740.00119 Control (Germany)/5–2546: Telegram
The United States Political Adviser for Germany (Murphy) to the Secretary of State
u.s. urgent
[Received May 26—4:40 a.m.]
1342. See my 1297, May 20.11 Fifty-sixth Coordinating Committee meeting 23 May discussed preliminary report from Disarmament Commission, but failed reach agreement permitting immediate start of activities.
(Note: Commission reported inability agree scope its activities; its British, French and US members considered inspection war industries essential to worthwhile appraisal demilitarization and disarmament, whereas its Soviet member considered such inspection unnecessary and premature. British member favored simultaneous examinations all zones by specialist teams. French member agreed such procedure to 15 June, but reserved right reconsider for operations subsequently. Soviet member favored special sub-commissions for Navy, Army and Air Force (but not for economic) questions, visiting zones successively. US member accepted Soviet recommendation provided sufficient time allowed sub-commissions for effective work. US and French members would insist on inclusion of economic sub-commission should Soviet method be adopted.)
Soviet member Coordinating Committee said that, for reasons explained by Soviet member of Disarmament Commission, proposal economic investigation now unacceptable under any conditions. He said Soviets did not oppose such investigation because they attached no importance to economic disarmament; but they felt that as practically no such disarmament had been carried out in western zones, it would be futile to send an inspection group there. General Dratvin said Soviets did not intend further delusions in nearby countries that much industrial disarmament had already been effected: “German war potential in form of powerful war industry remains untouched. Soviet Delegation would welcome quadripartite economic commission for all zones when reparation deliveries in form of war industries executed or even well under way”.
He urged acceleration reparations deliveries as effectual means destroy German war potential.
French member said he desired verify whether any German plants have been or are turning out war materials.
[Page 560]British member said he would be delighted to have inspections of war plants in British zone. He wondered why Soviet member omitted refer to reparation deliveries from Soviet zone, about which other three members knew nothing. He recognized that not all had been done that should have been done to demilitarize British zone; nevertheless it was not true, as Soviet member had alleged, that nothing had been accomplished in British zone. Actually British were not far behind on their program. He then asked rhetorically whether all output of aviation material, arms and ammunition had ceased everywhere in Germany, as was required? He considered basic purpose of US proposal was to reinforce mutual confidence among four occupying powers, and that persistent refusal participate fully in projected investigations must diminish confidence.
US member said his colleagues knew war requires matériel as well as men. US delegation had proposed examine all aspects of disarmament. Charges had been made that some zones maintained German troops under arms, and that others had allowed production of matériel continue, and thus far no investigation of these charges had been allowed. General Clay said that very large proportion explosive materials industry in US zone had been destroyed, and he wished learn whether that was also true in other zones, or whether plants there were in production. He said that although reasonable freedom had been accorded representatives from other zones to visit plants in US zone, reciprocal liberty had not been accorded US representatives. US delegation believed it was entitled to information. He was annoyed “at being constantly in one-way street where he always had to turn out for others. In football game one child with ball can make rules; however, as we are not children, we should join in writing rules in spirit of compromise.” Saying he would inform his Government that Soviet opposition to investigation war industries was blocking way to worthwhile results, General Clay suggested postpone further discussion to next meeting (28 May) by which time he hoped his colleagues would have received instructions from their Governments.
Soviet member agreed to postponement, but said his colleagues had not influenced him to change his mind. He still considered creation now of economic commission would be premature.
[In telegram 5797, May 26, 1946, General Clay gave a comprehensive review of the German situation; for text, see Lucius D. Clay, Decision in Germany (Garden City, N.Y., Doubleday and Co., Inc., 1950), page 73.]
- Not printed; it reported the agreement of the Coordinating Committee at its 55th meeting, May 17, to General Clay’s proposal for the establishment of a quadripartite commission to investigate disarmament in Germany (740.00119 Control (Germany)/5–2046). According to telegram 1264, May 15, 9 p.m., from Berlin, General Clay had received a request on May 12 from Secretary Byrnes at the Council of Foreign Ministers in Paris to make this proposal (740.00119 Control (Germany)/5–1546).↩