Foreign Relations of the United States: Diplomatic Papers, 1945, General: Political and Economic Matters, Volume II

840.811/10–1445: Telegram

The United States Political Adviser for Germany (Murphy) to the Secretary of State

Berlin, October 14, 1945—6 p.m.
[Received 8:40 p.m.]

782. Reference your 634, October 9, 5 p.m., to Vienna repeated Berlin.¹⁸ It is suggested that no action be taken by US representative Austrian Control Council to propose interim Austrian Danube Control Organization until Rainey²⁰ and Neff²¹ have discussed current German situation with US representatives Austrian Control Council in Vienna this week.

In view of Soviet attitude on International Waterways Commissions expressed at Council of Foreign Ministers and counter proposal submitted by Soviet Delegation at that time, I agree with General Appleton²² that US objectives will not be advanced by further US proposals to the Quadripartite Transport Directorate in regard to control of the Rhine. I understand these objectives to be (a) coordination of action to initiate traffic movement on the Rhine and (b) insofar as possible to develop some form of international cooperation in the control of European waterways.

An informal Rhine Committee for Traffic Control has been established at Duisburg with British, US, French, Dutch, Belgian, and Swiss participation. British and US controlled engineering organizations are located at Bonn and Wiesbaden. These existing organizations can be integrated and coordinated by arrangement among the US British and French Zone Commanders to fulfill the functions of the Interim Control Organization for the Rhine as recommended in your cable of September 26 (London’s 140²³). This action would be in accordance with your alternate recommendation to establish such an organization by arrangement among the Zone Commanders having jurisdiction on the German portion of the Rhine rather than by the Quadripartite Transport Directorate of the Control Council. Soviet participation in control of the Rhine would not facilitate movement of traffic on that waterway and, therefore, would not contribute to the immediate objective of initiating traffic.

In meetings of the Quadripartite Transport Directorate, Germany, all proposals have been submitted by the US, French and British representatives, none by the Soviet. In all transport matters the western Allies, therefore, have been in position of supplicants while the USSR has continued in a position to accept or reject these proposals. Under these circumstances we believe that the US position will be weakened by additional US proposals to the Quadripartite Transport Directorate and that nothing substantial will be gained toward achieving international cooperation on other waterways. The movement of captured Danube vessels into the US zone, Germany and additional actions of this kind, which may be determined after discussions between German and Austrian Control Council representatives, may create more favorable situation on the Danube. I suggest that the most effective approach to the problem of international waterway control at this time is to maintain the status quo on the Rhine and to attempt to develop a situation in which the Soviet Government will find it advantageous to initiate proposals in regard to the Danube.

The opinion of the Department in regard to this matter is urgently requested.

Sent to Department as 782, repeated to Vienna as 16 and as 107 to London.

Murphy

18. See footnote 14, p. 1367.
20. Froelich G. Rainey, senior economic analyst on the staff of the U.S. Political Adviser for Germany.
21. Lt. Col. Daniel R. Neff, Chief of Waterway Division, Transport Directorate, AMG Berlin.
22. Brig. Gen. John Adams Appleton, Director, Transport Division, Office of Military Government for Germany (U.S.), and U.S. Representative to the Transport Directorate, Allied Control Authority.
23. See footnote 15, p. 1367.