740.00119 EAC/1–2645: Telegram
The Acting Secretary of State to the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (Winant)
849. We agree with the view expressed in your 947 of 26 January, 9 p.m., that it would be most unfortunate if our proposed economic directive were interpreted in EAC as providing for the operation of each zone as a separate economic unit. It is the view of the Department that, while feasible decentralization of German administration should be encouraged, we should seek the greatest attainable measure of uniformity in policy among the several zones, and zonal boundaries should not be allowed to become economic barriers. I suggest that, in submitting this directive, you make such clarifying comments along these lines as seem to you desirable.
In interpreting the economic directive, the provisions of paragraph 2 of the basic directive are, of course, applicable. Thus, agreed policies of the Control Council are to be determinative throughout the zones, and coordination of administration is to be effected through the Council. The economic directive, like others, does not attempt to define in advance the precise division of responsibility between the Control Council and the zones; the scope of responsibility of the Council will depend upon the extent of agreement reached on specific questions.
In response to your observations regarding paragraph 1 of the economic directive, it should be borne in mind that the directive is addressed to the Commanders-in-Chief in their roles as members of the Control Council as well as in their capacities as Commanders of the respective forces of occupation. The objectives and policies set forth in this paragraph are not to be considered as matters for independent, uncoordinated action in each zone. This paragraph, along with the remainder of the directive, is regarded as providing guidance to the Control Council as well as to the zonal authority, so that necessary coordination may be secured.
[Page 399]Paragraph 2 of the economic directive is not designed to erect barriers to the interzonal movement of goods. On the contrary, it was recognized that the fact of zonal occupation might tend to hamper interzonal movements, unless affirmative action were taken to facilitate essential traffic; paragraph 2 was designed to pave the way for affirmative action if it should prove necessary. The responsibility of the Control Council with respect to interzonal trade is made explicit in the second paragraph of the relief directive.