Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume XV, Germany and Berlin

148. Memorandum of Conversation¹

US/MC/3

Brussels, June 6, 1966, 8 p.m.

UNITED STATES DELEGATION TO THE THIRTY-SEVENTH MINISTERIAL MEETING OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC COUNCIL

Brussels, Belgium—June 7–8, 1966

PARTICIPANTS

• United States
  • The Secretary of State
  • France
  • Foreign Minister Couve de Murville
• United Kingdom
  • Foreign Secretary Michael Stewart
  • FRG
  • Foreign Minister Schroeder

(Other participants listed separately.)²

SUBJECT

• East/West Relations—German Question

SPD/SED Debates

Foreign Secretary Stewart as host opened the meeting by asking Foreign Minister Schroeder about the forthcoming debates in Germany between the West German Socialists (SPD) and East German Communists (SED).

Schroeder said there would be two debates—on July 14 in Chemnitz and on July 21 in Hanover. There will be full press-radio-T.V. coverage. The safety of the participants will be guaranteed. The idea for the debates was initiated by the SED in February, obviously in an effort to win over the SPD and split it from the other West German parties.

Schroeder said that the SPD has no desire to establish common ground with the East German Communists. The hope of the SPD is to bring about greater freedom in the Soviet zone, to promote more exchanges of people, and possibly to win relaxing of the Communist order to shoot people at the Berlin Wall. The goal of the SED is to increase its prestige and promote the idea of two Germanys.

Schroeder thought that the debates would stir great interest in East Germany. He thought the humanitarian aspects are particularly important, as they have been in the case of the Berlin passes agreement. Schroeder was therefore inclined on balance to see positive aspects.

In summary, Schroeder thought there were three main aspects: the moral and psychological effect in East Germany; the advantage to West Germany in maintaining contacts with East Germany; and the international effect in obtaining political support for the FRG.

The Foreign Minister said that the CDU, the ruling party in the FRG, had first doubted the advantage of these debates, but the government had given support from the outset, feeling that the socialists should receive its support.

Secretary Rusk asked whether there would be only two debates or would they be continued. Schroeder said that it is his impression they should be restricted to two meetings. He doubted that the exchange should be continued indefinitely or that useful results would be obtained from continuation.

Foreign Secretary Stewart thought that people outside of Germany would believe the FRG is taking advantage of an opportunity in these debates. He asked what other opportunities Schroeder saw at this time. Schroeder said that there would be some negative aspects to these debates, which would result in a certain upgrading of the East German Communists. He noted that there had apparently been close contact between the East German Communists and Polish Communists; he thought therefore there might be a certain side-advantage in Eastern Europe resulting from these debates. There might also be a lessening of rigidity in East Germany.

Secretary Rusk said that these debates would be watched with great interest and that their potential effect might be considerable. Couve thought the debates would have a useful impact in the FRG and in the so-called GDR. There might also be a connection, he thought, with developments in Poland.

Eastern Europe

Secretary Rusk asked Couve about his recent visits to Eastern Europe.³ Couve said he had not got the impression of anything very new. The situation differs in the various countries he had visited—Poland, Rumania, and Bulgaria. He said there is little in common between these three countries. The Rumanians are not Slavs and do not particularly like the Russians; they have territorial problems with the Russians. Bulgaria is in a different position; it gets along well with the Russians and does not like Greece and Turkey, with whom it has a common border. Poland relies on the Soviet Union, as it must because of its geographical position.

Couve said that changes are currently taking place in all of these countries by contrast with the situation 10 to 15 years ago. They are more relaxed politically. They are better off economically except for Poland, which has an agricultural problem.

Couve thought there was a drive in all of these countries to improve their relations with other countries. He thought that Poland in particular wanted to improve its relations with the U.S.

Secretary Rusk said he believed there is a sentiment in Eastern Europe for closer relations with the nations of Western Europe. He noted that minority groups in the United States also have a keen interest in Eastern Europe, particularly the Polish and Serbo-Croatian minorities.

de Gaulle Trip to Soviet Union⁴

Foreign Secretary Stewart asked Couve about his next journey. Couve replied that he would accompany President de Gaulle to Russia for ten days, where they would visit Moscow and a number of cities including what is presently called Volgagrad. Couve said that as he had previously indicated to Foreign Secretary Stewart and as he would say at the NATO Ministerial Meeting, this visit is a stage in the French policy of developing more relations with the East in all fields. Couve said he was sure that nothing dramatic would happen on this trip. The French would expect to discuss the German question as well as other questions with the Soviets. The French would stress the need to develop relations between Eastern and Western Europe, thus creating a climate of détente. Couve did not think that an atmosphere of understanding could be created at this stage with the Soviets. The French would expect to discuss various problems and possible solutions that might eventually be reached.

Secretary Rusk asked whether the Soviet Union had said anything about the topics it would like to discuss. Couve said the Soviets had given no particular indication of this. He added that France would probably sign a consular agreement and possibly a space agreement with the Soviets. In response to the Secretary’s question as to whether France would sign a communications satellite agreement with the Soviets, Couve said he did not think things would go this far.

European Security and Tension Between East and West

Stewart said that he thought it was good to make large and small scale approaches at these various questions outstanding between East and West but he wondered whether this approach got us any nearer to solving what the Soviets call the European security question.

Couve said this is a real question. If however we desire settlements by peaceful means, then we must seek a climate for discussions where the understanding of the Soviet Government can become possible.

Foreign Secretary Stewart agreed and said that it is more difficult for the Germans in this area than for the rest of us. Couve agreed that the problem of Germany is the real problem.

Foreign Minister Schroeder said the problem which confronts us is to determine in whose favor these various approaches to the East work. Each side seeks its own advantage. The Communists seek to consolidate the status quo. The question therefore is whether these approaches help to overcome the division of Germany and Europe or do they perpetuate the division of Germany and the status quo. This is the reason why the FRG is reserved on the question of Europe security.

Schroeder continued that it would be bad if the European security situation were abused to prevent solution of various outstanding problems. It would be useful if security considerations could progress in such a way as to help these other matters. The FRG feels that in public discussions of the security issue, it must be careful because of these various factors. He noted that the Soviets have put forth security proposals again and again since 1955 but not for the purpose of overcoming the division of Europe. The question now is whether a new beginning can usefully be undertaken or whether the same old controversies will continue.

Couve indicated that he did not think the Soviet suggestion for a European security conference⁵ was a serious proposal at this time. He said that a cautious development of relations could be useful and could lead to progress toward ending the division of Europe. France believes that ending the division of Europe is the only way to end the division of Germany. Couve then asked whether there is any alternative to this method. Foreign Minister Schroeder said that we are all agreed that we should try to have good relations with Eastern Europe and that this is useful. He said that the FRG has, despite its particular difficulties, established trade missions in Eastern Europe. He noted that the Rumanian Trade Minister had recently visited Bonn and been introduced to the Bundestag. Couve said that the French had not gone this far with a Communist Minister.

Schroeder went on to say that the crucial question is to keep alive in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union an interest in overcoming the division of Germany under suitable conditions. We do not want to arouse Communist hopes that tension will be removed without any effort on their part; then they would have no incentive. The difficulty is to work for good relations on the one hand but nevertheless to show the Communists that they have an interest in improving the status quo. Schroeder emphasized that the main problem is the Soviet Union.

Couve said he would like to make several points. First, tension has been characteristic of the past 20 years but France does not believe this is the way to bring about solutions. Second, we must be cautious and should not be led to believe that things can develop very fast even if we hope for rapid change. Third, developments now in progress mean that things will not stay where they are. We do not know where all this will bring us in relation to Germany. We do not know, for example, what will happen after the debates in Germany. Perhaps there will be a deadlock.

Secretary Rusk said that perhaps there are two elements of faith on which we can rely. First, in free competition between institutions our free institutions have nothing to fear. Our tendency should be to break down barriers. Second, the 17 million people in Eastern Germany will want to be associated with other Germans and under free institutions. The Secretary said he agreed that the existence of tension has not advanced German reunification.

The Secretary commented that although there is a formal appearance of status quo, the real situation can be changing rapidly. Changes are going on in Eastern Europe—in attitudes toward Germany, toward the economic institutions of Western Europe, and toward the institutions of the Communist countries themselves. The Secretary said that, for one example, he found it hard to believe that the Soviets could again resort to repression by armed force as they had done in Hungary. The Secretary added that no one is prepared to use force to change the situation. He said that tension has not helped German reunification and that we should give other things a chance. The Secretary cautioned that he was not talking about immediate changes or progress but at the same time he did not feel that we had to think in terms of decades.

The Secretary said that he was not always sure what was meant by “division of Europe” although he clearly understood the division of Germany. Schroeder said that in effect they are the same thing since Germany is in the middle of Europe. He said he doubted the validity of the argument that tension has not helped. In the past conditions have not been such as to bring about changes; problems between West and East Europe have been very difficult. Nor will basic problems be solved simply by creating better relations between Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary and the rest.

The decisive fact, according to Foreign Minister Schroeder, is that Soviet divisions are on the Elbe. It may not be pleasant for the Soviets to keep them there, nor is it pleasant for the West to have to maintain its defensive military efforts.

Schroeder said that Soviet interests will change and the Soviets may become interested in other arrangements acceptable to all concerned. He commented that the Soviets remain disturbed about the problem of Communist China. The Soviets have troubles in Europe and elsewhere. Schroeder felt that these problems had to be borne in mind when we talk about reducing tension.

The Secretary recalled Soviet threats over Berlin in 1961 and the Cuban missile crisis in 1962. He said there had been no Soviet change of heart toward the West. Tension had been created by the other side. The Secretary commented that there are those who say that if the Vietnam effort were abandoned, there would be better relations between the United States and the Soviet Union. We could do the same in Berlin; then we might have a temporary honeymoon with the Soviets.

Secretary Rusk said that we pursue actions to our own advantage. He referred to the moon treaty now under discussion; this falls in the pattern of the Antarctica Treaty. The Secretary also commented on the attitude in Congress toward East/West trade.

Couve said that discussions with the other side do not imply accept-ance of their conditions. For agreement to be reached it must be acceptable to all concerned, and all have to make concessions.

The Secretary added he was sure the Soviets are concerned about the problem of nearly a billion Chinese along their Asian border. Schroeder said that Khrushchev had been greatly concerned about this. Couve said the present Soviet leaders are also concerned.

East German UN Application

Schroeder said that an application for UN membership has been submitted in New York on behalf of East Germany and that we should give intensive thought to our strategy. Schroeder thought that Gromyko might also introduce a proposal on European security to the UNGA in its fall session.

Secretary Rusk agreed that our representatives in New York should discuss this. The Secretary thought this did not present as much difficulty as the proposal for a world disarmament conference. He noted that the Communist Chinese had said they were not interested in taking part in a world disarmament conference, but a number of other Communist regimes might be involved including East Germany.

Dr. Carstens said that East Germany may be aiming at observer status in the UN. The Secretary said that he did not think there was much interest in the UN in letting in East Germany.

The meeting ended at 11 p.m.

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, NATO 3 BEL (BR). Secret. Drafted by Finn and approved in S on July 23. The meeting was held at the residence of the British Ambassador.
2. Not printed.
3. Couve visited Romania and Bulgaria April 25–30 and Poland May 18–21.
4. de Gaulle visited the Soviet Union June 20–July 1.
5. For text of the May 17 Soviet proposal, see American Foreign Policy: Current Documents, 1966, pp. 395–402.