خارجي ٤٦/٦١١٦(س) "ملخصات استخباراتية سياسية أسبوعية سرية، الأرقام ٣٥٦-٤١٦، أغسطس ١٩٤٦ - نوفمبر ١٩٤٧" [ظ‎‎٣‎٧‎٧] (٩٧٨/٧٧٠)

6
initiative. This is only true in the sense
that the Secretary of State as early as
December 1945 expressed his desire to
extend the duration of the Treaty to
50 years. The present negotiations actually
resulted from Generalissimo Stalin’s con
versation with the C.I.G.S. and from his
subsequent message to Mr. Truman last
January. Soviet insistence on a new
Treaty obligation not to participate in any
sort of agreements or actions which even
indirectly would be directed against one
of the parties concerned is reaffirmed. It
is known, however, that there are serious
difficulties on the British side to accepting
any such specious commitments which
leaves room for almost indefinite wrangling
over intentions and interpretations. The
general tenor of this article suggests that
the Soviet authorities may be preparing
the way for the announcement of a break
down in the negotiations, without losing
face themselves, at all events, at home.
Tass has also reviewed the attitude taken
up in the foreign press to the Council of
Foreign Ministers in an article which is
little more than another sounding-board for
official Soviet views. French, British and
United States papers and commentators are
attacked for their lack of objectivity and
seriousness and for their attempts to
“intimidate” the Soviet delegation by
holding it responsible for the stalemate in
the Conference and to ‘ 1 blackmail ’ ’ the
Soviet Union into making concessions
which would prevent the Conference being
a failure. The Times in particular is
attacked for insisting that it is the Soviet
Union which must renounce its legitimate
demand for reparations, since Bevin and
Marshall cannot yield. Reference is made
to the ordering of the British train for the
13th April and to American preparations
for departure as further examples of
intimidation. The Soviet Union is not be
intimidated, asserts Tass. Her firm
attitude in “a number of issues is in
harmony with the great constructive work
intended for the successful completion of
the Moscow session.”
Mr. Harold Stassen, prospective Repub
lican candidate for the Presidency of
the United States, has enjoyed a good deal
of publicity on his recent trip to the Soviet
Union and was actually received by the
Generalissimo on the 9th April. M. Stalin s
remarks to his visitor on the Soviet censor
ship, in which he chid American
correspondents for depicting the Soviet
Union “ as a sort of zoological garden ”
are common knowledge. Mr. Stassen
appears to have maintained a very correct
attitude and declined to discuss political
topics until his return to the U.S.A.
In the Ukraine he was received by
M. Khrushchev, and after visiting Lenin
grad he went on to Helsinki.
On the 14th April it was announced in
Moscow that the Governments of tlp^
U.S.S.R. and the United States had agreeu
to negotiate on the final settlement of out
standing Lend-Lease questions as provided
by the terms of the basic agreement of the
lith June, 1942. The negotiations are to
take place in Washington, M. Novikov,
Ambassador of the U.S.S.R. in the United
States, being the Soviet representative. It
is not known what has finally induced the
Soviet authorities to agree to negotiate.
They had already received five communica
tions from the United States Government
on the subject, the last being presented by
the American Ambassador in Moscow on
the 5th April. The cost of Lend-Lease
goods sent to the U.S.S.R. amounts to
11,100,000,000 dollars on the 31st October,
1946, and in addition there was a total of
221,000,000 dollars of goods under a pipe
line agreement, of which 17,000,000 had
been held up by Congress. Soviet aid
advanced to the United States under
reverse Lend-Lease totalled 2,213,000
dollars on the 2nd September, 1945. The
day following the announcement of this
Agreement, Mr. Marshall was received by
Generalissimo Stalin; no news has yet
come through of the substance of their
conversation. Meanwhile, the Soviet press
campaign against American imperialism
and militarism has continued with
unabated vigour.
Patriarch Alexei has recently been
decorated by King Michael of Roumania
with the Order of the Roumanian Star
(with Grand Cross). In expressing his
thanks the Patriarch referred to his immi
nent visit to Roumania, which he hoped
would further consolidate “ the fraternal
and spiritual bonds ” between the two
Churches. Two members of the Soviet
Embassy in Bucharest, though not the
Ambassador himself, attended the Easter
ceremonies. In his Easter message from
Moscow to Orthodox believers in the
U.S.S.R. and abroad, Patriarch Alexei
referred to the recent reception into the
fold of members of the Russian Orthodox
Church in America, who had been granted
“ freedom of church structure in accor
dance with the conditions of their life.”
This vague phrase does not make clear
exactly what measure of autonomy has been
granted to the Russian-American Church.
Metropolitan Theophilus, its head, appears
to have become rather wary after his first
exhibition of elan, and some of his bishops,