462A.62B31/7–1551: Telegram
The Director of the Berlin Element of HICOG (Page) to the Office of the United States High Commissioner for Germany, at Frankfurt1
69. For Reber and Frank Miller. Reuter informed Brit commandant this morning, and subsequently confirmed to us, that 1500 Warenhegleitscheine were returned to Senat late afternoon or early evening July 13 with notification that they required certificates of origin. Reuter says that although full study these Warenhegleitscheine not yet made, they appear mostly to cover high value goods, i.e., not under 10,000 DM. (Subsequent rough estimate obtained by Brit says 6,000 tons goods worth 31 million DM involved).
[Page 1852]Since CDTs’ letters to Dengin (mytel 19 to Bonn July 13 rptd Frankfort 62, Dept 47, Paris 18, London 9 Moscow 112) were delivered early afternoon July 13, it is possible that return these 1500 Warenbegleitscheine for certificates of origin constituted Dengin’s reply, although timing pretty close. In any case, it seems evident that Sovs not interested in further quadripartite talks if western prerequisite is lifting proof of origin requirement.
Brit CDT showed us confidentially July 14 strong telegram he had sent his HICOMER saying Russians and Fr have been playing with us now for 6 weeks and time has come for decisive action, i.e. countermeasures. Implying Fr leak, he commented to us on “coincidence” that number Warenbegleitscheine sent Senat corresponded precisely with HICOM figure of 1,500 mentioned para 1(b) my reftel. In conversation at Fr July 14 ceremony, Fr PolAd reiterated to us views expressed by Carolet yesterday as cited my same reftel, and said he “saw no way out of situation.” Further point of some interest this connection is that at Fr Potsdam mission reception July 13, Chuikov’s Chief of Staff, General Vinogradov, who apparently was not invited to French July 14 parade, asked Carolet whether he might not come. Both he and Dengin attended parade and reception after. Impression is inescapable that Sovs are working on Fr, and with some success, in order divide western allies.
In our immed preceding tel is draft background statement requested by HICOG Frankfurt for possible early release.3 We are not altogether convinced, however, that release of a statement now represents best strategy. There is good deal to be said for comment in Frankfort’s tel 25 to Bonn July 11 rptd Berlin 214 that “there is no practical possibility Sovs will in foreseeable future commit themselves to formal declaration renouncing right to demand certificate of origin, but they may be willing in practice to cease requiring certificates of origin.” We suggest that immed imposition of countermeasures might induce them to this end, particularly if matter has not meanwhile reverted to public issue; whereas countermeasures accompanied by release of statement wld make even tacit giving in impossible without serious loss of prestige. Once Sovs had ceased, in practice, to require proof of origin, quadripartite illegal trade talks cld be resumed and [Page 1853] west cld then push for definite settlement of proof of origin issue. If, as has been assumed by many observers, Sov requirement re proof of origin was motivated by desire to fence conclusion of IQQT [IZT] agmt, above outlined strategy wld seem to offer best chance. If, on other hand, Sovs real intention is to make trouble re Berlin, this will soon become apparent and western record can be put before public.
If it is decided issue background statement either now or later, we strongly urge no action until we can clear with Brit and Fr. Former will probably go along if timing satisfactory and if latter refuse we will have at least informed them of our intentions.
In view present apparent defeatist attitude of Fr, suggest Dept again approach Fr Embassy along lines Deptel 8567 to Frankfort (rptd Bonn 171, Berlin 411, London 5917, Paris 6862, Moscow 8085) as that approach seemed most fruitful. If our firm stand weakened or united western front here broken by Fr, we may well be faced with disastrous situation.
- Repeated to Washington, Bonn, Paris, London, and Moscow. The source text is the copy in the Department of State files.↩
- Not printed; it reported that, in accordance with a decision of the Allied High Commission, a letter had been sent to Dengin indicating that the Western trade experts would not resume the technical meetings until the Soviets had normalized stamping of Warenbegleitscheine. It also reported that Carolet felt the “decisions taken by HICOM and Commandants on Warenbegleitscheine stand may prove political blunder” since the West Berliners would not support the Western powers and no one had considered what could be done if the countermeasures failed to make the Soviets back down. (460.509/7–1351)↩
- Telegram 68 to Frankfurt (repeated to Washington as 51), not printed (462A.62B31/7–1551). The draft statement related the history of Warenbegleitscheine problem since 1947 from the Western view.↩
- Not printed; a copy of this telegram, which was not repeated to Washington, is in the Berlin Mission files, lot 58 F 62, Interzonal Trade 1951 511.2.↩
- Not printed; it reported that a representative of the French Embassy had called on June 16 to present the French views for delay and caution in Berlin. “He was reminded of London and New York agreements to apply counter measures and was requested to convey his government Department’s strong feeling that prompt and vigorous application such measures is best way of avoiding drift into blockade situation.” (462A.62B9/6–1451)↩