ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

tion regarding Siberia. The Chita government believes that a free hand will be given to Japan in Siberia, which will be a serious disadvantage to the Chita government. The result is a feeling in the Government of much uneasiness if not actual distrust with regard to the intentions of the American Government as to Siberia. Such action as the Chita government fears on the part of the American Government, I have pointed out, would be in contradiction to the American Government's declarations regarding its Russian attitude. It would have a good effect, however, if some further reply could be authorized which would express even more definitely the attitude of our Government on this particular occasion or else in this connection repeat a general statement which has been given already.["]

WARREN

861a.01/120: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Japan (Warren)

WASHINGTON, November 15, 1921-7 p.m.

196. Your 384 November 14, 4 p.m., for Caldwell

"Your November 10, 1 p.m., action approved. Position of this Government at the Washington Conference with reference to Russia was set forth in the announcement of September 19 58 (Department assumes Caldwell has copy of statement referred to.) No foundation whatever for statement regarding alleged understanding between President and Japanese Ambassador here. You may so inform Chita authorities if you think advisable."

HUGHES

861a.01/216

Memorandum by the Acting Chief of the Division of Russian Affairs, Department of State (Poole)

[WASHINGTON,] December 8, 1921.

MR. FLETCHER: On December 7, there called at the Russian Division of the State Department the special trade delegation of the Far Eastern Republic to the United States consisting of:

Chairman-Mr. Alexander A. Iazikoff,

Members-Peter N. Karavaeff, Boris E. Skvirsky.

I received the delegation informally, Messrs. Jameson and Kleifoth of the Russian Division and Mr. E. T. Williams of the Conference section of the Far Eastern Division, being present. Mr. Skvirsky not only acted as interpreter, but also took the leading part in presenting the views of the delegation.

He stated that the object of the mission was twofold, political, and commercial. On the political side they were interested in present

68

See telegram no. 545, Sept. 17, to the Ambassador in Great Britain, vol. 1, p. 69.

ing their case to the United States Government and to the Conference, giving all available data regarding conditions in the Far Eastern Republic with a view to securing recognition of their country, and the withdrawal of the Japanese troops from Siberia. They desired to establish normal relations with the United States.

From the commercial angle they desired to arrange for resumption of trade relations but did not go into details due to lack of time during the interview.

I pointed out that no delegations from countries not recognized by the United States would be received officially by this Government, nor by the Secretary of State, but that the Russian Division of the State Department would be pleased to discuss matters informally with the Representatives from Chita. Mr. Skvirsky stated that the delegation realized that the United States could not receive them officially and that they would be pleased to discuss the matters informally with the Russian Division but desired to present their case to the Conference informally. He said the delegation would present their credentials to the Chief of the Russian Division if it were impossible to present them to the Secretary of State.

Regarding the Mongolian question Mr. Skvirsky gave a brief sketch of the history of the attack of Semenoff's lieutenant, Baron Ungern Sternberg, upon Urga and upon the Far Eastern Republic, the necessity of the Far Eastern Republic defending its lands, and the recent defeat of the Ungern troops by the joint military operations of the Soviet troops and those of the Far Eastern Republic. (See Memo. of Mr. E. T. Williams attached 5o).

I pointed out that the continued presence of Soviet Russian troops in Mongolia without a protest from the Far Eastern Republic placed the latter in an unfavorable light. It indicated that the Far Eastern Republic was a party to Russian Soviet aggression in Mongolia or at least did not object to it, while at the same time Chita was pressing for Japanese withdrawal from Siberia.

As regards the Chinese Eastern Railway I assured him that the purpose of the United States in joining with other powers in the plan adopted for allied supervision of the Chinese Eastern Railway in 1919, was to temporarily operate the Railway in the interest of the Russian people with a view to its ultimate return to those in interest, without the impairing of any existing rights.

This was our honest endeavor and it was suggested that the Chita Representatives give a frank statement of their attitude toward temporary international control of the Chinese Eastern. Mr. Skvirsky confirmed the information in the hands of the State Department that negotiations were being carried on between the Far Eastern Republic and China looking toward the protection of the

59 Not printed.

rights of both countries in the Railway Zone. He said that a meeting or conference was scheduled to take place in the near future at Manchuli between the representatives of the two countries. He further remarked he would have to cable his Minister of Foreign Affairs at Chita regarding his country's attitude toward international control. He was given the substance of the telegraphic correspondence between the State Department and Consul Caldwell at Chita on this subject, but made no clear statement as to the attitude of his country. . . .

As to the Dairen Conference Mr. Skvirsky said the Japanese had presented a proposed treaty consisting of seventeen points with three additional secret clauses. The secret articles were:

1. That the Far Eastern Republic should dismantle all fortifi-
cations on the Siberian Pacific coast;

2. That the Chita Government should recognize as valid all
treaties and agreements made by Japan with the various
governments which had existed in Russia and Siberia,
(not only the Czar and Kerensky Governments but also
all provisional and minor governments such as the various
governments at Vladivostok and the so-called govern-
ments set up by Semenoff and other Siberian leaders);
3. That the Far Eastern Republic agree not to station her
troops within some thirty miles of the Korean border.

Among the seventeen points were provisions giving Japan navigation rights on the Amur, Sungari and Ussuri rivers. Mr. Skvirsky stated he would give us more detailed information regarding the Dairen Conference in the near future, but that the Far Eastern Republic had insisted upon Japan withdrawing its troops from Siberia on a fixed date, and would not agree to many of the Japanese demands.

D. C. P[OOLE]

CONTINUED REFUSAL BY THE UNITED STATES TO RECOGNIZE THE GOVERNMENTS IN THE BALTIC PROVINCES $1

860p.01/8

The Acting Secretary of State to the French Ambassador

(Jusserand)

WASHINGTON, January 15, 1921. EXCELLENCY: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of January 3, 1921,2 informing me that urgent representations have been made to the French Government by delegates of Latvia and Georgia looking towards the recognition of these States; that

01

Continued from Foreign Relations, 1920, vol. 1, pp. 640-668. 62 Not printed.

this question, in the opinion of the French Government, can only be decided by an agreement between the Allied Powers; that such an agreement may be held to exist as a result of the decision of the League of Nations regarding the admission of these two countries into the League; and that, although the United States has not as yet ratified the Covenant of the League of Nations, the President of the Council, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the French Government, would be pleased to be acquainted with the views of the American Government in the premises and to know whether this Government considers possible and opportune a modification of the position it has hitherto taken towards the Governments of Latvia and Georgia. This Government, as your Excellency is well aware, desires to act as far as possible in accord with the Governments with which it was associated in the war. It does not appear, however, that in the actual situation circumstances are so altered as to warrant a change from the attitude outlined in the note of August 10, 1920, regarding Russian affairs, addressed to his Excellency the Italian Ambassador, with which your Government was duly acquainted. Accept [etc.]

63

NORMAN H. DAVIS

860m.01/82

Mr. Jonas Vileisis to the Secretary of State

64

65

WASHINGTON, January 27, 1921. SIR: Since I last had the honor of addressing you, two important communications from the American Government have been given to the public concerning its attitude towards questions involving Russia and the border States. I refer to Acting Secretary of State Davis's letter to Honorable Alton B. Parker, of January 8, and the message of President Wilson to Mr. Hymans, of January 22 [18]. Both these communications contain statements which will have a hopeful and reassuring effect upon the people of Lithuania and, I may add, upon their sympathizers in the United States. Mr. Davis has stated that "There is no intention on the part of this Government officially to restore the former boundaries of the Russian Empire, nor to impose on any of the non-Russian territories the rule of the Great Russians." President Wilson points out that "the present moment offers a peculiarly pressing challenge to an attempt at a general pacification on the Russian borders," and urges that the Powers of Europe join the United States in a declaration of policy calculated to secure such pacification.

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

The Government of Lithuania is earnestly desirous of a return to peaceful conditions. All of its military efforts hitherto have been of a purely defensive character and the Lithuanian people will not take up arms, either of its own accord or at the instigation of any foreign power, in a war of aggression against any of its neighbors, nor will it willingly permit its neutrality to be violated for such a

war.

Lithuania is the more desirous of peace because the past year has seen a remarkable growth of activity in the establishment of commercial relations with other countries, particularly with the United States, where a number of banking and other corporations have been formed among Americans of Lithuanian connections to transact business with Lithuania. With the large number of people of Lithuanian descent in the United States-in the neighborhood of one million-there is a hopeful future for these business enterprises, if only peace can be preserved.

On February 16, 1918, Lithuania declared its independence in the city of Vilna, which was declared to be the capital of the Lithuanian State. The Lithuanian Government approaches its third anniversary-February 16, 1921-with increased confidence in the future, notwithstanding the continued presence within the ethnographic boundaries of Lithuania, and far beyond the ethnographic boundaries of Poland (the Curzon-Polk line) of the rebel Polish General Zeligowski and his forces and notwithstanding the danger from Russia which is caused by this violation of Lithuanian neutrality on the part of Poland. The causes of the confidence of Lithuania are many, chief among them being the unshaken determination of the people to maintain their freedom. But it is respectfully submitted that a survey of the course of affairs in Lithuania during the past three years will show that the Lithuanian people have succeeded in setting up a stable, orderly government and that they have the power, as they have the right, to administer their own affairs with entire independence.

I have the honor, therefore, to renew my request that the Government of the United States recognize the independence of the Government of Lithuania. May I be permitted to suggest that if the Government of the United States should extend recognition to the Government of Lithuania at this time, it would come with peculiar graciousness and fitness at the anniversary of the declaration of Lithuanian independence.

With assurances [etc.]

J. VILEISIS

Representative of Lithuania in America

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »