George F. Kennan : an American life

whisper, when Harriman could not hear: “That man doesn’t know how to build a fire!”³⁶

The risk that Harriman might incinerate Spaso House was not Kennan’s only source of anxiety. New York Times correspondent C. L. Sulzberger found him resentful that Harriman had concealed everything from him connected with Yalta. Martha Mautner, who had just joined the embassy staff, saw that Harriman had “both ears to the ground—he was very sensitive to political considerations.” Frank Roberts, now serving in the British embassy in Moscow, recalled Kennan as insisting to Harriman: “You must get home to the president what a terrible villain Stalin is, what awful things he has done.” Harriman’s reaction was: “We’re allies, and we’re fighting the war together. There is a moral consideration which obviously you’re quite right to put to me, but I don’t think I need to put it now to the president.” John Paton Davies remembered Harriman as “a great team player.” He felt “that Kennan was too skeptical, not really at all with the Roosevelt point of view.” Kennan, in turn, “suffered agonies of frustration” over his inability to influence Washington.³⁷

No doubt Kennan was frustrated: that was his normal state. His differences with Harriman, however, were not as great as they appeared to Roberts or Davies—or probably even to Kennan—at the time. The ambassador had been advocating a tougher line toward the Soviet Union since the Warsaw Uprising. “Unless we take issue with the present policy,” he had written Harry Hopkins in September 1944, “there is every indication the Soviet Union will become a world bully wherever their interests are involved.” Harriman did not always confide in Kennan, so he may not have realized the extent of his boss’s support for a firmer stance. And they did differ over how quickly such a shift could happen. Kennan, who resented domestic political influences on foreign policy, wanted it to take place at once. Harriman, like Bohlen, knew that this was impossible: “We couldn’t shock people in Washington because we would lose our influence.” It was, therefore, Harriman’s patience that worried Kennan, not any significant disagreement over the postwar intentions of the Soviet Union, or how the United States should handle them.³⁸

The key to changing American policy, Harriman knew, was changing the mind of the president himself. Roosevelt’s declining health—obvious to all who saw him at Yalta—made this difficult: exhausted leaders tend not to embrace new initiatives. Even so, the gap between Stalin’s promises of “democratic” regimes in Eastern Europe and the practices of Soviet officials there was becoming too large even for Roosevelt to ignore. When, at the beginning of April, Stalin interpreted a German surrender offer in Italy as evidence of an Anglo-American plot to divert the remaining fighting to the Eastern front, the president was furious. Had he lived, Kennan later speculated, subsequent history “might have been quite different.” But he was dying, and so he never saw Harriman’s request for permission to tell the Soviet leader that if his government continued its policies, “the friendly hand that we have offered them will be withdrawn and to point out in detail what this will mean.”³⁹

On the morning of April 13, Joan Kennan, then nine, was lying quietly in bed in the Mokhovaya apartment, playing with a kitten. “My father came into the room and said, ‘Joanie, the President is dead,’ and then sat on my bed looking so serious and so sad that I knew this was something very significant.” She could not recall her father ever speaking to her about world affairs, so “I was rather pleased that he thought me old enough to comprehend, at least partly, the significance of such a major event.”⁴⁰

Harriman had been planning a trip to Washington when the news reached him earlier that morning. Knowing the importance of being in the right spot at the right time, he accelerated his departure and so was on hand to advise an inexperienced Harry S. Truman on what he should do. With Bohlen present taking notes, Harriman warned that Stalin had interpreted American restraint as weakness: the view had developed in Moscow that “the Soviet Government could do anything that it wished without having any trouble with the United States.” That left the West facing a “barbarian invasion of Europe.”⁴¹

It’s not clear what Kennan would have said if given the opportunity, but what Harriman said was close enough. He had not been oblivious to the concerns of his anxious subordinate, and now he had the ear of a president with no firm views of his own. The effect on policy, however, was for the moment minimal. Truman gave Molotov a tongue- lashing when he passed through Washington on April 23—even Harriman, who was there, thought it excessive—but the president did not immediately give up on his predecessor’s efforts to enlist Stalin’s cooperation in shaping the postwar settlement.⁴²

There were several reasons for this. One had to do with Molotov’s destination: he was en route to San Francisco, where the conference establishing the United Nations—Roosevelt’s most cherished project—was to open on April 25. With hopes for the new organization as high as they had ever been, the United States could hardly undercut it before it had begun to function. A second reason was military: Pentagon planners, unsure whether the top-secret program to build the atomic bomb would produce a usable weapon, still counted on Soviet assistance in defeating Japan. Finally, Truman had other close advisers to whom he listened. One was Joe Davies, whose persistent desire to give the Soviet Union the benefit of every doubt countered Harriman’s determination to do the opposite.⁴³

From Moscow, Kennan saw little that encouraged him. Taking advantage of Harriman’s absence, he peppered the State Department with an almost daily litany of complaints about Soviet behavior:

April 20, 1945: One of the fundamental tenets of Soviet control is that the people shall be exposed to no propaganda influences except those of the Soviet propaganda apparatus.

April 23: Words mean different things to the Russians than they do to us. . . . In official Soviet terminology the Warsaw Provisional Government and even Soviet Estonia are “free.”

April 27: All information reaching Embassy indicates that Russians are seizing and transporting to Soviet Union without compunction any German materials, equipment or supplies which they feel could be of use to them.

April 28: Personally I believe that the Soviet Government actually wishes to discourage the maintenance here of large diplomatic staffs, believing that most of the functions they perform are more to the advantage of the foreign governments than of the Soviet Government.

April 30: It is now established Russian practice to seek as a first and major objective, in all areas where they wish to exercise dominant influence, control of the internal administrative and police apparatus, particularly the secret police. . . . [A]ll other manifestations of public life, including elections, can eventually be shaped by this authority.

May 3: If we feign ignorance or disbelief of a situation [the unilateral transfer of German territory to Poland] which . . . is common knowledge to every sparrow in eastern Europe, . . . [this] could only mean to the Russians that we are eager to sanction their unilateral action but we are afraid to admit this frankly to our own public.

May 8: More than thirty hours after signature of the act of surrender [by Germany to Allied forces in France], there had still been no recognition in Moscow of the fact that the end of the war was at hand.... For Russia peace, like everything else, can come only by ukase, and the end of hostilities must be determined not by the true course of events but by decision of the Kremlin.

Expecting the official announcement, Kennan and Roberts accepted invitations to a gala performance at the Bolshoi Theater that evening, only to find that it celebrated Aleksandr Popov, the alleged Russian inventor of radio.⁴⁴

When the authorities did finally announce the end of the war, on May 9, they and everyone else were unprepared for what happened. The first spontaneous demonstration anyone could remember in Moscow broke out in front of the Mokhovaya, where Soviet and American flags were flying, and it would not disperse. “We were naturally moved and pleased by this manifestation of public feeling,” Kennan recalled, “but were at a loss to know how to respond to it.” Anyone venturing into the street “was immediately seized, tossed enthusiastically into the air, and passed on friendly hands over the heads of the crowd, to be lost, eventually, in a confused orgy of good feelings somewhere on its outer fringes. Few of us were willing to court this experience, so we lined the balconies and waved back as bravely as we could.”