I circulate to my colleagues, for consideration by the European Advisory
Commission, a memorandum making proposals for the representation of
foreign countries in Germany after surrender. I hope the Commission will
be able to give early consideration to these proposals.
London, 30 April, [2
May?] 1945.
[Annex]
Representation of Foreign Countries in Germany
After Surrender
1. After the German surrender, the Governments of the United Kingdom,
the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics, and the Provisional Government of the French Republic,
will be represented in Germany by their respective
Commanders-in-Chief
[Page 1085]
in
their capacity as members of the Control Council, and their staffs.
It has been agreed in Article 8 of the Agreement on Control
Machinery in Germany7 that “The necessary liaison with Governments of
other United Nations chiefly interested will be ensured by the
appointment by such Governments of military missions (which may
include civilian members) to the Control Council, having access,
through the appropriate channels, to the organs of control.” Such
United Nations’ Governments will thus be represented in Germany by
their military missions. It has not yet been decided which
Governments shall be so represented.
United Nations chiefly interested
2. The United Kingdom Delegation proposes that an invitation to the
United Nations accepted as “chiefly interested” to appoint military
missions to the Control Council should be sent jointly by the United
Kingdom, the United States of America, the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics and France. Such an invitation should be sent not later
than the issue of the “public statement” provided for in paragraph 9
of the Report by the European Advisory Commission8 covering
their Agreement on Control Machinery in Germany (E.A.C. (44) 11th
Meeting). The U.K. Delegation would suggest that this invitation
should be addressed to the Governments of:—
- Australia
- Belgium
- Brazil
- Canada
- China
- Czechoslovakia
- Greece
- India
- Luxembourg
- The Netherlands
- New Zealand
- Norway
- Poland
- South Africa
- Yugoslavia.
Other United Nations
3. Representation in Germany by military missions does not seem
justifiable in the case of the remaining United Nations. At the same
time, it would seem impossible to refuse them representation of any
character, more particularly if, as we suggested below, neutral
states are to be allowed some degree of representation. The United
Kingdom Delegation accordingly suggests that the Governments of
these remaining United Nations should be invited to nominate “Civil
Agencies” to represent them in Germany. It would be undesirable to
accord the title of diplomatic mission to these agencies, as a
diplomatic
[Page 1086]
mission
normally enjoys a higher status than that of any other foreign
agency in the country of residence. It would clearly be impossible
to give a higher status to the representatives of the minor Allies
than to those of “the United Nations chiefly interested”, which
would be represented by military missions.
Neutral States
4. There remains the question of the representation in Germany of
neutral states. The United Kingdom Delegation, basing its view in
part on experience gained in Italy, takes the view that on the whole
the convenience of having neutral representatives in Germany to look
after their national interests on the spot would substantially
outweigh any inconvenience that their presence might cause. The
United Kingdom Delegation accordingly proposes that neutral missions
should be allowed to remain in Germany; but they too should be
classified as “Civil Agencies”. Those neutral states e.g. Chile,
which have no relations with Germany, could not be placed in a worse
position than those which have maintained relations. They should
therefore be permitted on request to enjoy the same facilities as
those determined for other neutral states.
Privileges and Immunities
5. The military missions of the United Nations chiefly interested
will not be entitled to deal with any German authorities except
through or with the permission of the Allied Control Machinery. The
same restriction should a fortiori be placed
on the Civil Agencies of the lesser Allies and of neutral states.
They should, however, be entitled to a certain measure, to be
determined by the Control Council, of the immunities normally
enjoyed by diplomatic representatives; e.g. immunity from local
taxation and arrest. The representatives of Allied states, whether
in military missions or Civil Agencies, should have the right to
communicate with their Governments by bag and cypher. This right
should not however be granted to the Civil Agencies of neutral
states, at any rate in the early stages.
Consulates
6. The only consulates which will be found in Germany on the
conclusion of hostilities will be those of ex-enemy and neutral
states. The treatment of the former is outside the scope of the
present memorandum. As to neutral consulates, the United Kingdom
Delegation takes the view that they might well prove an
embarrassment to the Commanders of forces of occupation and that it
would therefore be desirable to close them down at the earliest
possible moment. If it were later found convenient that certain
foreign states should have representatives in other parts of
Germany, the necessary steps could
[Page 1087]
be taken by permitting the military missions
or Civil Agencies of such states in Berlin to nominate local agents.
These should not have the title of consul, as that would raise
numerous technical difficulties, e.g. their exequatur.
Austria
7. The position in Austria9 is in many respects different, as there
have of course been no diplomatic missions in Vienna since before
the war. But the United Kingdom Delegation proposes that the
representation of foreign countries in Austria after Germany’s
surrender should, in the early stages at least, be broadly speaking
on the same lines as is proposed above for Germany.
