Foreign Relations of the United States, 1951, European Security and the German Question, Volume III, Part 2

462A.62B31/7–351: Telegram

The Director of the Berlin Element of HIGOG (Page) to the Liaison and Political Reporting Division, at Bonn¹

secret   priority

Berlin, July 3, 1951—6 p. m.

2. Verbatim text.

1. Commandants met 2 July, Genl. Bourne (UK) chairman, Genl. Mathewson (US) and M. de Noblet (Fr) to consider latest developments concerning Warenbegleitscheine situation and IZT negots. Bourne viewed sitn as critical and proposed that commandants recommended HICOM immed imposition simultaneous countermeasures Berlin and West Germany. De Noblet stated he authorized only to exchange info and that he had explicit instrs not to agree to any action or recommendations.

2. Bourne discounted significance of fact that 1520 Warenbegleitscheine delivered to Senate that morning. In light previous Sov failure to clear more than 4 Warenbegleitscheine since commandants wrote to Dengin on 26 June² and unpredictability of future deliveries of Warenbegleitscheine, he stressed that Sov had initiative and were playing Western Allies on end of a string. As indicative West Berliners discouragement over position of west commandants vis-à-vis Sov, Bourne mentioned Mayor Reuter’s question to him on Sunday as to whether Western allies were behind the West Berliners or in front of them in this matter. Bourne concluded that imposition retaliatory measures this week was already somewhat late but better than next week.

3. Mathewson took firm stand in support Brit position, pointing out basic absurdity of present sitn of commandants in which they are attempting to gauge their action based upon “rumor” info coming daily and hourly from German sources. De Noblet, on other hand, counseled temporizing on theory that no steps shld be taken which wld forestall possibility of Sovs coming to mtg with Western experts on 5 July. He also argued that return of 1520 Warenbegleitscheine was “evidence of Sov good will”. De Noblet wld accept neither conclusion that commandants were being played with nor recommendations for countermeasures.

4. Commandants finally agreed to meet 3 July on the understanding that Genl Carolet wld attend and be prepared to consider recommendations to HICOM, meanwhile sending Brit draft on tactual [tactical?’] sitn.

(Largely contained ourtel to Frankfort 1772 rptd Bonn 417, Dept 1571 Paris 342, London 158; Moscow 176³).

5. Late in mtg Leopold arrived and reported on talks which Kaumann and he had with Orlopp that afternoon. In all there were three points raised in Kaumann-Orlopp talks 2 July as follows:

a. Warenbegleitscheine. Orlopp announced that in addition to 1520 Warenbegleitscheine delivered today, 1641 wld be delivered tomorrow. He computed that since 12 June, 9,000 Warenbegleitscheine have been delivered and that the sitn as before 11 May had now been restored. This, Orlopp explained, meant that proof of origin wld be required in three percent of all Warenbegleitscheine now on hand and those submitted hereafter, as, he claimed, they had been required since 1948 on this percentage. He further made clear that this requirement wld not apply solely to certain types of goods (as fol example, the list notified to the Senate on Saturday 30 June by the East Transitstelle) but wld be applied on all types of goods on ACA restricted list. Impression was given that “spot check” method wld be employed.

In view this explanation by Orlopp, Leopold desired instrs from Commandants as reps of HICOM whether he and Kaumann could resume talks with Orlopp, scheduled for 7 o’clock that same evening.

b. Press communiqué. Kaumann informed Orlopp that negots cld not be continued unless it was agreed that all threats (such as threat by Rau to cut off electric power and coal supplied West Berlin by East Zone auths) be withdrawn at 2400 hours that night. Orlopp agreed to this proposal and suggested joint press communique be released that night as follows.

“Both parties continued today negots for purpose of concluding new trade agreement. Obstacles in principle to conclusion of new agreement no longer exist. It will merely require few more days to secure technical implementation of new agreement. To avoid any disruption internal Ger trade there will be no interruption of movement of goods up to time when agreement is reached. Parties to agreement agreed that agreement can be signed without further delay.”

c. Traffic agreement. Kaumann pointed out to Orlopp that proposed press communiqué not entirely correct since conclusion satisfactory traffic agreement still remains obstacle in principle. After Orlopp referred to his recent counterproposals on this subject, Kaumann informed Orlopp along lines of instrs recd from Bonn 29 June and deputy commandants 30 June that traffic clauses re movements to and from Berlin cld not be included in IZT agreement and wld be discussed at Allied level, except for technical traffic questions. Kaumann further informed Orlopp as instructed by HICOM that in event interference with such movements trade agreement wld be deprived of effect. Leopold reported that Orlopp than laughed and replied that this last condition was unacceptable since the trade agreement cld be renounced any minute under such circumstances.

Orlopp then proposed that Kaumann write him letter and submitted proposed draft of such letter as follows.

“Dear Herr Orlopp, Referring to many negots which I carried on with you, I may, at time of signing agreement of … state that we both agree permit traffic between separate parts of the currency areas to proceed unhindered across demarcation lines. As matter of principle trade agreement shld be sought which wld recognize econ development since 1945 of territories concerned. It is intended to appoint joint traffic delegation for this purpose. Please acknowledge receipt of this letter”.

6. Commandants agreed that Kaumann and Leopold shld resume talks with Orlopp that evening and instructed Leopold as follows:

a. Warenhegleitscheine. Leopold and Kaumann are to inform Orlopp that, while talks may continue, the trade agreement will not be signed until all Warenhegleitscheine are acceptable without certificates of origin and that position of the Western Allies on this point remains unchanged.

b. Press communiqué. Kaumann and Leopold are not to agree to press release beyond statement that talks are continuing.

c. Traffic agreement. Kaumann and Leopold are not to agree to sending any such letter to Orlopp as drafted and proposed by Orlopp.

7. Commandants with Genl. Carolet present for Fr met again this morning and agreed fol communication to HICOM.

Commandants met this morning to discuss present sitn. They reaffirmed their previous decision that in no case shld Berlin auths accede to East request for submission of certificates of origin.

Although no reply had been received from Dengin they discussed what action shld be taken if Sov auths declared themselves willing to come to quadripartite talks. They came to conclusion that they shld not agree to enter into talks with Sovs until they were satisfied that condition set out in last sentence of their letters to Dengin of 15 June⁴ had been met.

In view of statement reported to ITS by Leopold to have been made by Orlopp that Sov auths wld retain some three percent of Warenbegleitscheine submitted pending receipt of certificates of origin commandants’ opinion was that if all Warenhegleitscheine submitted up to and including 26 June had been returned that wld be acceptable indication of Sov compliance with condition.

They wld not propose to write further letter to Dengin but if his delegation came to mtg without foregoing condition being met Western delegations wld explain that they were in the circumstances unable to proceed to discussion.

Commandants ask for immed views of HICOM on line proposed in above paras.

The fol is agenda which we intend to adopt if quadripartite talks take place: Our experts will confine discussions to matters contained thereon and will not discuss trade agreement or any aspect of interzonal trade.

1. Control of trade.

a. Illegal trade.

i. Exchange of info and mutual assistance.

ii. Study of enforcement machinery.

b. Legal trade-shipment of goods from Berlin.

i. Not on ACA restricted list.

ii. On ACA restricted list.

2. Confiscation of goods fines imposed and merchandise otherwise interfered with during passage through Sov Zone.

3. Mail shipments.”

8. Kaumann informed Berlin Element this afternoon that in accordance instrs FedRep Econ Ministry all shipments goods from West Germany and Berlin to East sector zone have been embargoed. We also recd info from Senate that 1641 Warenbegleitscheine delivered today as promised by Orlopp. These Warenbegleitscheine cover textiles, electrical and rubber goods, machinery and food products.

9. In view urgency wld appreciate interim action by HICOM within 24 hours to anticipate possible talks Thursday.

Page

1. Repeated to Washington, London, Frankfurt, Paris and Moscow. The source text is the copy in the Department of State files.

2. Transmitted in telegram 1550 from Berlin, June 26 (460.509/6–2651), this letter reads:

   “In my letter to you of June 15, I said that, while maintaining my rights as sector commandant regarding documentation and movement of goods from US sector of Berlin, I believed it to be in our mutual interest to prevent illegal trade in both directions. I proposed that discussion to this end might be undertaken by our experts. I was happy to note, in your letter of June 18, that you concurred with this proposal.

   I therefore suggest that our experts meet on Thursday, July 5 at 10: 30 a. m. in Lancaster House to discuss what measures wld best achieve our common purpose of preventing illegal trade and, at the same time, of ensuring the normal flow of legal trade. I trust that by this date the investigation you referred to in the last paragraph of your letter of June 18 will have been concluded, and that the accumulation of Warenbegleitscheine awaiting stamping at Karlshorst (now some 6,000) will have been cleared up.”

3. Not printed; it reported that the best strategy seemed to be to refrain from further action over the weekend of June 30–July 1 to give the Soviets an opportunity to retreat from their position, but if the situation had not been clarified satisfactorily by July 2, countermeasures should be imposed in Berlin and the Federal Republic. (462A.62B31/6–3051)
4. Not printed, but see footnote 3, p. 1840.