862.00/7–948: Telegram
The United States Political Adviser for Germany (Murphy) to the Secretary of State
38. Refmytel 37, July 8.1 SPD held eight-hour session Ruedesheim July 7 to formulate party policy regarding Frankfurt proposals and instruct Ministers President for Koblenz meeting July 8 and 9. Carlo Schmid, Deputy Minister President Wuerttemberg-Hohenzollern, drafter original SPD occupation statute delivered main address analyzing three Frankfurt documents. He reiterated main aim SPD is creation of unified Germany. Party would accept western German state only as temporary solution, but a western state not under “constitution” and not under occupation statute set forth in document three of Frankfurt proposals. Main objection to document three centered on article concerning allied control of foreign trade and related internal policy. Schmid position supported in discussion by Hessian Minister Zinn, Schleswig Holstein Minister President Luedemann and Rheinland-Pfalz Minister of Interior Jakob Stefan.
More conciliatory approach advocated by Bremen Senate President Kaisen, Hamburg Buergermeister Brauer, Hesse Minister President Stock, etc. Germans should seize every opportunity within Frankfurt proposals to extend sovereignty, should forego outright opposition but make counterproposals (for example on question of foreign trade at least to wipe out JEIA) accept hopelessness of four power agreement on German unity but press for occupation statute against constitution. Following decisions represent compromise:
- 1.
- Committee established to draft and present occupation statute and counter proposals to MG. Draft to be called occupation statute basic law, administrative statute or anything but “constitution” as latter implies sovereignty which occupied Germany does not possess. Statute to include bill of rights.
- 2.
- Ministers President to press for occupation statute before cooperation on any work for constitutional convention. Statute must be drafted not by Ministers President themselves but by enlarged group selected indirectly by Laender. This group to prepare groundwork for convocation of Parliament.
- 3.
- Before end of 1948 Parliament elected by popular and direct vote to convene and form government.
- 4.
- Alteration of land boundaries to be postponed, carried out later by referendum.
Conference indicated that SPD reluctance to support constitution stems more from conflict over sovereignty than from fear of sanctioning split Germany. Ministers President instructed to work for compromise [Page 384] with Frankfurt proposals, but only on basis of occupation statute.
CDU–CSU Ministers President, Deputies, party functionaries and government officials from all three zones met for only three hours Koblenz July 7. Declared themselves in favor of all positive aspects of Frankfurt proposals and of federative basis for new state. Opposed linking together constitution and occupation statute. Adenauer and some associates took positive attitude, assuming proposals offer Germans opportunity to shape their own government.
French zone representatives regarded Frankfurt proposals as improving their own position. Dr. Josef Mueller of Bavaria stated proposals should not be construed as French concessions but on contrary as evidence French views prevailed over American and British. General demand for “clarification” of proposals before further Germans action and for clear definition German rights and realms of autonomy.
Decisions:
- 1.
- Constitutional convention should be elected indirectly from Laender not by popular direct vote.
- 2.
- Preparations should be made by Ministers-President not by enlarged committee as SPD suggested.
- 3.
- Committee should draw up short occupation statute not constitution as counterproposal to contain (a) delegation of powers and competence, (b) definition of structure, (c) bill of human rights not to include social, economic rights.
Sent Department 38, repeated Paris 10.
- Supra.↩