Foreign Relations of the United States, Diplomatic Papers, 1945, European Advisory Commission, Austria, Germany, Volume III

740.00119 Control (Austria)/12–1445

The United States Political Adviser for Austrian Affairs (Erhardt) to the Secretary of State

No. 588

Vienna, December 14, 1945.
[Received January 2, 1946.]

Sir: I have the honor to enclose a copy of a letter dated November 29, 1945,⁵⁷ from the Provisional Austrian Government to the Allied Council requesting a reduction in the number of occupation troops as a primary condition of the reconstruction of Austrian economic life and for the stabilization of its currency.

This letter was discussed by the Allied Council at its meeting of November 30, 1945, and a reply, a copy of which is enclosed,⁵⁷ was ordered transmitted to Chancellor Renner to the effect that the question of the strength of the forces of occupation was one within the exclusive competence of the occupying powers and that Austria could not, by its own action, divest itself of the obligation to meet the cost of occupation fixed by the Allies.⁵⁸

It will be noted from Item 7 of the unofficial U.S. minutes of the Allied Council meeting of November 30, transmitted with my despatch no. 539 of December 1, 1945,⁵⁹ that the Soviet representative took exception to the language of the Provisional Austrian Government’s letter interpreting it as a political effort to divide the Allies, a point of view which was shared by the other representatives on the Council.⁶⁰

It is requested that copies of these letters be made available to the War and Treasury Departments with reference to Item 7 of the unofficial U.S. minutes of the 10th meeting of the Allied Council held November 30, 1945.

Respectfully yours,

John G. Erhardt

57. Not printed.
57. Not printed.

58. The Allied Council’s reply to Chancellor Renner said in part: “The Allied Council rejects the allegation that the size of the occupation forces in Austria is based on considerations of military equilibrium, and considers the raising of this question as an attempt to make difficulties between the Allies. Such an attempt is all the more regrettable coming from the Government of a country which was liberated by the Allies, and to which they have, from the outset, lent their common assistance.

    “The Allied Council declares that the question of the strength of the forces of occupation is one which falls within the exclusive competence of the Governments of the Occupying Powers.

    “The Allied Council emphasizes that Austria, having taken part in the war on the side of Germany, cannot, by its own action, divest itself of the obligation to meet the costs of occupation fixed by the Allies.”

59. Neither printed.
60. Chancellor Renner, in his letter to the Allied Council, had written: “The number of occupation troops has been evidently not been settled according to the security requirements of Austria but rather according to reasons of military balance of the Allied Powers. The Austrian state territory is a threshold of European strategic areas and military reasons demand therefore a greater number of occupying troops.… It is obvious that peaceful and liberated Austria in comparison to the number of its population is occupied by far greater military forces than an average area in Germany. Austria cannot be held responsible for the cost of this occupation … an occupation which cannot be considered as justified by the demand for security within this state.”