Foreign Relations of the United States, 1951, European Security and the German Question, Volume III, Part 2

762A.00/6–2751: Telegram

The Liaison and Political Reporting Division to the Office of the United States High Commissioner for Germany, at Frankfurt¹

secret

Bonn, June 27, 1951—6 p. m.

1268. From Liaison Bonn. Fed Cabinet in session June 27 few hours after Adenauer’s return from Rome² declared total ban on all activities of FDJ (Communist youth) as an organization whose activities are directed toward disruption of demo constitutional order. Same legal mechanism used to ban SRP Reichsfront³ and Commie [plebiscite] comites has been applied to FDJ, namely BL article 9 (2) and article 5 of law for Federal laender cooperation in matters concerning protection of constitution under which Federal Govt has power to order laender to enforce ban. Federal Interior Min Lehr understood to be taking immediate action under latter.

FDJ ban will prohibit all activities of the organ as well as any action of associated organizations taken in attempt to promote FDJ in face of ban. Effort to secure enactment of “blitz law” revision of Ger criminal code (ourtel 1237 to Frankfort, 976 Dept, 258 Berlin, Unnumbered London, Paris, Moscow, June 20⁴) prior to Parliament recess expected to be increased in view of need for more effective punishment provisions to aid laender and local police enforcement of ban.

In view of known extensive SED–FDJ preparations for underground activity, it may be assumed that Federal ban will not have effect of eradicating the organ as such but merely of forcing it to camouflage its activities. Recruiting for Berlin Weltjugendspiel in FedRep will be seriously hampered, but it may be assumed that Commies will divert this effort to clandestine channels rather than give it up completely.

During the twilight period from now until new Ger criminal code provisions are enacted, activity in defiance of the ban will in most cases not be punishable by more than temporary detention and small fines under land police ordinances and existing criminal code provisions. In view of continued FDJ demonstrations in NEW during past few weeks despite total ban applicable to that land, it can be expected that immediate FDJ reaction, prior to final shift to underground, may take form of series of boisterous and semi-violent protest demonstrations as long as threat of serious punishment largely non-existent. However, it seems likely that laender police will be capable, as they have been on past occasions, of adequately handling demonstrations during interim.

Question of arresting SED agents presently directing FDJ activities in FedRep wld now seem best resolved by advising Ger police of their whereabouts, (Frankfort tel to Dept 10400 rptd Bonn 511 London 914 Moscow 124 pouched Paris⁵) because despite limited provisions present penal code, sect 128 and 129 do provide significant term of imprisonment for leaders of organizations charged with actively threatening constitutional order of state.

Hays

1. Repeated to Washington, Berlin, London, Paris, and Moscow. The source text is the copy in the Department of State files.
2. Adenauer had left for Rome on June 14 for a state visit. For a report on his visit, see telegram 5804, June 20, volume iv .
3. On May 4 the Federal Government had banned the Reichsfront and on the same day announced its intention of banning the SRP.
4. Not printed; it reported that KPD–FDJ demonstration in the Petersberg area on June 17 had caused the Federal Government to consider expediting anti-subversive measures. The Federal “blitz law” under reference had been proposed by Lehr and consisted of 15 points providing for the punishment of subversives who sought to disrupt the free democratic order. (762A.00/6–2051)
5. Not printed; it reported, inter alia, that at its 51st meeting PEPCO had discussed the internment of FDJ instructors who had infiltrated into the Federal Republic from the Soviet zone. (762A.00/6–2151)