Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, Germany and Austria, Volume VII, Part 1

396.1 BE/1–2154: Telegram

No. 341
The Ambassador in Austria (Thompson) to the Department of State¹

secret

Vienna, January 21, 1954—7 p.m.

1824. Foreign Office having been somewhat disturbed at two points made by Figl to Western High Commissioners re Austrian attitude at Berlin (Embtel 1763 repeated London 142, Paris 242²), Caccia discussed these points with Figl today. They were (1) Austrian indication they might seek revision of a number of obsolete or objectionable articles including Article 4 and (2) Austrian tactics re neutrality which also disturbed Department (Deptel 2049 repeated London 3683, Paris 2533³). On former point, Foreign Office feared that to reopen whole series of articles would open doors for Russians to introduce new proposals of their own, and reopening of Article 4 would be particularly dangerous in view recent Soviet accusations re Anschluss. On second point, Foreign Office somewhat exaggerated significance of Austrian tactics by describing them as “complete abdication of sovereignty in a vital matter”.

(We had, in fact, taken these points up at last working group⁴ meeting and obtained from Austrian experts assurances that revision of articles other than 35 would be sought only in final drafting stage if treaty seemed imminent, that they would advise against reopening Article 4 under any circumstances, and that Austrian gambit on neutrality would only be utilized, if appropriate at all, during late stage of discussion this subject.)

Figl replied to Caccia along much same lines. He stated categorically that no reference to revision of any article other than 35 would be made in his opening statement to conference and other articles would be reopened only if prospects for concluding treaty seemed excellent. He said he would discuss full text his opening statement with High Commissioners in Vienna before his departure and again with Western delegations in Berlin. As to neutrality, he reiterated Austrian position as previously stated, emphasizing he would oppose derogation from full sovereignty and would be guided by attitude of Western Powers.

Thompson

1. Repeated to London, Paris, and Berlin.
2. Telegram 1763 reported on a meeting with Figl on Jan. 14 at which the Austrian Chancellor reviewed his plans for the Berlin Conference, stating, inter alia, that Austria would not raise the neutrality issue itself. If however, the Soviet Union raised the question, Austria would reiterate its intention not to join any military alliance, express its belief that there should be no neutrality clause in the treaty, and state that this was a matter for four-power resolution. (396.1 BE/1–1454)
3. Telegram 2049 stated that the four-power agreement on the terms of Austrian neutrality was unlikely and that it would be better if Austria said nothing about it rather than leave it to the four powers. (396.1 BE/1–1454)
4. Following completion of the second session of the Tripartite Working Group in December, tripartite consultation with Austria had begun in January concerning those papers affecting Austria. Documentation on the several meetings in Vienna to discuss tripartite positions is in file 396.1 BE.