Foreign Relations of the United States, 1950, Central and Eastern Europe; The Soviet Union, Volume IV

663.001/6–2850: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Embassy in the United Kingdom ¹

secret
verbatim text

Washington , June 28, 1950—6 p. m.

3172. London’s 3539 Jun 22.² Re Brit proposed reply Aust note Mar 7 reduction occupation burdens. Dept has few comments other than view stated Audel 267³ that we favor more gen reply rather than specific point by point reply as proposed by Brit. Dept sees no need for further coordination of replies and has no objection to dispatch Brit note if they prefer that form.

Dept recd from Kleinwaechter Jun 26 copy identical notes recently addressed Govts UK and Fr by Aust Govt requesting US support Aust request that the Brit and Fr utilize the occasion transfer to civilian control to renounce occupation costs.⁴ Aust note states West Powers no longer regard themselves as mil occupation force but as friends whose troops remain solely in Aust interest. This conviction cannot however take hold completely until UK and Fr follow example of US and assume out of their own resources burdens arising from continued presence their troops in Aust. Aust Govt stresses that UK and Fr action to give up payment occupation costs wld play essential part in consolidating financial status Aust. US supports Aust request and expresses hope that favorable action may be taken this connection by Brit and Fr Govts. In our view this is the one single item in Mar 7 note upon which favorable UK and Fr action wld be most helpful in reducing Aust occupation burden.

Additional item on which favorable action by Brit and Fr wld be of assistance to Aust is item 12(c) of items to be mentioned by Caccia in oral statement relative release Aust property in countries of the occupying powers as well as in India, Pakistan, Neth, US of Indonesia, and Lux. Aust Govt has requested good offices occupying powers to induce foregoing Govts to release sequestered Aust property. This Govt supports Aust request this connection and is prepared to render appropriate assistance. Brit and Fr suggestions as to how this cld best be accomplished wld be most welcome.

Further reference proposed Brit note, Brit propose informing Aust Govt that they are communicating copies note to Govts USA, USSR and Fr. Sovs did not communicate copy their reply Aust note⁵ to West Govts and we see no necessity send copy our reply to Sovs. We believe it wld be preferable make no mention in West notes to Aust Govt concerning communication copies note to any other power.

London requested communicate foregoing views FonOff.

Comment will fol on proposed Fr reply Aust note, copy of which has been recd from Fr Emb here.⁶

Text US proposed reply will be submitted Brit and Fr for comment prior delivery.

Acheson

1. Repeated to Vienna as 937, Paris as 3057, Moscow as 548, and to Frankfort for Samuel Reber, Jr., United States Deputy for Austria at the Council of Foreign Ministers who had returned to Frankfort to resume his duties as Counselor of Mission, as 4633.
2. Not printed (663.001/6–2250); for text of the British reply as delivered on July 11, which has minor textual differences from the proposed reply in telegram 3539, see Margaret Carlyle, ed., Documents on International Affairs, 1949–1950 (London, Oxford University Press, 1953), pp. 510–514.
3. Not printed.
4. Not printed. A copy of this note is in file 863.10/6–2650.
5. The Soviet reply, dated April 15, after denying any blame for delay in negotiating an Austrian Treaty and placing the responsibility for delay on the three Western Powers, stated: “In regard to the proposal contained in the note mentioned concerning changes in the functions of the administration in the occupied zones, the Soviet Government sees no sufficient reason for such changes.” Despatch 382, April 28, from Vienna, not printed (663.001/4–2850).
6. Not printed; a copy of the proposed French reply, which was generally receptive in tone to the Austrian requests, is in file 763.0221/6–2650.