goes, will be the hand of those who are carrying out the
American plan—at least in that part of Germany to which
they have access. Only this can explain the unwillingness
to deal in the Council of Foreign Ministers either with the
peace treaty, or with the re-establishment of Germany's
unity, or with the formation of a provisional German
government.
We are told that either the proposed American plan
for Germany is carried out, or else not even "paper agree-
ments on the .peace treaties'1 will be concluded. Such frank-
ness is useful for clarifying the present situation. It fol-
lows that the tLS.A. makes the full restoration of peace
in Europe, as well as the re-establishment of the unity
of the German State, without which the peace treaty with
Germany cannot be concluded, conditional upon the ac-
ceptance of the American plan for Germany and Europe.
Either accept this ainti-democratic plan unreservedly, as it
is dictated by the American expansionists, or there will be
no agreement concerning the peace treaties—that is, the
restoration of peace in Europe will not be completed. This
policy of dictation could not but meet with rebuff from
the Soviet Union. It was this policy of dictation on the
part of the ILS.A. which led to the breakdown of the
London meeting.
The London meeting ended in failure. No few attempts
were made to lay the responsibility for this on the U.S.S.R.
Nothing came of it. The responsibility for the breakdown
of the London meeting lies with the ruling circles of the
United States of America. This time, too, both Mr. Bevin
and M. Bidault followed the lead of Mr. Marshall.