740.00119 EW/12–1845: Telegram
The Ambassador in France (Caffery) to the Secretary of State
[Received December 19—12:22 a.m.]
7225. From Angell Number 163. Following revised US text provisionally adopted by Conference subject to drafting changes and consideration of Czech proposal to add new provision (3) relating to United Nations held credits in form of currency and bonds issued by Germany and not reflected in occupation costs or other reparation claims.
Settlement of wartime claims against Germany.
(A). That, without prejudice to the determination at the proper time of the forms, duration or total amount of reparation to be made by Germany, and without prejudice to the right which each signatory government may have with respect to the final settlement of German reparations, the signatory governments agree as between each other that their respective shares of reparation, as determined by the present agreement, shall be regarded by each of them as covering all its claims and those of its nationals against the former German Govt and its agencies for all claims which are not otherwise specifically provided for, of a governmental or private nature against Germany arising out of the war, including cost of German occupation, credits acquired during occupation on clearing accounts and claims against the Reichskreditkassen; provided that the reparation settlement shall not be considered as affecting (1) the obligation of the appropriate authorities in Germany to secure at a future date the discharge of pecuniary claims [Page 1479] against Germany and German nationals arising out of contracts and other obligations entered into, and rights acquired, before the existence of a state of war between Germany and the government concerned or before the occupation of the country concerned by Germany, whichever was earlier, and (2) the claims of social insurance agencies of the signatory governments against the social insurance agencies of the former German Government.
I propose to make following statement to Conference concerning my understanding of this text.
“In order to avoid possible misunderstanding at a future time concerning the meaning of paragraph A of Section 2, on the settlement of wartime claims against Germany, I should like to state for the minutes my understanding as to its meaning, and I would appreciate being informed whether my colleagues confirm this understanding.
“The primary purpose of paragraph A, insofar as it relates to wartime claims, is to record the agreement between the signatory governments that all claims, of whatever nature, by a govt for reparation from Germany are, in effect, consolidated into a single claim which has been considered at this Conference, and furthermore that the German reparation which is made available to each govt in accordance with its agreed quota shall be the sole source of satisfaction of its consolidated reparation claim against Germany. If this were not the intention of paragraph A, a legion of reparation claims by individual govts would continue to exist and be presented for satisfaction outside the framework of the reparation program envisaged under the Potsdam Agreement. Under such circumstances, the reparation quotas we have been discussing would be meaningless because the quotas would have no relative significance whatever, and the work of the Paris Conference would be valueless.
“At the same time, certain of the govts not represented on the Allied Control Council have contended that, inasmuch as it is the Control Council, under the direction of the four occupying powers which in practice determines the forms, duration and total amount of German reparation, they are not prepared to renounce their reparation claims against Germany in advance of the actual receipt of their respective shares in the total amount of reparation to be made by Germany. To meet this contention, which I believe is a just one, paragraph A provides that the acceptance of the reparation quotas by the various govts represented at the Conference shall be without prejudice to the rights which the signatory govts may have with respect to the final settlement of German reparations.
“Under this paragraph, therefore, each signatory government is entitled to receive, in satisfaction of all its reparation claims against Germany, its quota, and only its quota, in the total of German reparation available for allocation among the signatory governments collectively. But the acceptance by a government of its quota does not prejudice the right it may have with respect to the final settlement of the reparation to be made available by Germany.”
French, Belgian, Dutch, Egyptian and other delegates supported with exceptional vigor and heat independent text submitted to Conference by Yugo delegate which expressly reserved right of each government [Page 1480] to present claim against future German Government for unsatisfied balance of its total reparation claim. This I stated was unacceptable. Above revised US text adopted only after strenuous debate. Yugo, Belgian and Dutch delegates declined to accept wording such as “without prejudice to right each government may have with respect to final determination (or settlement) of forms, duration, or total amount of German reparation.” They insisted on right of participation along with ACC in determination of forms, duration or total amount of reparation or of political participation in final reparation settlement. Former regarded by me as unacceptable. Latter is implied in phrasing adopted.
Believe text acceptable on basis of principles set forth in above statement which I shall make to Conference. Acceptance of principle of single source of reparation very important and it is certain that, with possible exception of UK, delegates will not renounce rights with respect to final reparation settlement. [Angell.]