Foreign Relations of the United States, Diplomatic Papers, 1944, General, Volume I

740.00119 European Advisory Commission/11–1144: Telegram

The Chargé in the United Kingdom (Gallman) to the Acting Secretary of State

London, November 11, 1944—8 p.m.
[Received November 11—6:55 p.m.]

9851. Comea 126. For the Acting Secretary, Mr. Matthews and Mr. Winant. United States delegation EAC is very appreciative of JCS and State Department comments on a substantial number of United States draft directives,⁵⁸ which are now ready for circulation to other two delegations and to SHAEF.

Joint advisers, however, understand serious consideration is presently being given in high military quarters in Washington to new plan which if adopted would require United States delegation to abandon procedure agreed on last June for presenting United States draft directives in EAC for tripartite negotiation and, instead, to present in EAC single omnibus directive along lines of JCS 1067.⁵⁹ This apparently is based on belief, which joint advisers consider erroneous, that British and Soviet delegates on EAC would agree to limit EAC action on policy directives to adoption of single broad policy paper, leaving all further implementation of that paper to tripartite military government groups.

United States delegation will naturally advocate such a plan in EAC if instructed to do so, but advisers are convinced British and Soviet delegations will not be willing to follow such a procedure. British have circulated their directives which it is obvious have been carefully studied by the Soviets. Soviet delegate has from the beginning handled personally all questions of policy. While he might agree to delegate authority to EAC subcommittees for work on directives, there is nothing in our experience in dealing with the Russians to support belief that they will entrust to their nucleus control group, when set up, negotiation of important policy matters with parallel United States British groups.

As has been demonstrated, Soviets can move fast in EAC negotiations when they wish and they have recently expressed informally desire to have EAC consider following subjects at early date: (1) United Nations prisoners of war and displaced persons; (2) disarmament and demobilization; (3) abolition of Hitler regime and war criminals; and (4) economic questions. Presentation of United States views on these questions obviously cannot be limited to a few sweeping policy statements such as those contained in JCS 1067. Unless United States delegation has approved draft directives to present, discussions will have to be based on British directives and possibly on Soviet directives if any are presented by the Soviet delegation. Furthermore, failure to circulate United States directives in the EAC means that Soviet and British negotiators will have no opportunity to study United States views in advance of actual discussions in EAC and that United States negotiators will start out with a very great handicap.

Joint advisers consider British directives too detailed; they spell out unnecessary instructions on how to accomplish objectives. United States drafts were prepared with that criticism in mind. It is felt that practically all points covered in United States directives are important policy requiring tripartite agreement on EAC level.

Joint advisers strongly recommend that remaining United States draft directives continue to be cleared by JCS and Department as expressions of United States policy for negotiation in EAC, regardless of or in addition to any new over-all policy paper which may also be submitted for possible negotiation. This recommendation is strongly approved by the principal officers of United States Group CC⁶⁰ as well as by the joint advisers.

Gallman

58. Between October 24 and November 10 comments on the following draft directives were cleared by the Department of State and Joint Chiefs of Staff and sent to the Embassy in London: Disposition of German or German-Controlled Aircraft, Aeronautical Equipment and Facilities; Primary Disarmament of the German Armed Forces Subsequent to Surrender; Disposition of German and German-Controlled Naval Craft, Equipment and Facilities; Control of Public Information in Germany; Censorship of Civilian Communications; Control of Post, Telegraph and Telephone Services in Germany; Elimination and Prohibition of Military Training in Germany; Control of Merchant Shipping Subsequent to Surrender; Control of Works of Art and Monuments; Securing and Examining Information and Archives; Administration of Justice; Control and Disposal of National Armed Forces and Property of Enemy Countries other than Germany; Religious Affairs; Disposition and Control of the German Police. During December, comments on one other draft directive, Disposal of German Armed Forces, were cleared by Department of State and the Joint Chiefs of Staff and sent to Ambassador Winant.
59. See bracketed note, p. 341.
60. United States Group Control Council (Germany).