662.001/8–2952: Telegram
No. 129
The Acting
Secretary of State to the Embassy
in the United Kingdom1
secret
priority
Washington, August 29, 1952—7:17
p.m.
1470. Fol is Dept’s draft proposed reply to Sov note on Ger.2 for discussion in
the various capitals and for London’s guidance when coordinating
talks begin:
- “1. On July 10, the US Govt proposed to the Sov Govt
that there be a four-power mtg to seek agreement on the
composition and functions of a Comm to investigate
whether the conditions necessary for free elections
exist in all four zones of Ger and in Berlin.3 The
US note pointed out the obvious fact that if any
progress is to be made towards sealing the breach now
steadily being widened betw the Sov Zone of Ger and the greater part of
the country which is under the jurisdiction of the Fed
Rep, the first question to be settled is how free
elections can be held throughout the country. It was
further made clear in the note of July 10 that if this
first step cld be undertaken seriously and successfully,
future mtgs cld turn to the problems of forming an
all-Ger Govt, determining its status, and finally to the
terms of a peace treaty to be negotiated with that
all-Ger Govt. The US Govt had hoped that in spite of
earlier refusals by the Sov Govt to join in practical
steps to bring about unity in Ger, the concrete and moderate proposals of
July 10 wld induce a more cooperative spirit.
- “2. It is with renewed disappointment therefore that
the US Govt has noted the Sov Govt’s negative reply of
Aug 23. Instead of joining the Western powers in an
effort to get at the key-log in the jam on Ger unification—i.e. the
problem of elections, for which there must first be
suitable conditions created, if a free and democratic
all-Ger Govt is to result—the Sov Govt offers only a
renewal of its earlier insistence on talking first about
a Ger peace treaty.
Having discussed this point, the Sov Govt wld talk about
formation of an all-Ger Govt and finally, apparently as
a matter of quite secondary importance, wld talk also
about elections and a Comm to investigate the existence
of suitable conditions for elections.
- “3. With respect to the gen statements of the Sov Govt
on the Ger problem in
this, as in previous Sov communications, the US
[Page 306]
Govt observes
that these statements are drawn up in large part in
terms inadequate to serve as a basis for profitable
discussion of the gen aspects of the subj in
question.
- “4. The Sov Govt, for example, refers to the Atlantic
Pact as an instrument which pursues aggressive aims, and
proceeds to discuss the question of the right of a
future Ger Govt to assoc
itself with other nations for peaceful purposes in the
light of this interpretation of the aims of the Atlantic
Pact. This represents a unilateral, arbitrary assertion
of the Sov Govt, to which neither the US Govt nor any
other member of that pact wld be able to agree and which
is, therefore, unacceptable as a basis of
discussion.
- “5. Similarly, the Sov Govt refers to the provisions
of the Potsdam Agreement calling for the restoration of
Germany as a ‘united, independent, peace-loving,
democratic state.’ The US Govt has learned from the
experiences of recent years that these words have
meanings for the Sov Govt entirely diff from those with
which they have been traditionally associated in either
the Russian or Eng (Fr) languages. It notes that Sov
statesmen reserve the use of the word democratic exclusively for those societies in
which monopolistic or dominant political power is
exercised by elements recognizing the polit auth of the
Commie Party of the Sov Union. The term independent appears to have a
similar connotation, and is used most frequently in Sov
terminology to denote states having the outward
trappings of sovereignty but which are actually in a
state of marked subordination to Sov Commie influence.
The term peace-loving, as used in
Sov official statements and materials, appears to denote
anything which promotes the polit aspirations of Commie
Parties recognizing the auth of the Commie Party of the
Sov Union; and by the same token it appears that
anything which implies resistance to the aspirations of
such Commie Parties is portrayed as evidence of war-like
and aggressive intent. The Sov Govt by these distortions
of the meaning of terms pretends that there has occurred
some measure of reconciliation of the points of view of
the Govt of the US, the UK and Fr and of the Sov Govt.
The US Govt fails to see wherein the previous
differences have been bridged in reality.
- “6. The US Govt accordingly feels that in existing
circumstances discussion had best be confined to the
practical steps which each of the parties is prepared to
take with a view to overcoming the division of Germany
and restoration of that country to normal peacetime
status. In its latest note as in the first note, the Sov
Govt continues to put the cart before the horse. It
continues to relegate to the background the simple and
practical question of agreeing on a Comm to see whether
free elections can actually be held in all of Ger. Until this is done and
suitable conditions exist, elections
[Page 307]
cannot be held. Until
elections are held, no all-Ger Govt can be formed nor
can the country be unified. And until an all-Ger Govt is
formed and given a suitable status of freedom, it is
useless to discuss the terms of a Ger peace treaty. The US
Govt for its part wishes to see est for all of Ger an all-Ger Govt which
will faithfully reflect the actual electoral strength of
all important polit elements in Ger willing to accept the obligations of
loyalty and restraint implicit in the operation of a
genuine parliamentary system. The Govt of the US is
compelled to remind the Sov Govt that conditions have
radically altered since 1945 and that the idea of a
peace treaty drawn up by the four powers and imposed by
them on Germany is entirely unsuitable as procedure in
1952, given the enormous strides made in the Fed Rep
towards independent and democratic Govt, a progress we
wld expect to go even further in a unified Ger. The Sov Govt must
recall that the Potsdam Agrmt stated by its own terms
that its polit and econ principles were designed to
govern the initial control period only. Nor is the
situation aided by the Sov Govt’s sug that reps of the
Ger regime in the
Sov Zone take part in a four-power mtg for ‘the
examination of approp questions.’ Until free elections
are held which include that area there will be,
unfortunately, no Ger
Auth properly qualified to speak for the population of
the Sov Zone on such matters as a peace treaty.
- “7. Furthermore, since the Sov Govt rejects as ‘an
insult to the Ger
nation’ all suggs of an impartial internatl Comm to
investigate existing conditions in Ger for their bearing on
the holding of free elections, the diff in points of
view on this problem do not appear to be growing less.
While repeatedly expressing willingness to consider any
practical proposal for attaining the desired results,
the US Govt has continued to insist that what is needed
is a Comm whose members stand apart from the various
contentions about conditions, whose members are free
from influence by the Occ Powers and who are therefore
able to make a useful report. It is no insult to the
Ger nation to insist
that the best way in which true conditions in the Sov
Zone can be exposed and corrected lies through the
creation of an uncontrolled outside body. The
freely-elected reps of fifty million of the Ger people have themselves
declared on Sep 27, 1951 by a unanimous vote of all the
non-Commie parties that no fruitful results could come
from an attempt to work with the reps of Communism who
have imposed their will on the other 17 million Gers.4 It was thus
the Ger people
themselves who
[Page 308]
then proposed the creation of a neutral internatl Comm
under UN
supervision.
- “8. The US Govt must insist again on the necess of
starting four-power discussions at the only point from
which they can logically start, which is the formation
of a Comm so that elections can be organized. The need
for such a Comm is reinforced more strikingly day by
day. The Ger people and
the world want to know the truth about alleged
conditions of freedom in an area from which kidnappers
can issue forth and to which kidnapped persons can be
taken and held for weeks, months and years without trial
or sign of life. Recent events strengthen this demand.
The Ger people and the
world want to know the truth about alleged conditions of
freedom in an area where farmers and villagers are
dispossessed overnight without recourse, in the name of
security against non-existent ‘spies, diversionists,
terrorists, etc.’ The people of Ger and the world are not convinced by the
information conveyed by a steady stream of thousands of
refugees fleeing every month from the Sov Zone that
suitable conditions exist there for the holding of free
elections. The necess for an impartial Comm is
abundantly clear from the ‘elections’ staged in the Sov
Zone in the autumn of 1950, which the Ger people know to have
been anything but free and democratic. The world has
noted the decision taken at the Jul conference of the
Commie Socialist Unity Party that the Sov Zone shld
press forward on the road to Communism, thus alienating
the Sov Zone still further from the major part of
Germany and clearly pushing aside the attainment of a
unified democratic Ger.
It is precisely because developments in the Sov Zone
have not proceeded in the manner envisaged by the
Potsdam Agrmt that the proposals of the Sov Govt are now
unrealistic.
- “9. Under all these circumstances, the US Govt cannot
feel that any progress has been made in the six notes
which have previously been exchanged. It is anxious,
however, to avail itself of any opportunity, however
slight, to find a way of ending the division of Ger, now so arbitrarily
maintained. This division exists as a festering sore in
Eur. It will not be healed by discussions about a
hypothetical peace treaty with a country yet lacking all
semblance of a unified Govt. It will only be healed by
energetically tackling the problem of unifying the
country through free elections.
- “10. The US Govt therefore renews the proposal made in
its note of Jul 10 for a four-power mtg to discuss the
formation and functions of an impartial Comm of
investigation in order to prepare the way for a
subsequent discussion of the program for the formation
of an all-Ger Govt. It most earnestly urges the Sov Govt
to reconsider
[Page 309]
its refusal to join the other Powers in a single-minded
effort to come to grips with the problem of holding free
elections in Ger.”
