Foreign Relations of the United States, 1949, Council of Foreign Ministers; Germany and Austria, Volume III

740.0011 EW (Peace)/4–1649: Telegram

The United States Deputy for Austria at the Council of Foreign Ministers (Reber) to the Secretary of State

secret

Vienna, April 16, 1949—3 p.m.

417. From Reber. After arrival here April 14, I conferred with US High Commissioner and members USFA and Legation staffs about problems of Austrian treaty. At suggestion High Commissioner press conferences held treaty negotiations. In series of visits with President Renner, Chancellor Figl, Vice Chancellor Schaerf and Foreign Minister Gruber, conversations were largely concerned with discussions at London and prospects following recess.

Renner spoke in uninterrupted discourse on importance of maintaining Carinthian frontier unimpaired. Although he did not imply belief Western Powers were planning compromise, he nevertheless dwelt on this subject with deep feeling. Figl expressed appreciation Austrian Government of efforts made by Western Powers particularly US to conclude treaty in current negotiations, and indicated Austrians considered significant progress had been achieved in two respects, namely, through withdrawal French proposal to impose restrictions on economic activities of military significance (Article 27¹) and renunciation by Western Powers of claims to German assets in Western Zones.² I recall that neither of these had brought agreement on part of Soviet delegation and that negotiations had not yet revealed intention to alter previous Soviet positions so that acceptable treaty might be completed. Figl strongly upheld view that Austria cannot subscribe to treaty unless it offers assurance of an independent economic existence for Austria and restores Austrian sovereignty. If such treaty could not be obtained now it was better, in his opinion, to wait until this was possible, but hope must be kept alive among Austrian people by every attempt to continue discussions at reasonable intervals.

After series of questions about likely developments after present recess, Schaerf suggested that in the event treaty not concluded this time desirable alternative would be revision New Control Agreement³ with view to far-reaching relaxation of powers of military authorities and reduction of size occupying forces. In advancing these proposals, to which he and Socialist leaders generally attach great importance, he stressed opinion that control agreement had not been fully carried out and called attention expressly to provision (in Article 14) requiring review of agreement for purpose of revision within six months after its effective date. Further reason for revision was found in occupation statute for Western Germany⁴ which he appeared to consider would give Western Germany more favorable position in relation to occupying authorities than would be case of Austria in its present situation. Upon inquiry, he stated Austrian Government had not formulated specific suggestions along this line, but that such proposals had only been put forward so far by political leaders. Recommendations of Legation and USFA on this subject are being pushed to completion urgently and will be forwarded to Washington shortly.

Gruber is pleased with course of treaty discussions during final days before recess. His primary concern during my official call was Yugoslav reactions expressed by Yugoslav political representatives here after return from Belgrade, that recent Austrian proposals for economic arrangements (Legtel 295, March 24⁵) were not sufficient. In any event Gruber agreed it is advisable to leave matter in suspense until possible further report either directly or indirectly from Belgrade.

As result of discussion with Austrian leaders here following impressions stand out:

(1) Relinquishment by Western Powers of claims to German assets is deeply appreciated by Austrian Government and gives West decided propaganda advantage until Soviets make counteroffer,

(2) View held by political leaders on treaty prospects is generally realistic but all here stressed importance of keeping discussions alive,

(3) Leaders of both coalition parties appear convinced Western Powers earnestly seeking to conclude treaty.

I am making brief visit to Carinthia⁶ and plan return to London April 21 or 22.

Sent Department 417, repeated Belgrade 12.

[

Reber

]

1. At the 147th meeting of the Deputies, April 1, the French Representative had withdrawn his proposals for paragraph 2 of Article 27 and annexes III, IV, and V, which restricted Austrian economic activities contributing to military potential.
2. At the 152nd meeting of the Deputies, April 8, the Representatives of United States, United Kingdom, and France stated that no German assets in Western Austria should be made available as German reparations and that such assets should be relinquished without obligation for payment.
3. The reference here is to the New Control Agreement of June 28, 1946. For its text, see A Decade of American Foreign Policy, Basic Documents, 1941–1940 (Washington, Government Printing Office, 1950) p. 614.
4. The reference here is to the Occupation Statute which was signed April 8 in Washington by representatives of the three Western powers and came Into effect September 21. For the text of the Statute and documentation relating to its negotiation, see pp. 156 ff.
5. Not printed; it reported that Gruber had offered to open discussions with Yugoslav representatives leading to a new and considerably extended trade agreement. (863.014/3–2449)
6. Reber visited Carinthia and Styria shortly before his return to London and reported that no substantive movement existed among the populations of either province for a special autonomous regime or union with Yugoslavia. (Telegram 1581 (Delaus 99), April 25, from London, not printed (740.00119 Council/4–2549))