762.63/101
The Minister in Austria (Stockton) to the Secretary of State
[Received September 5.]
Sir: With reference to the Legation’s despatch No. 885, of August 8, 1933,7 concerning the provocative attitude of the German Nazis toward Austria, I have the honor to inform the Department that despite the démarche of the French Ambassador and the British Chargé d’Affaires in Berlin, and the friendly discussions which took place on the subject between the Italian Ambassador and the Wilhelmstrasse, there has been a renewal of the attacks against this country.
There seems to be considerable confusion with regard to the Wilhelmstrasse’s response to the Anglo-French intervention on behalf of Austria. British and French papers indicated that the Reich Government had made a conciliatory reply to the effect that it would investigate and take the necessary steps to put a stop to propaganda against the Austrian Government, emanating from German radio stations and [Page 434] being distributed in the form of leaflets from airplanes alleged to be German. On the other hand the German press declared that the British and French representatives had been plainly told that Austro-German relations were no concern of any other nation. Recent events would make it appear that the reports in the German press were more nearly correct, as on August 9, Herr Habicht, Reichstag Deputy and so-called Provincial Inspector of the National Socialist Party in Austria, broadcasted from Munich another philippic against Dollfuss and all his works. As Habicht has been intimately associated with Hitler in the National Socialist movement in Germany, the Reich Government apparently intends to take no serious steps even to restrict radio propaganda against Austria. In his speech Habicht charged Dollfuss with appealing to anti-German nations, especially France, for the sole purpose of clinging to office, despite the opposition of a majority of the Austrian people. Habicht dismissed the reports of propaganda attacks by air over Austria as mere fairy tales and described the establishment of the Austrian Emergency Police as a violation of the Treaty of St. Germain which had received the approval of the former Allied Powers only because it was directed against Germany. He also declared there could be no peace in Europe until a rapprochement between the two German countries had been brought about by the establishment of a Nazi Government in Austria. He challenged the Dollfuss Government to call a general election, adding tauntingly that if it really had the Austrian people behind it, it would have nothing to fear and that the National Socialists would pledge themselves in advance to abide by the verdict at the polls. In conclusion, he naively remarked that friendly representations in Vienna would be more helpful than démarches in Berlin, which had nothing whatever to do with internal conditions in Austria.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
In my opinion, the Austro-German crisis is becoming serious. The nervousness in French official circles is evident in the comments of the French press on the predicament of Austria. The present situation is not unlike the one which existed in Europe in June 1914. The powder keg is again in Vienna, and matches are being lighted and thrown around indiscriminately. Although the provocative measures of the German Nazis against Austria may not be technically acts of war, nevertheless if they were directed against almost any other sovereign power they would generate friction which would soon flare up into open warfare. Even if Austria were not disarmed, without outside help, it could offer no effective resistance to German aggression. However, despite Mussolini’s sympathy for Fascism in the Reich, the Duce is a hard-boiled realist and must of necessity exert every possible effort to prevent Germany’s extending its frontier southward to the Brenner Pass.
[Page 435]Germany today is not unlike a crazy man wildly brandishing a revolver. Although, in my opinion, the French are dead set against war, the Quai d’Orsay is aware that should a conflict become inevitable, the sooner it begins the better it will be for France. Under these circumstances France may make Germany shoot and thus bring about a preventive war at a time when the Reich is completely isolated and insufficiently prepared either militarily or economically.
There are many signs that the British Government is also viewing the situation with anxiety. However, this is no time for a waiting policy. I am apprehensive that unless Great Britain, France, and Italy, in the near future, take a decided stand in connection with the Austro-German tension, it may soon be too late. The German Government may go so far that it cannot back down without a serious loss of prestige to Hitler in his own country, which might have grave internal repercussions.
The Chicago Tribune, Paris edition, of August 13, quoted Winston Churchill as having declared in a speech that there were foundations for the belief that Germany was rearming contrary to the terms of the Peace Treaty and that its smaller neighbors were growing restive. Churchill went on to say that he had always been opposed to the rearmament of the Reich and had denounced as a perilous policy the proposed weakening of the French army which, fortunately, the Quai d’Orsay had prudently and resolutely refused to consider. He characterized the French refusal to disarm as constituting the keystone of peace in Europe today. Churchill further urged the British to keep their own powder dry and in conclusion emphasized that Britain’s hour of weakness was always Europe’s hour of danger.
I am afraid that Germany’s aggressive policy toward Austria will be the final straw that will break the back of the Disarmament Conference. Although I have long been a sincere advocate of disarmament as a preventive measure against war, were I a Frenchman, in the present ticklish situation existing in Europe today, I would be adamant against giving up a single rifle until the threatening atmosphere clears.
Respectfully yours,
- Not printed.↩