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

762A.00/5–1750: Telegram

The United States High Commissioner for Germany ( McCloy ) to the Acting Secretary of State

secret
priority

Frankfort , May 17, 1950—2 p. m.

4233. Following is brief summary report of May 16 meeting between HICOM Council and Chancellor Adenauer,¹ who was accompanied by Economics Minister Erhard, McCloy (US) chairman, Poncet² (France), and Robertson (UK).

1. Review of London FonMins’ Conference.

As chairman, I reviewed subjects dealt with in London, both with respect to general world problems and deliberations affecting Germany. With respect to world problems, I briefly mentioned: balance of strength between Communist and non-Communist world and present efforts to correct disparity of military and economic strength of west; importance of maintaining position in Far East and SE Asia, impasse in UN reached as result of Soviet boycott on issue of recognition of Communist China; organization of defense and finance North Atlantic Treaty machinery; integration of western Europe with stress on Acheson statement that termination of Marshall aid in ’52 would not represent terminal date of US interest in Europe; Allied policy re Austria (did not mention civilian high commissioner); appointment of inter-governmental study group to consider problem of migration for relief of over-populated areas (I pointed out that group would be happy to consult FedRep experts this connection); developments in certain undeveloped areas of world, particularly Africa, and part which western Europe including Germany could take in development of such areas, as well as UN role in Point IV program; and finally, policies re satellite areas with particular emphasis Yugoslavia.

With respect to Germany, I reviewed FonMins’ declaration of May 14 placing particular stress on democratic development in Germany which would provide lasting elements of security and that presence of Allied troops at present time is not so much for suppression or performing usual purposes of occupation as for maintaining defence forces in Germany to protect it from foreign encroachment during period of FedRep development. I reviewed purposes of study group re occupation statute and reducing difficulties arising out of state of war and lack of peace treaty. I indicated study group might also concern itself with prewar obligations of German claims and implementation of Articles 18 and 19 of the Ruhr statute. I indicated FedRep would be consulted in work of study group. I transmitted declaration re Berlin³ and indicated Benelux agreed to study situation with object of increasing purchases in Berlin and cited proposed activities of Harriman and OEEC to aid Berlin. I transmitted Soviet-held German POW’s declaration.⁴ I stated FonMins would deliver protest to Soviets re formation and maintenance of para-military organization in east zone which would be delivered in about a week’s time.⁵ I indicated new law 75⁶ would soon be promulgated as appeal had lapsed. Re Schuman plan, I indicated Monet would present general plan in Germany next week. Poncet added that FedRep would be invited to designate representatives to participate in study group to be established in near future to work out general structure of Schuman proposal. Adenauer stated he reacted rapidly and favorably to Schuman plan as it was same plan he had submitted to Reichstag in 1925 at period when Franco-German relations had reached lowest ebb. He indicated that at that time plan was suggested for political reasons, but now that Africa is to be included, plan takes on great importance for overpopulated western Europe and because it is laying foundation for European integration.

Robertson emphasized that FonMins declaration was straightforward statement meaning what it said, that progressive independence is based on frank cooperation on the part of the Germans. It should, he hoped, bring to an end era “in which we talk about concessions being made by occupying powers toward Germany.”

Adenauer stated he welcomed establishment of study group and that although German press had criticized fact that FedRep was not a member, he believed that it would be embarrassing for FedRep to participate in group “which would be working upon its own occupation statute”. In passing Adenauer noted that FonMins’ declaration had not found great welcome in US press according to his information (which he admitted was not always reliable). I replied that US press seemed most favorable to Schuman plan and that I had not seen any unfavorable nationwide comment on declaration itself. I believe on reflection he was referring to the reaction in US press to London reports we were about to go to a “council of ambassadors.”

In executive session I informed Adenauer that no action was taken concerning his letter re establishment federal police,⁷ but that it was recognized that a case was made out for some sort of federal police, though amount and nature was still uncertain. Each of us would appoint an expert to study problem together with his expert. Re security guarantee to FedRep area, I read reply and reviewed orally statement authorized by FonMins.⁸ He replied that statement gave him some relief, but expressed uneasiness over alleged military plans calling for defense at particular line, i.e. Rhine. I replied that question of lines was military affair and that we were not in position to discuss such matters with him. I pointed out lines must necessarily vary with strength and situation and that he could be sure that we would always defend the line which we were capable of defending. I pointed out significance of guarantee under NAT extended FedRep.

I also in executive session Adenauer raised question of shipbuilding restrictions, investments and Reich assets and debts. He urged that we come forward with something in these fields before he introduces Council of Europe issue in Bundestag. I stated that HICOM would consider any steps which could be taken to strengthen the economy of Germany and aid its government, but not in relation to council of Europe issue.

Adenauer, although pleased with entire affair, wasn’t beyond attempting further bargaining.

2. Federal law regulating petrol prices.

See paragraph 7 of HICOG Frankfort 4235 to Department⁹ this date reporting HICOM decision based on brief discussion with Adenauer and Erhard.

Sent Department 4233, repeated priority Paris 380, London 261, Bonn 99, Berlin 323.

McCloy

1. The minutes of the 17th meeting of the Council with Chancellor Adenauer are included in the Bonn Embassy Files, McCloy Project: Lot 311: Box 357: D(50) 1355.
2. André François-Poncet, French High Commissioner for Germany.
3. For the text of the Foreign Ministers declaration on Berlin, see vol. iii, p. 1091.
4. For the text of the Foreign Ministers statement on repatriation of German prisoners of war from the Soviet Union, see Department of State Bulletin, June 19, 1950, p. 1018.
5. Regarding the protest by the Western Allies to the Soviet Union on the formation of paramilitary organizations in the Eastern Zone of Germany, see pp. 942 ff.
6. U.S. Military Government Law No. 75, Reorganization of German Coal and Iron and Steel Industries, November 10, 1948, For the text, see Germany, 1947–1949: The Story in Documents, pp. 348 ff. Allied High Commission Law No. 27, May 16, 1950, superseded British and American Military Government Laws No. 75; for the text of new provisions, see Beate Ruhm von Oppen, ed., Documents on Germany Under Occupation, 1945–1954, pp. 490 ff. The full text is printed in High Commission Gazette, 20 May 1950, p. 299.
7. For the text of Adenauer’s letter, see telegram 205, May 4, from Bonn, p. 684.
8. For the text of the Foreign Ministers statement on the security of the Federal Republic, see MIN/TRI/P/10 Final, vol. iii, p. 1085.
9. Not printed; it transmitted a summary report of the 28th meeting of the Allied High Commission. Paragraph 7 indicated that Federal law regulating petrol prices had been temporarily suspended. (740.00/5–1750)