Page 378

FOREIGN RELATIONS, 19 4 6 , VOLUME III
               FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 1946
   FIFTEENTH MEETING OF THE POLITICAL AND TERRITORIAL
       COMMISSION FOR ITALY, SEPTEMBER 6, 1946, 10 A. M.
CFM Files
                 United States Delegation Journal
USDel (PC) (Journal) 35
  The representative of Poland spoke on the problem of Trieste and
the Italo-Yugoslav frontier, supporting the Yugoslav claims (CP Gen
Doe. 1 U 3 and CP (IT/P) Doc. 25)43 and the Byelorussian amendment
(CP Gen Doc. 1 D 1). M. Winiewicz drew a parallel between the
1919 solution for Danzig and the CFM solution for Trieste, elaborat-
ing this similarity in its physical, economic and political aspects
throughout his speech. He disagreed with Senator Connally's state-
ment that Trieste should be a "new independent state", declaring
that
in Poland's views Trieste's ties with Yugoslavia should be close and
its territory small. Finally the Polish Delegate declared a complete
lack of bias in his Delegation's point of view.
  Mr. McNeil (U.K.) said that his Delegation had, of course, studied
the Danzig plan closely and desired to avoid the dangers inherent
therein. In reply to M. Winiewicz's concern for the "corridor"
be-
tween Trieste and Italy proper, Mr. McNeil pointed out that Trieste
to be viable must have a common frontier with Italy as well as with
Yugoslavia. The British Delegation did not like the "French line"
either, he said, but it was the best that could be found, when ethnic,
economic and political conditions were equally considered. The Dele-
gates must bring an international spirit to the consideration of this
problem, which was unhappily lacking from M. Vyshinsky's speech
of yesterday. It is no crime to be an Italian, he said, and the United
Kingdom Delegation is not without gratitude to Italy for her part on
the Austrian front in the First World War. The U.K. cannot accept
the text of "how much can we punish Italy." Turning to the Free
Territory and Free Port of Trieste, Mr. McNeil said that they must be
placed strictly under the control of UNO, and this thought is reflected
in the British draft statutes. He could not say the same for the
Soviet and Yugoslav drafts and referred to the many provisions in
those two proposals linking the Free Territory to Yugoslavia or pro-
viding for Yugoslav domination. If the statute of Trieste comes out
of the Conference warped and the independence of the Free Territory
impaired, the U.K. reserves its right to review its attitude not only
" C.P. (IT/P) Doe. 25, a memorandum defending the Yugoslav claim, is
not
printed.
378