501.BC Greece/5–1247: Telegram

The Secretary of State to Mr. Mark F. Ethridge, at Geneva

secret
us urgent
niact

403. For Ethridge. Impression created here by a reading of your draft conclusions (your 701) is that they are not as unequivocal as Dept was led to believe by para 5 your 39 of April 13.2 This appears to be caused by three factors:

A.
Conclusions do not distinguish between statements of evidence received on the one hand and Commission’s appraisal thereof and conclusions therefrom on the other. For instance in paragraph I–(11) Commission states clearly its conclusions with respect to Bulgarian Government. There is no such clear conclusion, however, with respect to the responsibility of Yugoslavia and Albania, nor is the first full paragraph in Section I clear in this respect. This paragraph would be clearer if following were added: “On the basis of the facts ascertained by the Commission it is the conclusion of the Commission that Yugoslavia and to a lesser extent Albania and Bulgaria, have supported guerrilla warfare in Greece.” Similarly paragraph II–(7) appears to us as unnecessary since it is in effect argument of Counsel and not evidence, especially since this stock excuse has been used traditionally as pretext and justification for aggressive acts.
B.
Section IV of your conclusions does not appear to us to be entirely in line with Dept’s views contained in Deptel 313 and 349.3 [Page 863] Since conclusions have already been distributed it is recognized that drastic changes may not be feasible. However Dept would appreciate your consideration of the following changes:
1.
Para. 1. Last sentence might be redrafted along following lines: In view of extensive evidence submitted to Commission on internal affairs of Greece, such evidence is summarized below. Although in the opinion of the Commission the internal situation in Greece has a historical relationship to border violations and disturbances, the Commission considers that evidence with respect to internal conditions in Greece cannot be accepted as legally valid evidence of responsibility of Greek Government for the border violations and disturbances under investigation by the Commission.
2.
For paragraph 8, second sentence, suggest substitution along following lines: It is the Commission’s opinion that persecution and disturbed conditions in Greece have been factors which help explain existing situation along Greek frontier. But there must be clearcut distinction between general conditions in countries concerned, which make frontier violations easy or possible, and actual direct responsibility for such violations. End paragraph with your final sentence.
3.
Paragraph 9. We think word “apparent” should be omitted.
C.
Dept notes that conclusions with respect to Greece refer to present and continuing situation rather than past (see II–(9) and IV–(8)), whereas conclusions on responsibility of northern neighbors relates to past only. This focuses attention on present situation in Greece rather than on primary responsibility of northern neighbors.

Unless in your opinion these changes are in contradiction to the facts it is hoped that you will be able to incorporate them in the US draft during course of Commission’s deliberations. Since views of British FonOff coincide with ours in large part, seems probable British suggestions may give opportunity to effect changes suggested above.

Sent Geneva. Repeated New York and London for communication of substance to FonOff.

Marshall
  1. See telegram 299, May 12, from Geneva, p. 850.
  2. Identified also as telegram 106, from Geneva, not printed.
  3. Dated May 7 and 10, respectively, pp. 840, 848.