740.00119 EW/12–845: Telegram
The Secretary of State to
the Ambassador in France (Caffery)
Washington, December
10, 1945—7 p.m.
5760. For Angell No. 84. You are authorized to proceed as requested para
8, urtel 130, Dec 8.31
No specific agreement on transfer of PWs exists. PWs transferred, by SCAF
[SCAEF?] and its successors under terms
indicated Appendix B, Repmem 12.32
[Page 1452]
Following is our reply urtel 10533 drafted last week but
not despatched owing to oversight:
- “1. Dept not inclined favor Gottschalk and Gray proposal
(urtel 105, para 5) to restrict benefits of reparation for
victims of Nazi persecution to non-repatriable concentration
camp denizens, since people of German and Austrian
nationality who were found in concentration camps and wish
to leave Germany and Austria and needy refugees now abroad
should not be excluded from benefits. Believe it
satisfactory to leave determination classes of persons aided
in rehabilitation and resettlement to Board of trustees or
other intergovernmental body charged with responsibility of
distribution reparation on understanding such persons must
be: a. true victims Nazi persecution;
b. needy in terms future economic
position.
- “2. Gottschalk, Gray view that allotment of share must not
be construed as solution of problem shared by Dept. Should
be made clear that reparation cannot compensate victims
fully, that occupying powers, United Nations, (thru
UNRRA34
and otherwise), and private charities thruout world
recognize their obligations. Because reparation will consist
largely of payments in kind and will leave Germany with
economy capable only of paying for essential imports,
Germany cannot be made to compensate in full victims of Nazi
persecution who have left or will leave Germany. Proposal
therefore is simply to add small amount liquid assets, which
can be made available, to supplement other arrangements.
Restitution of property taken from victims of Nazi
persecution will, of course, be made in Germany, but can
hardly be expected to benefit refugees substantially.
- “3. Dept favors allotting absolute sum rather than
percentage share to victims Nazi persecution. Believes sum
should be nearer 50 million than 15 million dollars plus
non-monetary gold you propose. Any figure less than 30
million plus non-monetary gold regarded here as Contributing
too little to solution to be acceptable.
- “4. Dept agreeable British proposal of Trustees under UNO,
with your provision of interim arrangement.
- “5. Whatever sum or share is set aside should be in liquid
assets. Agency handling fund should not be put in position
of claiming equipment in IARA or of requesting share in
stocks or current output.”
Please repeat urtel 105 to Dept to London for Stevenson.35
Sent to Paris as 5760, For Angell No. 84, repeated in part to London for
Stevenson as 10690.
