462A.62B31/12–1751: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Embassy in the United Kingdom 1
2955. Ref Deptel 514 Dec 4 to Bonn rptd Berlin 203 [205], Paris 3323, London 2775, Moscow 382[383];2 Bonn’s 645 and 624 rptd Berlin, London, Paris, Moscow3 and previous messages re Berlin and interzonal trade.
Dept requests subj Berlin and interzonal trade problem be discussed along fol lines with Br and Fr FonOffs soonest.
[Page 1890]Sov restrictions on Berlin traffic during past seven or eight months have not injured Berlin excessively in econ field, primarily because of commercial airlift and multiple submission shipping permit applications to Sovs. On other hand, continued holding and rejection large numbers shipping permits constitute direct challenge to principle of freedom access to Berlin long maintained by OCC powers, and are prob intended by Sovs as probing action to test Western firmness. Failure thus far by West to deal with problem firmly and quickly has provided Sovs opportunity use shipping permits to promote discord in West, to deny principle of freedom access to Berlin and most important, to pave way for more serious restrictions in future.
To permit indefinite continuation Sov harassments wld, Dept fears, make greatly increased Sov pressure on Berlin inevitable at future date when ability of West to resist encroachments against Berlin will prob have been materially reduced. To achieve satis solution present impasse in near future wld not, of course, preclude such pressure, but it wld maintain and possibly strengthen Western polit, econ and legal positions in Berlin. There is no reason believe present restrictions will be removed unless sufficient pressure is brought to bear on East Zone and unless East Zone (or Sovs) believe pressure will continue.
Our primary means retaliation against Sov harassing measures appear to be West German trade restrictions and West Berlin’s controlling position in Sov Zone barge network. Latter weapon will be useless during winter and will likely be largely removed within course of next spring or summer through completion canal by-pass. Trade weapon prob has its greatest potentiality at present, since future effectiveness may be decreased thru increasing Sov Zone self-sufficiency and increasing Sov Zone efforts use third countries for transshipment or procurement.
We therefore believe trade weapon shld be utilized to maximum extent during period of its greatest potentiality and solicit cooperation FonOff in requesting HICOM to bring to complete halt with certain ad hoc minor exceptions, movement of goods from FedRep and Western Berlin to Sov Zone. We hope every effort on part of FedRep to bring about additional and broader exceptions to embargo can be resisted by HICOM (see refDeptel) unless East is in fact making serious concession.4
- This telegram, drafted by Rogers, and cleared with Hillenbrand, Riley, WE, BNA, and EDS, was also sent for action to Paris and repeated to Bonn, Berlin, and Moscow.↩
- Supra.↩
- Neither printed; they reported further West German pressure for exceptions from the trade restrictions and that the Federal Republic showed “no disposition to suspend IZT completely”. In view of this and British and French unwillingness to act, McCloy felt that representations were necessary in Paris and London to obtain an effective embargo of trade until the Berlin situation improved. (462A.62B31/12–551 and 12–651)↩
- On December 22 Gifford reported that the Foreign Office would be unable to reply to the U.S. approach on Berlin until after Christmas due to the need for interdepartmental coordination, but the preliminary response suggested little possibility of a change in the British attitude. (Telegram 2853 from London, December 22, 462A.62B31/12–2251) On December 27 Bruce reported the French position, noting that the Foreign Ministry was in basic agreement with the United States, but “still reluctant to issue outright instructions to Poncet” for a complete ban on interzonal trade. (Telegram 3825 from Paris, December 27, 462A.0031/12–2751)↩