C.F.M. Files: Lot M–88: Box 2065: Deputies Documents

The Secretary General of the Council of Foreign Ministers (La Grandville) to the Members of the Council

secret
C.F.M. (D) (46) 92

I have the honour to forward herewith to the Members of the Council an Aide-Mémoire, together with two appendices referring to [Page 455] the Austro-Italian frontier, received this morning from Monsieur Karl Grüber, Foreign Minister of the Federal Government of Austria.

The first appendix14 deals with the problem of Kanale. At the request of the Deputies, it was not mentioned in the oral statement made by Monsieur Grüber on 30th May.15

La Grandville
[Enclosure]

Aide-Mémoire of the Austrian Federal Government16

I. Referring to the decision arrived at by the Council of Foreign Ministers on 14th September, 1945 concerning a minor rectification of the Austro-Italian frontier, which decision was confirmed by a resolution adopted by the Council on 1st May, 1946, the Federal Government of Austria has the honour to present to the Deputies of the Foreign Ministers, by way of a continuation of its Note of 10th May, 1946, some definite proposals for a minor rectification of the Austro-Italian frontier.17

This rectification starts with the idea that it will effect an improvement in the present demarkation line of the frontier and put an end to the harm caused in the course of the demarkation of this frontier in 1919.

The Austro-Italian frontier region bears in general the character of a region of high mountains which have a deciding influence on its geographical structure, its communications, and, in consequence, also on the demarkation of the frontier line.

The proposed demarkation of the frontier must take account of these circumstances.

II. As a result of the demarkation of the frontier as fixed by the Treaty of Saint-Germain, the Klagenfurt-Innsbruck line was cut and the Northern Tyrol separated from the Western Tyrol. In this way [Page 456] the Tyrol lost its territorial uniformity and consequently the administration is faced with extraordinary difficulties. A minor rectification which would once more incorporate into the Austrian territory the sector of the railway line Klagenfurt–Lienz and Brenner–Innsbruck; the backbone of which would be Pustertal and the Upper Eisacktal, would without any doubt, have a most beneficial effect on the traffic and the economic life of Austria. In this way Austria’s position in the European traffic system would be appreciably consolidated, because through the acquisition of this line of railway the narrow corridor of the Northern Tyrol would become a wide communication line not only between Western and Eastern Austria, but principally between south-eastern and western Europe. It will, besides be possible to combine into one, from the point of economics and communications, the Austrian Federal lands of Carinthia, the Tyrol and Salzburg, which at present, on account of a detour about 150 kilometres long of the Tauern railway, possess only one means of railway communication, which results in a considerable loss of time. This detour must at present be made in order to avoid, in the case of transportation of goods between the Austrian provinces of Carinthia and the Eastern Tyrol on the one hand and the western regions of Austria on the other, a double passage of merchandise through the customs, while crossing Italian territory.

While the acquisition of this railway line would resolve into very great advantages to Austria, in losing it Italy would suffer only in a minor way. This line in actual practice is of no significance to Italy except as a transversal cutting her line of communication from the north to the south between Innsbruck and Bolzano. In accordance with statistical data, the following quantities of goods were transported in both directions along the line Lienz–Franzensf este:

1914 850,000 tons
1936 154,000

The demarkation of the frontier line suggested by way of a “minor rectification” would follow the line of the watershed between the Rienz and the Piave, would cross the valley of the Eisack south of Brixen, once more to follow the watershed between the rivers Eisack and Etsch and to join at last the Austrian frontier at Zuckerhütl. If the proposed rectification of the frontier contains both the lateral valleys of the Upper Eisack and those south of Pustertal, it is with the object of avoiding their complete cutting-off from their principal valleys and the exposure by this act of the population of these transversal valleys to economic ruin.

On account of its geographical situation, Brixen is the economic and cultural centre of the Upper Eisacktal and of the Pustertal. For [Page 457] centuries it was the seat of the diocesan authorities, on which the Austrian territories also depended for their administration. Ever since that time Brixen was also the seat of the administrative authorities of the region of the valley of the Upper Eisack and of its lateral valleys.

If the new frontier were traced north of the town, somewhere between Franzensfeste and Brixen, the town would find itself separated from its hinterland and condemned to the loss of its cultural and economic importance. At the same time, the upper Eisacktal and the Pustertal would certainly find themselves deprived of their economic centre of gravity. In fact, the generally narrow valley of the Eisack forms, north of Brixen, a sheet of water 4–5 kilometres wide, and the town is situated at its southern end. Immediately below Brixen the Eisack forms a new valley with just enough room for a railway and a road. It is, therefore, reasonable to say that Brixen, given the geographical structure of the territory, is so closely connected through its commerce and traffic with the Pustertal and the upper Eisacktal, that any fixing of a frontier north of the town which would separate it by political frontiers from its valleys would inevitably condemn it to economic and cultural ruin. The town of Brixen bears an undoubtedly Austrian character. In accordance with the latest Italian statistics, the population amounts to about 12,000 inhabitants, about 10,000 of whom speak German and 2,000 are of Italian nationality.

The entire region which would be affected by the above rectification of frontier has an approximate area of 3,200 square kilometres, say 1 per cent, of the total surface area of Italy. On account of the Alpine configuration of the region, 13 per cent, of the total territory is composed of rocky desert and glaciers. Only 6 per cent, of the territory is actually available for intensive cultivation, while the rest is composed of forests and meadows. These figures are derived from the Italian agricultural survey of 1929–1930.

The Italian census of 1939, which distinguished only southern Tyrolese (Alloghani, i.e. German-speaking inhabitants or Ladine) and Italians, gave for the region involved in the rectification of the frontier the following figures:

German-speaking inhabitants including 5,000 Ladine 74,032
Italians 9,243
83,275

This figure represents very nearly 2 per cent, of the total population of Italy. Furthermore, the Italian population does not constitute the aboriginal element, because it is composed of elements who immigrated since 1919.

[Page 458]

The economic configuration of the region is above all conditioned by the Alpine character of the country. The majority of the population is composed of peasants who are mainly occupied in fruit-growing, the cultivation of the vine and the growing and exploitation of forests. On the other hand, the hotel industry, which is well developed in the towns and the more important villages, is a basis for a tourist industry which is capable of development on account of the tourist traffic in the neighbouring regions of the eastern and Northern Tyrol, of Carinthia and Salzburg, which regions will not form a united tourist area unless this rectification of the frontier is carried out. Natural riches which could serve as a basis for the development of an industry of any importance are completely absent from this region, where no mineral or other deposits are to be found. While the Italian Government had intensely industrialised the regions of Bolzano and of Meran since 1919, the regions of the Pustertal and of the upper Eisack valley were not involved in this evolution. Artisans still predominate in the towns and the more important villages, with the exception of a number of insignificant enterprises of the textile and timber industries.

Among the hydro-electric power stations of a major importance which were established by Italy in the Southern Tyrol, one large and two small ones are situated in the area affected by this minor rectification. They are the power stations at Brixen, Pfitsch, south-east of the Brenner, and at Vals, immediately north of the confluence of the Rienz and Eisack. These three power stations supply almost the entire output of their energy to the Italian railways for the Brenner line. They produce an approximate total of 615,000,000 KWH per annum, the power station at Brixen taking first place with a production of 500,000,000 KWH per annum. In comparison with this, in accordance with Italian statistical data of 1939, the energy production of the entire province of Bolzano stood at 2,006,000,000 KWH per annum, while the entire production of Italy amounted to 17,683,686,000 KWH. The Pustertal and its tributary valleys do not lend themselves to the installation of hydro-electric power stations on account of their gentle slopes. For this reason no plant of this kind was therefore constructed in this region.

The Austrian Government has on a number of occasions declared that it was prepared in the case of the restoration to Austria of the Southern Tyrol to accord to the Italian hydroelectric power stations of this region a special status in virtue of which these works would remain Italian property and would be allowed without any hindrance to export the entire output of their energy into Italy. A detailed résumé18 of these proposals made by the Austrian Government and [Page 459] concerning the legal settlement of the economic problem of the hydroelectric energy is attached to this Note.

III. Apart from the minor rectifications in accordance with paragraph II in the Brixen–Bruneck region, the Austrian Government suggests a similar one in the region of the Kanaletal. This small strip of territory, with an area of 362 square kilometres and a population of about 8,000 inhabitants, situated with its principal town, Tarvis, on the northern slope of the Carnic Alps, formed for centuries a part of the Austrian province of Carinthia and in 1919 found itself separated from Austria for purely strategic reasons. It is an almost entirely German-speaking area. In a Note addressed to the Chairman of the Allied Council, dated 15th March, 1946,19 the Federal Government of Austria requested the Allied Powers to arrange that the frontier commission entrusted by the Council of the Deputies of the Foreign Ministers to study the ethnographic and economic problem of the province of Venezia Giulia should extend its investigations into the Kanaletal and that a plebiscite should finally decide the position of this region.

This Note, as well as a brief Memorandum on the history and the economic and ethnographic position of the Kanaletal, is presumably in the possession of the Council. Nevertheless, the Federal Government once more submits this Memorandum to the Council with a request that the Kanaletal should be re-incorporated into the Austrian territory, if necessary, after a plebiscite.20

  1. Not printed.
  2. At their 57th Meeting, May 30, 1946, the Deputies heard statements by the Austrian Foreign Minister, Karl Gruber, and by the Italian Ambassador in London, Nicolo Carandini, on the subject of the rectification of the Austro-Italian frontier. The text of Mr. Gruber’s remarks was circulated to the Council of Foreign Ministers as document C.F.M. (D) (46) 99, May 30, 1946, not printed. The remarks of Mr. Carandini were circulated to the Council as document C.F.M. (D) (46) 100, May 30, 1946, not printed. The principal points made by Gruber and Carandini were reported in telegram 2665, Delsec 539, June 1, 1946, from Paris, p. 461.
  3. This document was considered by the Council of Foreign Ministers at its 24th Meeting, June 24, 1946, 11:30 a.m. For the United States Delegation Record and the Record of Decisions of that meeting, see pp. 588 and 597, respectively.
  4. For the Council’s decision of September 14, 1945, see the Record of the Third Meeting of the Council, London, September 14, 1945, Foreign Relations, 1945, vol. ii, p. 158. Regarding the Council’s decision of May 1, 1946, see the United States Delegation Record and the Record of Decisions of the Council’s 6th Meeting, May 1, 1946, pp. 194 and 202, respectively. The Austrian Government’s letter of May 10, 1946, was circulated to the Council as C.F.M. (46) 66, May 11, 1946, p. 357; see also the map facing p. 358.
  5. Not printed.
  6. Not printed.
  7. Memorandum not printed. In a note of May 27, 1946, to the Secretary General of the Council of Foreign Ministers, designated C.F.M. (D) (46) 87, May 28, 1946, not printed, Ales Bebler, the Yugoslav Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs, observed that the Deputies intended to hear official statements by the Italian and Austrian Governments on the subject of the Austro-Italian frontier and that the Austrian Foreign Minister had publicly declared that Austria was claiming the valley of the Kanal. Bebler’s note went on:

    “The Yugoslav Government is disagreeably surprised to realize that in connexion with this subject the Council intends to hear the declarations of the Governments of two States which were aggressors, without informing Yugoslavia, which had put forward its rights to this country. The Yugoslav Government therefore considers that the fate of the Valley of the Kanal could not be settled without its participation in the debates.”

    In a letter of May 29, 1946, to Deputy Foreign Minister Bebler, a copy of which circulated to the Council as C.F.M. (D) (46) 96, May 29, 1946, Secretary General La Grandville replied as follows:

    “In a letter dated 27th May, 1946 you were good enough to ask me to convey to the Deputies of the Ministers for Foreign Affairs a request from the People’s Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, to be heard on the question of the Valley of Kanal, in the course of the meeting at which the representatives of the Austrian and Italian Governments would be invited to attend in order to express their views on the question of the Austro-Italian frontier.

    “The Deputies, to whom I immediately transmitted your communication, have instructed me to convey to you in reply that in accordance with the instructions of the Council of Foreign Ministers, this meeting will be concerned exclusively with the consideration of the frontier in the region of the South Tyrol.” (Lot M–88: Box 2065: Deputies Documents)