Skip to content

July 6, 1964

Note on Issues in Romanian-Soviet Relations Prepared by the Romanian Side for the Conversations in Moscow

This document was made possible with support from Leon Levy Foundation

Note on Issues Prepared by Romanian Side for the Conversations in Moscow,


Bucharest, 6 July 1964


1. Issues in RWP [Romanian Workers’ Party] – CPSU [Communist Party of the Soviet Union] and RPR [Romanian People’s Republic] – USSR Relations


a. The Creation of an Anti-Soviet Atmosphere in Romania


- Evaluating the RWP CC Plenary Declaration of April 1964


* Model of common enterprise


- How compensation of the SOVROMS was regulated


- Evaluating the position of the RWP and RPR in the USSR


- The measures taken by us with the changing of some names: the Russian Book Store, the Maxim Gorky Institute, mandatory Russian language [training], etc. – measures of an internal character falling strictly within the competence of the Romanian government, cannot be interpreted as anti-Soviet manifestations.


- Diminishing the role of the Soviet Army.


- The role of internal factors in accomplishing the insurrection of 23 August 1944.


- The atmosphere that has been created by the position of Romania.


- The position of the Soviet press and radio towards the RPR (ignoring the activities of the RPR, misrepresenting some realities, insinuations).


- Soviet materials, works, plays and films in the RPR.


- The position towards Romanian students and doctoral candidates.


- The position of Soviet representatives in different international organizations towards the representatives of the RPR (in the IUS, FDIF they are not consulted etc.)


b. The Problem of Soviet Citizens in the RPR


- The manner of regulating the situation of foreign citizens in the USSR and in other countries.


- Occupying functions of responsibility in educational institutions in the RPR – professors.


- Having children born in the RPR and registered in the USSR as Soviet citizens (the problem of double citizenship).


- Inability to participate in community life.


- Inability to benefit from all the rights of citizenship.


- Those who have requested Romanian citizenship have been labeled traitorous.


- The intervention of Soviet parties in this problem, direct interference in our internal affairs.


c. Espionage Networks – The Organization and Maintenance of Intelligence Networks on the Territory of the RPR


- They were justified before power had been completely taken and we supported them.


- After taking over full power they no longer had any justification.


- The discussions on this problem between delegations of the RWP CC and the CPSU CC in June 1963.


- We do not conduct espionage activity in the socialist countries.


- Why place trust in such sources of information – the lack of trust in the party and in the government.


- We consider the immediate cessation of this activity an imperious necessity.


- In the future we will take measures, conforming to the laws of the RPR, against those who undertake such activity.


d. The Issue of Borders – Bessarabia and Transylvania


- The declaration of N. S. Khrushchev – Leipzig 1959


- The Yugoslav response to the speech at Leipzig.


- The message of 31.XII.1963 with regard to the resolution of territorial differences.


- Raising the issue of Bessarabia in the meeting at Gagra.


- [Moscow] raises the issue of Transylvania, although the leadership of the HPR [Hungarian Peoples Republic] does not raise it.


- The INTOURIST map published – 1963.


- The concept of wiping away frontiers.


- The Valev proposals for creating the Lower Danube regional economic complex.


- Sovereignty as historical notion.


e. The Situation of Commercial Relations between the RPR and the USSR


- The dynamic of increasing exchanges in the last five years.


- The requests presented by us that were not satisfied.


- Contracts concluded for the RPR to supply to the USSR which the Soviets have unilaterally reduced (cement, chemical equipment etc.)


- The request of the RPR for equipment for the hydroelectric plant at the Iron Gates, which has not yet received any response.


- Late deliveries to the RPR.


- Incomplete deliveries of equipment or deliveries of equipment of lower quality [then that contracted].


- The position of the Soviet organs towards Soviet-Romanian collaboration during 1966-1970.


f. The Problem of Relations with Capitalist Countries


- The USSR’s attempts to monopolize the relations of the socialist countries with the capitalist countries.


- The independence and sovereignty of the socialist countries in relations with other countries.


g. The Modification of Article 20 of the Danube Convention Referring to the Joint Romanian-Soviet Administration of the Lower Danube


- Joint participation only on riparian territory.


- Writing the Romanian administration of the Lower Danube into the Convention.


h. The Uranium Issue


i. The Rescheduling of Payments of Credits for Armament


- The military expenditures of the RPR are calculated by the Soviet side as reduced.


- The relative place of the RPR in terms of level of expenditures among the countries participating in the Warsaw Pact.


- The Unified Command proposals for supplying the Armed Forces of RPR.


- The economy of the RPR cannot support such expenditures.


- The effort that we make at present, the level of our military expenditures.


- If the effort must be greater, it could be increased only on the condition of rescheduled military credits.


- The conditions under which armaments are supplied in the West.




2. Problems in Connection with Collaboration within the CMEA


a. The Situation Created after the Meeting between the delegations of the RWP CC and the CPSU CC in June 1963


- The accord reached to limit the damage [and] to not advertise the problems.


- Restating all of the initial proposals:


* Creating a single planning organ


* A single plan


* Interstate unions according to branches


* Joint property enterprises


* Internationalizing the forces of production


* Regional industrial complexes.


- The coordination of the foreign trade (export-import) of the CMEA countries in capitalist countries.


b. The Position expressed in the April 1964 Declaration of the RWP CC regarding the problems of collaboration within the CMEA


c. Clarifying the formula “interested parties”


- We do not accept the creation of supra-state forms within the CMEA.


- Interested parties can create any forms they wish outside of the CMEA.


- The principle of unanimity holds within the CMEA.


d. The position of the RPR regarding the thesis “relying [bizuirea] in the first place on one’s own forces”




3. Issues of the World Communist and Workers Movement and of the international situation in general


a. The position of the RWP towards the problems of the International Communist and Workers Movement


- The manner of treating divergences


- Public polemics (the actions undertaken by the RPR to stop public polemics)


- The preparation and convocation of a new congress of communist and workers’ parties.


- The path to realizing socialist revolution: peaceful or non-peaceful.


- Provisions of the 1960 Declaration that must be reexamined.


- Manifestations of lack of trust.


- Presenting the position of some parties in a deformed manner.


- The role of the journal “Problems of Peace and Socialism” in the public polemic.


* Who establishes the political line of the journal


* The role of the editorial college


* The role of the representatives of the parties in the college


b. The position of the RPR towards the fundamental problems of the contemporary period


- Peaceful coexistence


- War and peace


- General and total disarmament


- The struggle against imperialism


- Economic competition between the two systems.


- The position of the RPR delegation at the UN (1963) and at the Conference for Trade and Development [UNCTAD].


- The defective position of the USSR delegation at these international meetings.


- The independent position of each country does not exclude coordination.


c. The issue of the Warsaw Pact


- The activity of Political Consultative Committee


* Who decides its convocation


* The manner in which the agenda is established.


- The lack of consultations in problems which engage the member countries.


- The obligation to discuss all of the problems connected with this treaty.


- The treaty is limited to the European countries.


- The attempts to revise the provisions of the Treaty, or to attribute tasks to it that transcend its provisions. For example:


* N. S. Khrushchev’s speech – at Miskolc [Hungary].


* The creation of a permanent organ for the coordination of foreign policies (the letter of 2 January of this year and our response of 14 January).


- Consultations on all major international issues, but not within the framework of the Political Consultative Committee, but in bilateral and multilateral meetings on a case by case basis.


- One should not bring problems regarding the countries participating in the Warsaw Pact to public attention without first obtaining the agreement of the respective countries.


- The independent position of each of the countries in foreign policy issues – the sovereign right of each of the countries to establish its foreign policy (freedom of action).


- The right of each of the countries to propose the convocation of the Political Consultative Committee and the obligation to make known beforehand – in a timely fashion – the problems proposed for discussion.



4. Other Problems (diverse)




List of the ultimately irreconcilable differences that had arisen in Soviet-Romanian relations under Gheorghe Gheorghiu Dej by July 1964, in preparation for the upcoming discussions in Moscow. Topping the list of major problems were the “anti-Soviet atmosphere in Romania,” the “problem of Soviet citizens,” and the “maintenance of espionage networks” on Romanian territory.


Document Information


ANIC, Fond C.C. al P.C.R., Sectia Relatii Externe, dosar 36/1964, filele 9-13; Document No. 3 in Buga (2012), pp. 32-36. Translated by Larry L. Watts and published in CWIHP e-Dossier No. 42.


The History and Public Policy Program welcomes reuse of Digital Archive materials for research and educational purposes. Some documents may be subject to copyright, which is retained by the rights holders in accordance with US and international copyright laws. When possible, rights holders have been contacted for permission to reproduce their materials.

To enquire about this document's rights status or request permission for commercial use, please contact the History and Public Policy Program at [email protected].

Original Uploaded Date





Record ID



Leon Levy Foundation