863.501/12–750: Telegram

The United States High Commissioner for Austria (Donnelly) to the Secretary of State

secret

1131. Deptel 1084, December 5.1 Legation agrees that if disciplinary investigation five police chiefs results in decisions of not guilty as in case eight officials who attended Stadlau Conference serious precedent would be created which might lead Soviets to believe that they can dictate conditions of police control in their zone. There is however no evidence yet that this will be result. We have continued urge firmness on Austrian Government in issue of police officials and have received assurances from both ministerial level and political internal security officer in Ministry Interior that prosecution will be seen through to end.

Case of eight officials (Legtel 1098, December 22) differentiated by Schaerf in conversation yesterday, who stated their offense not in comparable category. Government was aware that eight were not Communists and that attendance at Stadlau meeting not grave, but brought charges as warning to other police personnel and in belief that government would be in better position vis-à-vis Soviets if nation [action] not limited solely to Commies, but any police who had been negligent or equivocal in discharge of duty.

I also discussed matter with Figl today and told him frankly that we interpreted treatment of eight officials as weakening on part Austrian Government. We were afraid, I added, this might be followed by lenient treatment of five police chiefs. Figl said he shared our apprehension and was determined that five police chiefs must be removed soonest. He would see to it there would be no further postponement of case. I reminded Figl of two protests to Soviets by three Western powers, following strong position in AC and that if Austrian Government weakened at this time it could be regarded victory of Soviets and defeat for Austria and West. Figl agreed.

Feeling in government rests on no illusions about Soviet willingness make concessions, but on increased self-confidence that by playing the game as carefully as they have since September Government has gradually but perceptibly made real progress in objective reducing [Page 427] Commie influence in police. Government in fact a little surprised that they have accomplished as much as they have, and are itching for renewed Soviet impositions after this lull. Government regards as accomplishments fact that by initiating disciplinary measures they have for first time challenged Soviets over police issue, appointed non-Commie police chiefs in Wiener-Neustadt and St. Poelten, introduced 500 new gendarmes into Soviet Zone, have succeeded in eliminating Commie police chief First Bezirk and three Commie gendarmes from Lower Austria, and have five additional chiefs on the grill. No question of government’s desire to press this type of action as far as possible. They feel that obvious limit beyond which direct action can not be pressed is point where Soviets would have pretext for partition or measures equivalent to East-West division of police force.

Legation considers Austrian view realistic. Although it cannot be excluded that Austrians would be willing accept only partial victory if they feel they could thereby achieve substantial part their objectives. Even so, they would undoubtedly return to issue at next opportunity in accordance with classic pattern of Austrian dealings with Soviets. As we see it, important factor is to keep Austrians moving along path of increasing resistance to Soviet occupation regime, and as suggested Deptel 1084, Legation will emphasize long run importance of firm and consistent opposition and of not compromising principle involved out of exaggerated sensitivity about partition.3

Department pass Moscow. Sent Department 1131, repeated info Paris 122, London 60, Moscow 28.

Donnelly
  1. Not printed; it stated that the reprimand of the eight police officials appeared to indicate a willingness by the Austrians to compromise with the Soviet Element. If similar action was taken on the five police chiefs the Soviet Element would “have gained everything they could have expected and established dangerous precedent that removal of Aust officials their zone requires their consent.”(863.501/12–250)
  2. Not printed; it reported the outcome of the case (863.501/12–250).
  3. In telegram 1145, December 11, to Vienna, not printed, the Department of State concurred in these views and expressed its pleasure that the Austrian attitude was more realistic than it seemed. (863.501/12–750) Subsequently Legation Vienna reported that Interior Minister Helmer had ordered the findings of the board set aside and the eight accused officials “to appear before supreme disciplinary board composed of high-ranking members of Ministry.” (Telegram 1172, December 12, from Vienna, not printed, 863.501/12–1250)