620

RIDING THE STORM

Butler, who presided over the Cabinet in my absence, sent, in the name of my colleagues, the warmest message of support:

Public opinion has registered the difficulties created by your host's public speech and has not missed the stiff tone of the President's Press Conference. There remains, however, a strong desire that you should probe further despite what may appear to be rebuffs—and indeed the belief that you are the only person who can do so.

He also reported that the Press and Parliament were, with few exceptions, steady and sympathetic.

From Paris Gladwyn Jebb sent an account of a conversation with General de Gaulle, in which the General had observed that Khrushchev's speech in the middle of the present conversations was outrageous. Although he regarded the position as serious, he still did not think that Khrushchev was prepared to push things to the point of war. In thanking the General for his message I said I still believed that as a result of what we had learned by our visit we were all 'better enlightened as to the attitude which, as allies, we must adopt in common in face of today's and tomorrow's difficulties.'

At Kiev we had the usual reception with a guard of honour and appropriate ceremonies. Vasili Kuznetsov, Deputy Foreign Minister, proved a most interesting companion and pleasant host. It was clear, in spite of his attempt to conceal his feelings, that he was anxious and disappointed by the rift which had taken place. After a formal call upon the Chairman of the Presidium of the Ukrainian Supreme Soviet we attended the performance of *The Song of the Forest* at the Shevchenko Theatre. The next day was long but interesting. We first drove to a farm, where we had a splendid welcome from the people, and appropriate photographs were taken of me in country clothes linking arms with two attractive milkmaids. What struck me most about the agricultural system was the enormous number of people employed in relation to the acreage of the farm. This was partly because the mechanisation, of which they were very proud, was still in a somewhat primitive condition, and partly due to the need to make some use of the teeming population. The weather was now milder, almost springlike. Although the atmosphere when I left Moscow was freezing, in every sense, here,

A VOYAGE OF DISCOVERY

621

as the correspondents noted, it was very different. Large crowds were gathered and seemed interested.

On our return from the farm we spent the rest of the morning at an exhibition of the economic achievements of the Ukraine. This, like many exhibitions, was fatiguing as well as tendentious. We had to submit to long explanations and great masses of statistics poured out by the eager exponents of Communist success. Malik, the Ambassador in London, a man of considerable charm and culture, did his best to protect us from too much propaganda. However, all this gave us some fascinating sidelights on Russian life. In the afternoon we were taken on a sightseeing tour of Kiev, which, in spite of the terrible destruction suffered in the war, was still a city of outstanding interest and beauty. We were allowed to see St. Sophia's Cathedral and some other noble buildings.

In the evening we attended a dinner at which both N. T. Kalchenko, the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Ukraine, and I made speeches. We had now received a report of Mikoyan's election speech to his constituents of Rostov. Although he paid tribute to my initiative in beginning negotiations and in submitting proposals for trade and culture he went on with severe criticisms which clearly reflected Khrushchev's mood of indignation:

> In the course of talks about a peace treaty with Germany and the Berlin question, the British Prime Minister—possibly under the influence of the burden of his connections with the allies of Britain—chose a tough line.¹

At the dinner I naturally made no reference to the painful incident in Moscow, but tried to strike a constructive and even confident note. Somewhat unexpectedly Khrushchev's daughter appeared at the dinner together with her husband. Whether this was on instructions from her redoubtable father or whether it was due to irrepressible curiosity on her part was obscure. Incidentally, except for a woman Minister, she was the only woman present. I rapidly adapted my speech to make a reference to her presence.

The next day, just before leaving for Leningrad, a message came from the Kremlin. It was from Khrushchev himself. After expressing

¹ Mikoyan, quoted in *Manchester Guardian*, 28 February 1959.

622

RIDING THE STORM

the hope that we had enjoyed our time at Kiev, he said he felt
sure that I would be glad to know that his tooth was better. The
dentist had used an excellent and newly designed British drill! The
next day, 28 February, we left for Leningrad, after a farewell speech
and a guard of honour. We reached Leningrad at 1 p.m., where we
were greeted both by Mikoyan and Gromyko, who seemed deter-
mined to remove all memories of the disagreement and showed
us the greatest possible courtesy. This action, on behalf of these
two leading Ministers, was, of course, regarded throughout by the
Press of the world as a peace offering, and the unexpected change
of atmosphere was equally reflected in the Russian Press. This
dramatic transformation was naturally emphasised when the story
of the tooth became generally known:

It is hard to see why the Russians behaved in this way. It
helped me enormously. In order to keep straight with the
Western allies, I had—at some point—to take a 'tough' line on
Berlin and the consequences of unilateral action by the Soviet
Government. This was not easy to do, although necessary.
Khrushchev's public speech (especially its rather 'Limehouse'
character) enabled me to do this, but in *reply*. He took offence, or
pretended to take offence, and then realised his mistake.

Probably (as so often) the simplest explanation is the right
one. He had this party speech fixed long ago—a sort of 'Black-
pool' speech. He did not realise how it could be taken as an insult
to me. He tried to cover his mistake by taking offence at my
protest. He saw that he had acted foolishly and impulsively, and
then made amends.¹

At Leningrad we spent the afternoon inspecting the atomic ice-
breaker *Lenin*, and in the evening enjoyed a fine performance of the
ballet, *The Stone Flower*, at the Kirov Theatre. The next day,
1 March, Selwyn Lloyd and I drove round Leningrad accompanied
by Mikoyan and were able to see the main features of this marvellous
city—the Venice of the North. We were taken, in addition, both to
a department store and to a polling-booth. There was a lot of
boisterous fun over the latter when Mikoyan cast his vote and
jokingly suggested that I should do the same. I said that I should,

¹ 4 March 1959.

A VOYAGE OF DISCOVERY

623

of course, vote for the Government candidate and I was given a
ballot paper for a keepsake. In the afternoon Mikoyan took us to the
Hermitage, where we had all too little time to see this marvellous
collection.

Apart from all the courtesies, some of which seemed to have been
improvised in order to fill the cup of reconciliation to overflowing,
there were useful opportunities in these two days for long conversa-
tions between the Foreign Secretary and Gromyko. Selwyn Lloyd
made it clear that I personally was in favour of a Summit meeting,
and I believed that it would be, in proper conditions, acceptable to
the Americans and the French. But the principal point of issue still
remained the Russian concept of such a meeting. They still seemed
to expect that practical work could be done in two or three days'
discussion between Khrushchev, Eisenhower, de Gaulle and myself.
This seemed to be quite unrealistic, and we were determined upon
preparation through diplomatic channels or better still a meeting of
the four Foreign Ministers. In addition to this question of method,
Selwyn Lloyd in his calm and efficient way was able to put forward
to Gromyko a clear but moderate statement of how we saw the
difficulties. Gromyko, as always cautious but now friendly, observed
among other things 'the British cannot shelter behind the Americans.
Your word carries weight when you want it to do so.'

Before we left Leningrad we were given an advance copy of a
note which the Soviet Government intended to deliver to the French
and the Americans as well as to ourselves. This was formally
presented on 2 March, being the reply to our last note of 16
February. After a long preamble it proposed that a Summit Con-
ference be called. This should discuss European security, disarma-
ment, the mutual withdrawal of troops and the establishment of a
nuclear-free zone in Europe, the reduction of forces of the four
powers and the prohibition of nuclear weapons and the cessation of
nuclear tests. In addition to the four great powers, Poland, Czecho-
slovakia and other interested countries should be invited and the
D.D.R. and the Federal Republic should be represented during the
discussion on German problems. All this was familiar enough. But
the important change was the admission that if the Western powers
were not yet ready for a Summit Conference, there should be a

624

RIDING THE STORM

conference of Foreign Ministers. I, of course, pointed out both to President Eisenhower and de Gaulle as well as to Dr. Adenauer that this represented a real concession. Not only did it meet our request but in effect it superseded the ultimatum due to expire on 27 May. I therefore appealed to them that we should consider these proposals sympathetically and, although some of the details might prove unacceptable, answer positively and not negatively. Above all I begged President Eisenhower to make sure that the State Department and any official spokesman 'refrained from any hasty or too hostile reaction'.

After a formal dinner with Nikolai Smirnov, Chairman of Lenin-
grad City Soviet, with more toasts, in which I made an appeal for
quiet and steady negotiations, we left by the night train for Moscow.
At the station there was another speech and another guard of
honour. We reached Moscow at 9.40 a.m. on Monday 2 March, and
after a quiet morning at the Embassy, chiefly occupied with reading
telegrams and summaries of the world Press, the Foreign Secretary
and I went to the Kremlin in the afternoon for a further meeting
with Khrushchev and his colleagues. Once again Khrushchev was
accompanied by Mikoyan and Gromyko, as well as Malik. Patrick
Reilly and Norman Brook came with us. This was our first meeting
since the famous quarrel. Khrushchev began, somewhat naïvely, by
assuring me that a stopping really had come out of his tooth and
this had prevented him from coming with me to Kiev. He also
repeated his tribute to the English drill. I replied that I had been
much touched with the message that Khrushchev had sent to me
in Kiev in which he had said that if Britain could reach an under-
standing with the Soviet Union, they could not have better or more
trusted friends. I hoped that our discussions had done something
to lay the foundations of such a friendship.

We then turned to the business in hand. The whole discussion
was carried on in the most amicable terms in spite of the underlying
difficulties of the problems.

On Germany, Khrushchev made it quite clear that what the
Russians really wanted was for us to accept the existence of Eastern
Germany with its existing frontiers. He said that he was not
interested in *de jure* recognition. If we preferred not to sign a peace

A VOYAGE OF DISCOVERY

625

treaty with the German Democratic Republic, some formula could
perhaps be found whereby we would recognise the frontiers de facto.
He also said that there would be no need for West Germany to
recognise East Germany de jure. On Berlin, he said that the date of
27 May had no particular significance. It could be 27 June or 27
August or any date we liked to name. He repeated the assurance
about working out with us and our allies the fullest guarantees for
access if West Berlin became a free city.

I suggested that the main theme of our discussions had been that
problems should be settled by negotiation. I thought we had identi-
fied during the talks a number of points on which progress could
now be made. If we could get a settlement on some of these, it
would become easier to deal with other issues. Khrushchev agreed
with this approach.

Khrushchev himself raised the question of a non-aggression
treaty. I did not discuss the Soviet draft in detail, but said that a non-
aggression treaty, perhaps between NATO and the Warsaw Pact,
might well come as the culmination of the negotiations on the
immediate problems. Meanwhile, we might consider a joint declara-
tion on the following lines—to agree that in all matters of dispute
both sides should act according to the spirit and the letter of the
United Nations Charter; to agree that neither side should seek
unilaterally to prejudice the rights, obligations or vital interests of
the other; on the basis of these principles to agree that disputes
should be settled by negotiation and not by force. Khrushchev said
that he thought the principles suggested were attractive, but that
there should be something about the use of foreign bases in the
United Kingdom. I made it quite clear that we could not con-
template anything which would destroy the Western alliances just
as I would not expect Khrushchev to accept anything which would
destroy the Warsaw Alliance.

As regards the next step I pointed out the difficulties of reaching
agreement on major issues at a Summit meeting which must be
limited to four or five days. I suggested that we might combine a
Summit meeting with meetings of Foreign Ministers or other
negotiators so as to get a procedure which was most likely to give
results. Khrushchev said that he entirely agreed. He was not out for

626

RIDING THE STORM

a Summit meeting at all costs. If a Summit meeting failed it would be worse than no meeting. He also liked the idea that there should be Summit meetings from time to time and that they should not be regarded as a fire-brigade to be called out only in times of crisis.

At the end of the conference Khrushchev again reverted to the peace treaty with Germany and Berlin. He said that he was not trying to put pressure on anyone, but that the question was ripe for settlement, and he was only asking for the position which had now arisen to be fixed and accepted.

We left the meeting feeling that the thaw was now complete. Indeed at the ceremony which followed Khrushchev and his colleagues went out of their way to emphasise the change. At a vast assembly to which all the notabilities of Moscow were invited, including the Diplomatic Corps and the Press representatives of all nations, held in the famous pillared hall of the Kremlin, unchanged from Tsarist days, with the white walls glittering with the light of vast chandeliers, Khrushchev seemed in a gay and bubbling mood. He followed his usual plan of making a series of little speeches to all and sundry. He declared that I had prepared the way for agreements which would ease the cold war. 'Of course the peoples look forward to something more; to solutions which will enable flowers to bloom for the happiness of both our peoples.' What with the crowds and the drink and the imposing military band, the music varying from classical items to a rendering of *Tipperary*, and after the strain of a two-hour conference, the day proved exhausting. But it was not yet over. Before it ended formal speeches had to be made and replied to, in the course of which I ventured to refer in detail to the suggested joint declaration which I would like to see result from our meetings.

When at last we got back to rest I could not help feeling satisfied that, whatever might be the final result of all our efforts, at least the Russians had accepted the idea of a Foreign Ministers' meeting and the ultimatum on Berlin was in effect withdrawn.

But there was one more task awaiting me before the day was over. This was the television broadcast which I was allowed, somewhat surprisingly, to make from an uncensored text. This privilege was indeed unique and represented a very substantial concession which

I was determined not in any way to abuse. We had prepared the speech with studious care, and I was fortunate in having a wonderful translator in John Morgan, third secretary at the British Embassy in Moscow, who was a brilliant Russian scholar. We had decided that the translations should take place paragraph by paragraph rather than sentence by sentence. This certainly added to its effect. It is not usually worth while recalling old speeches or broadcasts, but perhaps it is worth reproducing this address delivered in such unusual conditions at the end of so exciting a visit, with all its ups and downs and changing moods.

Let me say first how pleased I am to be in Moscow and to have this opportunity of speaking to you in your homes. I wish that I could speak to you in Russian, but I fear that I cannot do so. So I must have the help of an interpreter.

I should like also to express my thanks to the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the U.S.S.R. for having invited the British Foreign Secretary and me to visit Moscow. As you know a Soviet Government delegation including Mr. Khrushchev visited Britain in 1956. We were very glad to have them and to show them something of our country. I am sorry that it has been so long before we could repay this visit. We too have a proverb which says 'better late than never' and I hope that you will feel that this applies to our visit now.

This is not my first visit to the Soviet Union. I came here as an ordinary private citizen in 1929 and spent some weeks travelling in your country. At that time you were going through great difficulties and your people did not find life easy. It is wonderful to see what changes there have been since then. You are beginning to see the fruits of all the efforts which you have made to develop your country. The Soviet Union is now the second industrial power in the world in total production. It is true that we in Britain still produce twice as much as you per head, but with us the period of the rapid expansion of our basic industries is a thing of the past. We can still increase our total production and shall do so; but our population is already as highly industrialised for its size as we can expect. Our small island is only five times larger than the Moscow oblast, but fifty-two million people live there. We have few natural resources except

A VOYAGE OF DISCOVERY

627

628

RIDING THE STORM

coal and some iron ore. That means that we have to live by the
skill of our hands, the sweat of our brow and the inventiveness of
our minds. We must somehow earn enough to pay for the food
and raw materials which we need—and which we must bring
from overseas.

It's not surprising, therefore, that some of the world's great
basic inventions have had their beginnings in our little island.
We needed them. In our own time those inventions have in-
cluded radar, the jet engine and penicillin, and the first television
pictures ever to be transmitted were seen in Britain more than
thirty years ago. Today in this atomic age our scientists have
pioneered in harnessing atomic power to man's needs. In 1956
we had the privilege of showing Mr. Khrushchev the work of our
atomic energy research scientists at Harwell. It was in 1956 also
that we opened our first atomic energy power station at Calder
Hall. Our giant radio telescope at Jodrell Bank has provided
valuable information about the progress of your wonderful
Russian sputniks. British industry is tremendously active. We
export more textile machinery, agricultural tractors, bicycles and
motor bicycles than any other country in the world. Our exports
of motor cars are running at an annual rate of more than 500,000
and the annual production is over one million each year. Our
aircraft engineers built the first turbo-prop airliner and 400 are
being operated by airlines throughout the world. Our agriculture
is probably the most highly mechanised in the world—about one
tractor to every nine hectares of arable land. And Britain holds
the world's land and water speed records.

Besides these we have also many successes in consumption.
For example, since the end of the war we have built over three
million new permanent houses. Most of these outside the centres
of towns are separate houses, one for each family, and have a
garden. About a third of all households have a car. In addition
there are one and a half million motor-cycles. The number of
students at our universities has doubled since 1939. We provide
free full-time education for all children for ten years from the
ages of five to fifteen. In fact the British standard of living is the
highest in Europe. All these are achievements of which we are
proud—and I think rightly—but I cite them not so much because
of that but because they illustrate the way our national life has
been shaped by the physical environment in which we live.

A VOYAGE OF DISCOVERY

629

We are a nation which lives by trade. There you have a key to
understanding our approach to affairs. A nation living by trade
needs peace. It also needs other people to be prosperous. Peace it
needs because only then can trade flow freely backward and
forward. And other people's prosperity it needs because only in
that way can there be good markets for its products.

That is why we welcome competition in economic matters.
We believe that this is good for all of us. It is very important to
raise the standard of living and to wage war against poverty. But
the Gospel says man cannot live by bread alone. We believe that
man has a spiritual destiny also. Every individual should have
freedom to develop his personality. On this foundation our
whole political system is built. We hold that the State exists for
Man. In our small island we have thought a lot about political
philosophy and we have worked out our system gradually over
a period of a thousand years. Of course the result is not perfect,
but we think it represents a good compromise between the rights
of the individual and the demands of the State. For the problem
of the organised Society is really how to combine Order and
Freedom.

You may think it a curious system which allowed our great
war leader, Sir Winston Churchill, to be turned out of office as
soon as he had achieved victory. As a politician I myself have
been a candidate in ten Parliamentary elections; sometimes I
have won; sometimes I have lost. When I won I thought to
myself that the system was excellent; when I lost perhaps I had
my doubts. All the same our system works well and suits our
needs.

The British system is essentially flexible. Its fundamentals are
free and secret elections, freedom to discuss and argue, com-
promise and toleration in public affairs, and the absolute separa-
tion of the executive and the judiciary. With various local changes
this system has spread through many parts of the world. What
used to be called the British Empire is now the Commonwealth.
This is a free association of 600 million people of every race and
creed which stretches right round the world. This is not a
military alliance. It has no written rules of membership. It is an
association of people who found that they shared the same ideas
about the organisation of human affairs. This Commonwealth
association is still growing in numbers. Since the war five nations