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

Conference files, lot 59 D 95, CF 108

No. 48
Minutes of the Meeting of the Foreign Ministers of the United States, the United Kingdom, and France With the Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany, May 25, 1952, 10:30 a.m.¹

secret

Bonn, May 25, 1952, 10:30 a.m. to 1:15 p.m.

• There were present:
  • United States
    • Mr. Acheson
    • Mr. McCloy
    • Mr. Jessup
    • Mr. Perkins
    • Mr. Lewis
    • Mr. Reber
    • Mr. Harris
    • Mr. Reinstein
    • Mr. Calhoun
    • Miss Kirkpatrick
  • United Kingdom
    • Mr. Eden
    • Sir Ivone Kirkpatrick
    • Mr. Roberts
    • Mr. Ward
    • Mr. Trevelyan
    • Mr. O’Neill
    • Mr. Bathurst
    • Mr. Shuckburgh
    • Mr. Ridsdale
  • France
    • M. Schuman
    • M. Francois-Poncet
    • M. Alphand
    • M. Berard
    • M. Seydoux
    • M. Leroy-Beaulieu
    • M. de Guiringaud
    • M. Sauvagnargues
    • M. Patey
  • Federal Republic
    • Dr. Adenauer
    • Herr Schaeffer
    • Prof. Hallstein
    • Herr Blankenhorn
    • Prof. Grewe

[Here follows a five-point index to the minutes.]

1. French Reservation on Reparations; Application of Article 50 of Rights and Obligations Convention; Outstanding Financial Questions

Mr. Acheson said that, as a result of discussions which had taken place in the interval since the last meeting, the Allied Ministers were now ready to make proposals on the basis of which it should be possible to reach a solution of these problems as a group. As to the question of reparations, it was proposed that Article 1 of Chapter Six of the Convention on the Settlement of Matters Arising out of the War and the Occupation² should be allowed to stand without modification and that the French position would be covered by the following protocol:

“The U.S. and U.K. Governments declare that they have not asserted and do not intend to assert any claim for reparations out of current production. They have consistently opposed, and intend to oppose the exaction of such reparations by any other Power. The French Government takes note of the situation of fact and therefore associates itself with Article 1 of Chapter Six of the Convention on the Settlement of Matters Arising out of the War and the Occupation.”

M. Schuman intervened to say that the French concession on this point was dependent on agreement being reached on the whole group of these problems. Mr. Acheson said that he had been about to make this point and hoped that the Chancellor and M. Schuman could settle between them the remaining points at issue regarding the application of Article 50 of the Forces Convention and the question of the application of Articles 7 and 3 of the Finance Convention.³ In that event, the three Governments were prepared to confirm the recommendation made by the High Commissioners for the division of the Federal Republic financial contribution to defense.⁴ After some discussion, it was agreed that French and German experts should retire in an attempt to resolve the outstanding issues with regard to the application of Article 50.

The experts upon their return reported that they had been able to agree on a revised text for Article 50, except for a German reservation that the EDC Commissariat should have a right of intervention in matters of logistic support prior to 30 June 1953. M. Schuman said that he objected to this reservation on several grounds. In the first place, the problem was not now within the competence of the EDC Commissariat and in any event the rights of the French and Belgian troops involved would be covered by the convention for only a few months. The cost of support of these troops would not be within the control of the EDC Commissariat and it would be illogical to give the EDC any responsibility in the matter of material support. Finally, the introduction of yet another date into the steps leading up to the adoption of a common budget would create great fiscal difficulties.

The Chancellor replied that he believed that giving the EDC Commissariat a right in this matter would perhaps be reassuring to certain other member countries of the EDC, but added that he placed no very high value on the point and would be willing to concede it. M. Schuman thanked the Chancellor and indicated that he would be willing to concede to the Chancellor’s position on Article 3 of the Finance Convention if the Chancellor would accept his position on Article 7 of that convention. The Chancellor agreed.

On Mr. Acheson’s proposal, the Foreign Ministers and the Chancellor then confirmed the division of the Federal Republic’s financial contribution as proposed by the High Commissioners.

2. Special Arrangements for Entry into Force of Parts of the Contractual Arrangements Prior to Complete Ratification of the EDC Treaty

The four Ministers confirmed agreement to the following text of the letter to be addressed by the Foreign Ministers to the Chancellor on this subject:

“During the discussions on the conventions which have been signed today, you have raised the question whether certain provisions of these conventions might be put into effect before the time provided for in the conventions themselves.

We wish to inform you that when the conventions have been ratified by all the parties to them our Governments will be prepared if there is any undue delay on the part of other parties in ratifying the Treaty on the Establishment of the EDC to hold a meeting with the Federal Government to consider the situation, and to determine whether arrangements may be made to put certain provisions contained in the conventions into effect prior to the entry into force of the conventions.”

3. Article 7, Paragraph 3 of Convention on Relations Between the Three Powers and the Federal Republic of Germany⁵

Mr. Acheson referred to the difficulties which Paragraph 3 of Article 7 of this convention had raised for the Chancellor. Members of the three Allied delegations had consulted amongst themselves and with representatives of the Chancellor and were now in a position to propose a new draft of this paragraph which they hoped would meet these difficulties.^* He explained that the new draft incorporated two ideas. The first was that the Three Powers in the event of unification of Germany would extend the rights of the Federal Republic under the present conventions to the government of a unified Germany upon the assumption by such a government of the Federal Republic’s obligations under the conventions. The second was that the Federal Government should not enter into any agreement which would impair the rights of the Three Powers under the conventions.

After the text of the paragraph had been read to the Chancellor in full, he said that the second sentence contained a commitment on the part of the Federal Republic which the Three Powers were not called upon to reciprocate. The Federal Republic was asked not to conclude any agreement or enter into an arrangement which would impair the rights of the Three Powers, but the Three Powers were not undertaking a similar obligation toward the Federal Republic.

Mr. Acheson said that this question had been previously discussed in connection with Article 2, Paragraph 1, of this convention under which the Allies had reserved powers concerning Germany as a whole including the question of unification and the peace settlement. The question had arisen as to whether under this reservation of power the Three Powers could take action which would impair the rights of the Federal Republic.

The Allied experts had prepared the draft of a letter which stated that the Three Powers did not interpret this reserve power as permitting them to derogate from their undertakings to the Federal Republic.^†

Mr. Eden said that as he saw it the last sentence of Article 7 (3) dealt with rights and obligations of the Federal Republic and this proposed letter contained the counterpart obligation on the part of the Three Powers. M. Schuman said that he agreed with Mr. Eden and approved the text of the letter.

After further discussion as to whether the new draft of Article 7 (3) and the proposed draft letter constituted fully reciprocal undertakings, the Chancellor indicated that he would accept the drafts with a modification of Article 7 (3) to provide for the possibility of mutually agreed adjustments to the conventions.

4. Clemency for War Criminals

Mr. Acheson recalled that the Chancellor had asked the Allied Governments not to suspend clemency action with respect to war criminals during the period between the signature and ratification of the contractual conventions. He could inform the Chancellor on behalf of all three of the Governments that such action would not be suspended, during this period. The Chancellor thanked Mr. Acheson for his statement, but added that his request had gone somewhat further. He had hoped that advantage might be taken on the occasion of the signature of the conventions to extend clemency on an increased scale. Such action need not be taken immediately, but should come within the near future so that the public would understand that it was connected with the signature of the conventions and the coming into effect of the new relationship. The Ministers said that they would bear the Chancellor’s remarks in mind.

M. Schuman said that the number of prisoners in the French Zone had been progressively reduced to about 100. The French Government was considering general clemency measures, although he was not in a position to commit himself on this subject. By general clemency measures he did not mean immediate release of the prisoners, but that special consideration would be given to individual cases.

Mr. Eden said that since the Chancellor had visited London,⁶ the U.K. Government had undertaken an extensive review of its cases. The number of prisoners had been reduced from about 200 to 100. He was inclined to feel that the best way of proceeding would be as at present by a periodic review which would eventually result in reducing the number of prisoners to a small core. Mr. Acheson pointed out that the U.S. Government had already caused a careful and far-reaching review to be made and that review would continue.

The Chancellor expressed his appreciation for these remarks. Although he realized that little could be done at the present moment when the conventions were about to be signed, he asked whether any steps could be taken to improve conditions at the Spandau Prison. He mentioned particularly the case of von Neurath and asked whether at the right time something could not be done to alleviate his condition. M. Schuman said that he understood that the Three Powers intended to take this problem up with the Soviet authorities. He also agreed, at the Chancellor’s request, that joint discussions between France and the Federal Republic should be held in the near future on the status of German war criminals in France.

5. Close of the Meeting

The Chancellor said that he wished to pay a particular tribute to the High Commissioners whose efforts and understanding had done so much to make the conclusion of the agreements possible. The U.S. High Commissioner, on behalf of his colleagues, praised the Chancellor for his great contribution to the success of the negotiations. Mr. Acheson, on behalf of the Foreign Ministers, concluded by expressing their appreciation to the officials and experts who had for many long months worked on the texts of the conventions which had now been completed.

The Meeting adjourned at 1:15 p.m.

1. There is no indication on the source text to show who prepared these minutes. The U.S. Delegation transmitted a summary of the meeting in telegram 3062 from Bonn, May 25. (662A.00/5–2552)
2. For text of the Convention on the Settlement of Matters Arising Out of the War and the Occupation, see Senate Q and R, pp. 25–88, or Cmd. 8571, pp. 75–135.
3. For text of the Convention on the Rights and Obligations of Foreign Forces and Their Members in the Federal Republic of Germany, see Senate Q and R, pp. 89–133, or Cmd. 8571, pp. 17–58. An extract from this convention is printed as Document 53; for text of the Finance Convention, see Document 55.
4. Regarding the High Commissioners’ recommendation, see point 9, Document 43.
5. Document 51.

6. The text of this draft read as follows:

   “The Three Powers will, in the event of the unification of Germany, extend to a unified Germany the rights which the Federal Republic has under the present Convention and the related Conventions and will for their part agree that the rights under the Treaties for the formation of an integrated European community should be similarly extended, upon the assumption by such a unified Germany of the obligations of the Federal Republic toward the Three Powers or to any of them under those Conventions and Treaties. Except by common consent of all parties to this Convention the Federal Republic will not conclude any agreement or enter into any arrangement which would impair the rights of the Three Powers under those Conventions and Treaties or lessen the obligations of the Federal Republic thereunder.” [Footnote in the source text.]

7. The text of this letter is: “In the course of our recent conversations you asked us to confirm that the right relating to Germany as a whole reserved by the Three Powers in Sub-paragraph (c) of paragraph 1 of Article 2 of the Convention on Relations between the Three Powers and the Federal Republic of Germany cannot be interpreted as permitting them to affect adversely the relations established between themselves and the Federal Republic by the conventions signed today.

   “We have the honor to inform you that our Governments do not interpret the right in question as permitting the Three Powers to derogate from their undertakings to the Federal Republic in the conventions signed today.” [Footnote in the source text. For the final text of this letter, see Document 60.]

6. Adenauer participated in the London Foreign Ministers meeting, Feb. 13–19.