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

662.001/5–652: Telegram

No. 96
The Secretary of State to the Embassy in the United Kingdom¹

secret
niact

Washington, May 9, 1952—6:27 p.m.

5807. 1. This msg contains our comments on draft text in Embtel 5037, rpt Bonn 564, Paris 2272, Moscow 181, Berlin 68.² Our revised draft contained in next fol tel.³

2. Believe objectives mentioned in para 1 London text shld be broadened to include mention of unification of Ger.

3. Our formulation seeks to improve tone para 2 by coupling our readiness to begin negots with necessity for Sov Govt to give evidence of constructive attitude.

4. We consider para 3 to be unwise in its discussion of interrelationship between Ger and Eur unity, implying that latter may be preconditioned to former. Believe this para as well as para 5 shld be eliminated and likewise continue to feel that para 4 remains insufficient statement of value of policy of integration and of our support for that policy. Have, therefore, substituted for paras 3, 4 and 5 a new para 3 which is combination of para 7 of London text with para 2 of last US draft.⁴ We believe this revision will particularly meet McCloy’s suggestions for better org contained in Bonn’s 2742 (rptd London 764, Paris 884, Berlin 274, Moscow 109).⁵

5. We have somewhat revised para 6 of London draft in effort to give greater emphasis to necessity for Ger participation in treaty negot, to correct statement with regard to Sov proposal for Gers isolation and in order to eliminate reference to “allowing” Ger to build up armed forces.

6. Have handled para 7 as stated in point 4 above. Only wish to add our belief that last sentence of para 7 is better as statement of assumption than as question.

7. In suggesting revision of para 8 we believe we have fully conserved a point which draft para seeks to make but have somewhat avoided difficulties dealt with in fourth para Embtel 5098 (rptd Paris 2292, Moscow 190, Bonn 574, Berlin 72).⁶ We also think our revision is preferable in speaking of maintenance rather than estab of rep character, in eliminating distinction between internal and external fields and in a reference to the necessary “governing powers”. On last point Berlin has analyzed available evidence as suggesting Sovs hope to keep all-Ger Govt in powerless position vis-à-vis Eastern Zone between elections and treaty and that they wld, therefore, view independent governing functions with distaste and wld be touchy on this point.

8. Para 9 has one slight modification to emphasize relatively major importance of Western Ger.

9. We believe references to elections “which the four Govts desire” shld be deleted from para 11. See no reason to credit Sov Govt with desire for elections.

10. Consider that second sentence of para 12 is apt to suggest that UN Comm proposal has been written off. Similarly, formulation of sub-points i and ii of para 13 seems open to dual criticism that it reproposes in precise terms something already rejected by Sov Union and then immediately writes off this proposal by inviting alternative proposals. (In addition whole para lays us open to loss of initiative to Sovs but this danger can probably not be avoided in any event.) We have accordingly suggested new language in our para 9 which combines thoughts of your paras 12 and 13 in a way calculated, we believe, to avoid criticisms mentioned above.

11. With respect to sub-point iii(b) of para 13 we suggest a slight modification because we are troubled by the phrase “essential guarantees”. We wonder what guarantees cld actually be demanded or given and consider that “assurances” were what para was really driving at.

12. To save time and prevent confusion, we have maintained our draft in form of reply from HMG.

13. Our draft is being submitted for White House clearance and we will send you further message tonight or phone you in morning.

Acheson

1. Drafted by Laukhuff; cleared by Bonbright, Matthews, GER, P, and UNA, and initialed for Secretary Acheson by Jessup. Repeated to Paris, Moscow, Bonn, and Berlin.
2. Supra.
3. Telegram 5808, infra.
4. Transmitted in telegram 5593, Document 91.
5. Telegram 274, in addition to reporting Adenauer’s reaction to the draft in telegram 5037, supra, reported McCloy’s suggestions for rearranging several paragraphs in the note. (662.001/5–852)
6. In this paragraph Gifford reported on the efforts of the tripartite group to devise language that would allow Germany freedom to associate with other states and to negotiate a peace treaty without being subject to duress. (662.001/5–852)