Foreign Relations of the United States, 1955–1957, Central and Southeastern Europe, Volume XXVI

180. Telegram From the Mission in Berlin to the Embassy in Germany¹

Berlin, November 22, 1956—11 p.m.

428. Reference our telegram niact Bonn 426, niact Dept 485, prity USAREUR 17, routine Moscow 135, Paris 23, London 20.² Allied political advisers saw Soviet Deputy Commandant Kotsiuba late this afternoon at Karlshorst. Previously agreed that while American chairman political adviser would lead off discussion, in view of different problems of each country, French and British would feel free to raise questions and make additional points. Kotsuiba, who noted he was Acting Commandant since General Chamov had just departed on winter leave, apologized for delay in arranging appointment. He gave as reason that he had to familiarize himself with problem, implying instructions had been issued from higher authority.

We opened with statement along lines of message telephoned to Kotsiuba yesterday (see referenced telegram), adding that we had come in hope of obtaining clarification of situation. This launched Kotsiuba into loud, repetitive and not always clear discourse, gist of which follows:

a. There was no question of challenging Allied communications to Berlin per se. Question was rather one of regulating procedures of control. Right to do this was given to Soviets by Allied Control Council document of 10 September 1945, supplemented by agreements of 18–21 May 1949.³

b. New measures are in force and are not subject to any admendments. They will also apply to Autobahn travel.

c. Reason for changes in control procedures at Marienborn is information received by Soviets that persons who have been traveling on military trains or under military orders on Autobahn have no connection with military garrison in Berlin.

d. First steps taken by Soviets re new procedure show no misunderstanding on part of American and French whose train commanders have produced documents required; British, however, did not seem to wish to comply.

e. In order to verify fact that passengers have proper documents confirming information on manifests, Soviet inspectors will have to board train, just as on Autobahn they check individual travelers. (Comment: Should be noted that this statement was hardly consistent with point he reiterated several times that French and American procedure on trains satisfactory, and if British would only do same they likewise would have no trouble.)

f. Zorin–Bolz letters of September 20, 1955,⁴ had foreseen this procedure. He quoted second paragraph reading in effect the control of cargo and passengers between FedRep and Berlin pertaining to military forces of U.S., U.K. and French in Berlin, both by Autobahn and rail, will be carried out by Soviet officials.

g. Re Autobahn, he added that military convoys must also have proper documentation and that control would be exercised over passengers in cars. He alluded to ACA document dated 30 August 1945⁵ which he said showed that volume of transport on Autobahn would be insignificant, and that railway would be used for heavy traffic. He added that more than 50 per cent of all transportation was being moved over Autobahn. As far as passengers were concerned, travel orders issued by Allies were appropriate only for representatives of military forces. However, such documents were also being issued to persons having no right to them. Recent example cited of French woman civilian traveling on by automobile under French military orders who admitted permanent residence in Berlin and that she was traveling on tourist status for tourist reasons. In future, such people will not be passed.

French political adviser said that, while procedures which have been followed successfully in past by Allies were not put in writing, they were based on mutual understanding and agreement as to their propriety. Normal mode of conduct if Soviets desire to make procedural change would be to request Allied agreement thereto in orderly discussions, rather than to try to change on spot without warning. Therefore, he again asked that Soviet authorities in Marienborn be instructed to suspend new measures. He added that problems raised by Kotsiuba statement were numerous and very serious, and should not be presented to Allies as fait accompli.

To this Kotsiuba responded that procedures of control were entirely matter for Soviets who had right to change them as they wished. No mutual agreement to their change was necessary. Soviet Commander at Marienborn had simply been informed that such controls were to go into effect. Kotsiuba then irrelevantly queried why French had issued travel orders for Autobahn to person who had nothing to do with military authority. Procedure which he had described was in effect and would be adhered to. This applied to Autobahn as well. He then attempted summarize procedures for Autobahn and railroad: (1) persons who are authorized to travel are those belonging to West Berlin military garrison; (2) commanders of trains and commanders of convoys as well as passengers in cars must present proper documents proving that all passengers belong to military garrison; (3) no question being raised by Soviets as to number of trains or as to limiting Autobahn traffic. They are merely concerned that connection of West with Berlin should be utilized properly and lawfully.

He continued that Soviets had nothing against documentation being presented by American and French train commanders. While exception had been made last two nights for British trains, he would have to ask British to adopt same procedure immediately. If they did this, all would be well.

Point then made by political advisers that, apart from documentation itself, two important issues raised by Kotsiuba to which Allies could not agree were boarding of trains by Soviets and Soviet claim to pass judgment as to whether documentation should have been issued to specific individuals by Allied authorities. Kotsiuba completely ignored question of boarding trains, but stressed again that Allied trains had to be used for transportation of military garrison or of U.S., British or French nationals who are dependents or members of military garrison. Military documentation should be issued only to these categories; others should proceed to Berlin on other documentation. To this, political advisers made point that if Western Allies issued travel orders, that in itself should conclusively establish that persons concerned were traveling in connection with military occupation. Here Kotsiuba again dragged out his case of French woman residing in Berlin, traveling under French military orders for tourist purposes.

British political adviser then raised special problem of British train. He said that British Commander in Helmstedt had no authority to agree to change in procedure in effect for many years. Soviet Commander in Marienborn had been informed to this effect. Yet procedures were changed without Soviets having raised question elsewhere. Practice followed by British had not caused Soviets to complain during period of 10 years. If Kotsiuba insisted that such a change be made, this could only be reported to British superiors for consideration. He therefore requested that orders be issued to the Soviet Commander at Marienborn to permit British train to pass at least for time being on basis of present documentation.

Kotsiuba responded that new orders were in effect and that they would be enforced. He could not rescind them for British. However, application of stricter procedures on Autobahn would be held up for period of two or three days.

Political advisers concluded discussion by saying they would have to reserve position on all points of principle raised, and would report Kotsiuba statements to their superiors.

Since meeting with Kotsiuba, British here have decided to provide individual travel orders for passengers on tonight’s trains. Train commanders will not be authorized to present passports or other identity documents of travelers.

We have this evening received information from Berlin Command Provost Marshal that American teacher, employed by U.S. Army in FedRep, attempting travel to Berlin by automobile was today turned back at checkpoint by Soviets because she had passport and not AGO card.

Comment: Kotsiuba, who is never a model of clarity, was particularly vague today on a number of points. When he repeated himself, he frequently added a new twist. For example, each statement he made re who was entitled to military travel orders differed slightly from previous one. At one point he implied anyone with an AGO card was legitimate. He was firm, however, re Soviet intention to enforce new control procedures if somwhat imprecise in defining exactly what they were.

Informed 2200 Zebra French train cleared Marienborn in less than 10 minutes after being required to show travel orders all passengers. No Soviet comment.

Gufler

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 762.0221/11–2256. Confidential; Niact. Repeated to London, Paris, Moscow, and Washington. The source text is the Department of State copy.
2. In telegram 484 from Berlin Gufler reported that without any prior notice Soviet officials had begun on November 20 asking for individual travel orders and identity cards for passengers on military trains going to and from Berlin. (Ibid., 762.0221/11–1756) Telegram 485 transmitted the text of a November 21 message to Kotsiuba asking for a meeting to discuss this change of procedure. (Ibid., 762.0221/11–2156)
3. For text of the September 10 document, see Documents on Germany, 1944–1970, pp. 42–44; regarding the agreements in 1949, see Foreign Relations,, 1949, vol. III, pp. 776 ff.
4. See Document 218.
5. Not further identified.