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

Conference files, lot 60 D 627, CF 203

No. 466
Memorandum of Conversation, by the Counselor of Embassy in Austria (Davis)

secret

Berlin, February 12, 1954.

• Present: British Delegation
  • Mr. Warner
  • Mr. Malcolm
  • Mr. Blair
• French Delegation
  • M. Sauvagnargues
  • M. Mille
• Austrian Delegation
  • Dr. Schoener
  • Dr. Roessler
  • Dr. Gudenus
• U.S. Delegation
  • Mr. Freund
  • Mr. Tyler
  • Mr. Davis

Subject: Austrian Reaction to Molotov’s Proposals¹ and Future Tactics

The Tripartite Group on Austria met with the Austrians tonight. The Tripartite Group also met alone and this meeting is the subject of a separate memorandum.² After brief indication from Mr. Warner that we considered the Soviet proposals on Austria made this afternoon by Molotov were impossible to accept, Dr. Schoener was asked whether the Austrian Delegation had formulated its views.

Tentative Austrian Views on Soviet Proposals

Dr. Schoener said the Austrian Delegation viewed the Soviet proposals negatively. He made the following points:

1) While Austria was willing to make sacrifices to obtain a treaty and restoration of its independence, the Soviet proposal that Austria should in reality continue to pay for and still retain occupation troops was impossible to accept. The Austrian Parliament would never accept this. Therefore, this was the Austrian principal objection.

2) Dr. Schoener referred to paragraph 1(b)…³ the Soviet proposal to insert into the text of the State Treaty an additional article beginning “Austria undertakes not to enter into any coalition, etc.”. Yet what does “coalition” mean? Does it apply to non-military organizations such as the Council of Europe, Coal and Steel Community, EPU, OEEC? Perhaps this should be clarified.

3) Dr. Schoener referred to paragraph 2 of the Soviet proposal and remarked that to postpone withdrawal of troops meant, in fact, indefinite occupation.

4) He referred to the proposal to withdraw troops from Vienna which he characterized as particularly dangerous. It would mean Vienna was isolated in a sea of Russian soldiers and, in fact, he might mean the partition of Austria.

5) As for the special agreement to be prepared by the Four Powers with the participation of Austria on the legal status of the troops remaining, he remarked this would, in fact, mean a new control agreement and probably one worse than the existing control agreement. In reality the Soviet proposal was a promise to give the Austrians a straight treaty with a new control agreement, the contents of which were unknown.

In reply to a queston by Mr. Warner whether the Austrians thought the Soviet proposal should be rejected as a whole or some points were acceptable, Dr. Schoener replied that while he could only speak unofficially, he thought the whole proposal was unacceptable. He remarked Parliament would never accept a continuance of the occupation while Austria was forced to continue making economic sacrifices. However, Dr. Schoener could not say now whether the Austrian Delegation would reject the Soviet proposal as a whole or only on certain principal points.

The Austrians appeared to agree with the argument of the Tripartite Group that we should not ask the Soviet Delegation to clarify points in the Soviet plan since to do so would lead confusion in the public mind and would give the false impression that we accepted the plan as a basis for discussion.

In reply to a question whether the Austrian Delegation intended to make any new proposal, Dr. Schoener indicated they had nothing new to suggest and would probably keep within the line laid down in Dr. Figl’s opening speech.

Tactics at Saturday Session

A discussion followed on whether the Austrian Delegation should speak first and reject Mr. Molotov’s proposal or alternatively the first word would go to the occupation powers. Dr. Schoener was unable to give any opinion and it was agreed that this question should be decided by the Ministers. Dr. Schoener then said that Dr. Figl would like to meet with the three Western Ministers before tomorrow’s meeting. We promised to take this up and inform the Austrians tomorrow morning whether the Ministers could meet with Dr. Figl possibly at 12:30.

1. FPM(54)55, Document 519.
2. Infra.
3. Ellipsis in the source text.