USPOLAD Germany Files: 800C Other Polit. Parties
The Director of the Office of European Affairs (Hickerson) to the Political Adviser for Germany (Murphy)82
Dear Bob, Your letter of August 19th83 dealing with the desirability of revoking the authorization for the KPD to operate in the US zone raises a question which we have considered in the past, particularly at the time when we were working on the new SWNCC directive to OMGUS.
You will have noted that paragraph 8 (b) of the new directive contains the following sentence:
“… Every authorized political party should have the right freely to state its views and to present its candidates to the electorate, and you will tolerate no curtailment of nor hindrance to the exercise of that right; if, however, you find that an authorized party is adopting or advocating undemocratic practices or ideas, you may restrict or withdraw its rights and privileges.”84
In formulating the latter part of that sentence, we had expressly the question of the KPD in mind, and we sought to provide Military Government with a sufficiently flexible authority to deal with the problem of the KPD as it might develop.
We here are inclined to believe that the time has not yet come for prohibiting the KPD from operating in the US zone. We recognize that the situation may alter very quickly and believe, of course, that the matter requires continual surveillance and a continuing review of the decision. In particular, we will doubtless want to have another look at the question after the November CFM meeting.
From reports received here, we believe that it is preferable to let the KPD operate openly, that Communist activities can thereby be better watched, better controlled and better opposed. To prohibit the KPD would only drive Communist elements underground and make it more difficult for us to watch their operations. We have received several reports recently that the KPD in the Western zone is already organized to go underground on the expectation that the US authorities will ban the KPD. If the KPD does go underground, there is likely also to develop a more widespread penetration of the other political parties by the KPD elements. As long as the KPD is permitted to organize out in the open, it cannot afford to scatter its forces widely into the other political parties. There is also the danger that if the KPD is driven underground, there may develop either underground warfare between KPD and Nazi-minded elements or, what is even more likely, a nefarious cooperation which would be most detrimental to the successful development of democratic elements in Germany.
We are in complete agreement with General Clay’s decision not to authorize the SED in our zone. We would only want to consider such authorization in the unlikely case that the Soviet authorities would permit the SPD to function freely in the Eastern zone. As long as the KPD remains operative in Western Germany and the opposition between the SPD and the KPD continues evident, we feel that the SED is bound to appear to the German people as the artificial creation it really is.
Although we do not believe that the KPD should be banned, we most certainly believe that its rights and privileges should be restricted wherever and whenever, in the judgment of Military Government, KPD actions exceed the bounds of propriety. If local KPD units were, for instance, to stage demonstrations that were in any “way hostile to the occupying power, such units might well be dissolved either indefinitely or for a period of time in accordance with the nature of the offense. Care should be taken naturally that the Communists are not made to appear as martyrs in the eyes of the German [Page 893] population, but whenever necessary we should rap them on the knuckles.
I do not think that we should ban the Communist party in our zone until such time as the Communists have made unequivocally manifest to the German people their own true anti-democratic character. It would not be wise in my opinion to have a prohibition against the KPD appear to the Germans as a small item in a larger Soviet-American conflict, rather than a proper result of local KPD conduct.
Although we would be hesitant now to approve prohibition of the KPD, we do not believe that there is any reason for Military Government to afford the same assistance to the KPD as to the other parties. To be sure, the new directive states in paragraph 8, b: “you will likewise give support to the principle that Military Government and the German authorities should afford non-discriminatory treatment to duly authorized political parties.” In so far as non-discriminatory treatment under present circumstances may involve material assistance, say in the form of automobiles, gasoline, newsprint, office equipment, etc., I think that the non-Communist parties should be favored in material aid over the KPD. The principle of neutrality, however, should be carefully observed in our treatment of the genuinely democratic parties.
Sincerely yours,
- All but the first paragraph of the source text was quoted in a letter of October 29, 1947, from Murphy to Gen. Clay, not printed.↩
- Ante, p. 882.↩
- The quotation is from the Directive to Commander in Chief of United States Forces of Occupation Regarding the Military Government of Germany, J.C.S. 1779, July 11, 1947; for text, see Germany 1947–1949, pp. 34–41.↩