762A.00/6–1451
The Chief of the Political Affairs Division of the Berlin Element of HICOG (Wellington) to the Director of the Office of German Political Affairs (Laukhuff)
secret
Dear Perry: In a conversation I had with Otto Suhr several evenings ago, the inevitable question of “twelfth Land” came up. I told Suhr (not for the first time!) that in my personal opinion there was no chance of Berlin’s attaining that status in the foreseeable future and that I thought it would be better all around if the Berlin leaders reckoned with such a probability and refrained from making too great an issue of the subject. Suhr replied that he remembered I had been [Page 1914] right in the past when I made such predictions, but that this time he wondered. …1 when he was in Washington,2 he said, he received the “strong impression” that Berlin might well become a twelfth Land “in the winter”. I asked him what he based this on, and he said various conversations he had had in the State Department, including one with Hank Byroade. He hastened to add that no one had told him in so many words that Allied objections to the twelfth Land would be lifted; it was only that he had gotten the impression—and a strong impression—that they would be. For example, he said, he had been asked to say very frankly whether Berlin was really ready to “bear all the consequences” of what twelfth Land status would mean, and he had also been asked to explain in detail how the Berlin leaders envisaged working out the situation if such a status were accorded. He volunteered as a possibility that he had perhaps misinterpreted the intent of the conversations on the subject, but he reiterated that he had left Washington with the definite impression that Berlin’s hopes in this respect might well be realized before too long.
I told Suhr that he had been in Washington more recently than I and that, furthermore, to be quite frank, we had not had any recent exchange of views with the Department on the subject—he might, therefore, be right in his impressions. I said that I could only express a personal opinion anyway, but that I myself knew of nothing to change what I had told him earlier. He then said that he was grateful for my having told him what I thought, that he might have to change certain ideas he had been mulling over, and that he might ask me in about a fortnight if he could discuss the subject with me again. The SPD, he said, was having a meeting fairly soon in which they were going to have to try to find a way of “doing something about the East Sector”, and the probability or improbability of Berlin’s becoming a twelfth Land would enter into the picture (this remark was extremely vague and I answered only that I would be glad to talk to him further whenever he wanted). He then asked whether the situation would be changed if East Berlin were to become a sixth Land of the GDR. My answer to this was that I thought, should it happen, it would probably eliminate overnight the objections to twelfth Land status.
It would be extremely helpful if you could let me know what the thinking really is on this subject in Washington. I know that many of you strongly favor the idea but I know, too, that there is some opposition to it among our people in Frankfurt and Bonn and, as far as 1 can see here, the French remain unalterably and strenuously against [Page 1915] it, although the French political people, at least, in Berlin say that “if the Soviets incorporate East Berlin into the GDR on Tuesday West Berlin can become a twelfth Land on Wednesday”.
My principal reason for asking you about this question is because I think that if there is, in fact, no chance of twelfth Land status for the time being, we should try to persuade the Berliners not to keep on making an issue of it. Every time Reuter makes a speech on the subject, French distrust of him increases. This means not only a worsening of Franco-Berlin relations in general but also—and this is very important—it means that the French regard every act of the city government which tends to strengthen Berlin’s relationship with Bonn as a sly means of trying to make Berlin a twelfth Land by the back door. The result is not very happy, as you can imagine. Another aspect of the matter is partially set forth in our telegram 1341 of May 23 regarding the François Poncet–Reuter controversy over Berlin (there is more on the subject in Karl’s attached memo of May 44). This, too, has certainly caused a deterioration in Franco-Berlin and Franco–Reuter relations, and has not made our tripartite work any easier either. My perhaps over-optimistic idea is that, unless it is contrary to our immediate policy, we might try to persuade Reuter and Co. how unrealistic it is for the time being to continue their pressure for twelfth Land status, and that they could achieve a good deal more for the city if they would keep quiet on the subject and devote their efforts to strengthening Berlin’s practical ties with Bonn to the greatest extent possible short of actual integration. If this could be accomplished, there is just a possibility that French suspicions might subside and they might consequently accept a good deal which they now oppose.
Forgive this long harangue, but it is a difficult problem and I think it is worth a try at smoothing things out a bit.
Best wishes to you and Jessie and others in GER.
Sincerely,
- Omission in the source text.↩
- Suhr had visited the United States in April. A memorandum of his conversation with Secretary Acheson and other officers of the Department of State, dated April 12, on various topics concerning Germany is in file 762A.13/4–1251.↩
- Not printed; it reported that the French Commandant had censured Reuter on behalf of François-Poncet on April 25 for the Mayor’s publication of an article in Telegraf which stated that the French attitude on the twelfth Land status of Berlin and the question of the Saar were stumbling blocks to rapprochement between France and Germany. (850.33/5–251)↩
- Not printed; it reported particulars on Reuter’s attitude toward the controversy with François-Poncet.↩