740.00119 EW/11–2845: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in France (Caffery)
5553. For Angell No. 50. Present tel intended to follow that Personal for Angell from Secy on subject Secy’s letter of appointment.74
Following is answer sent by War Dept to Gen Clay in response his tel Nov 2375 which states:
- 1.
- He had not received copy clarifying inst to Angell.
- 2.
- Copies tels from Angell to Dept sent to Murphy indicate tripartite consideration given in Paris conference to matters ultimately requiring quadri-partite decision and citing evaluation of labor services.
- 3.
- He requests opportunity comment evaluation labor services in reparations accounts in light of Clay’s view that this would nullify efforts to democratize Germany.
- 4.
- Clay’s view OMGUS should withdraw from reparations negotiations now pending for Control Council for fear duplicating efforts Paris and Berlin.
Following answers Clay’s tel:
“Subject is possible conflict of jurisdiction between Angell and OMGUS on reparation and restitution.
[Page 1425]Clarifying instructions from State Dept to Angell now in process of dispatch for comment are being sent you for comment separately. Meanwhile State Department has issued instructions to Angell to avoid negotiations and agreements on number of specific points where possible conflict might arise, in particular restitution other than gold, to ensure that area of possible conflict is narrowed to minimum.
State Dept does not fully agree with point you make on labor reparation. State Dept concedes that fixing terminal date under which PWs should be returned to Germany after hostilities in accordance with Geneva Convention, recruitment of civilian labor, in Germany for purpose of labor and its valuation are matters of quadripartite decision which are not to be taken up in Paris, and has so informed Angell. State Dept believes, however, that duty imposed on Angell to negotiate allocation of reparation shares among countries entitled thereto other than USSR and Poland, requires him to take PW labor allocated under Facs 24076 program into account. Rehabilitation labor performed by PWs confers benefit on receiving country. Unequal distribution of benefits therefrom must be taken into account in distribution of reparations benefits. In view French opposition, it is unlikely that benefits from Facs 240 program for distribution of rehabilitation labor by PWs will be explicitly valued at Paris Conference, but they may affect percentage allocations of reparation benefits. In State Dept opinion, however, explicit or implicit valuation of PW services rendered Western European reparation countries has no proper relation to allocation of industrial capital equipment to USSR and Poland now being carried out by Control Council and therefore is not a matter for quadripartite negotiation. (Re last sentence CC 19295) State Dept will appreciate amplification your views relation between evaluative labor for reparations and efforts to democratize Germany, especially as concerns appraisal of benefits from PW labor in considering reparations for Western Europe.
In State Dept opinion, as yet no important conflict has arisen between Angell mission and tasks assigned Control Council by governments. State Dept hopes you will recognize Angell’s task is made difficult by fact that smaller countries have been drawn into reparation matters for first time by Paris conference and are accepting opportunity thus afforded to give vent to opinions on many aspects of question. Under circumstances impractibility of restricting talk to subjects appropriate for three-power discussion must be recognized. Agreements arrived at, however, will conform to proper jurisdictional lines.
In light of foregoing, State Dept believes it of utmost importance you continue your negotiations in Control Council.”