CFM files, lot M–88, box 187, questions affecting Berlin
The Chairman Secretary of the Allied Kommandatura, Berlin (Gaugain) to the Secretary-General, Allied General Secretariat, at Frankfurt
confidential
Berlin, December 5,
1951.
BK/AHC(51)120.
Subject: Implementation of the Foreign Ministers’ Instructions Relative to Berlin1
- 1. In accordance with the request contained in SPCOM/Sec(51)9 of 26th October 1951,2 the Commandants have further studied the fields in which reserved powers in Berlin must remain and the extent of the powers to be reserved in each field.
- 2. There are three classes of control which the Allied
authorities must retain in Berlin:
- (a) ultimate control in all fields. The Allied Kommandatura cannot, for political-legal reasons, surrender this control, although it can delegate some powers or refrain from exercising them;
- (b) control over action in fields in which the Allied Authorities in Berlin have particular obligations and responsibilities or which affect the special situation of the city. Those are at present covered by para 2(a), (c), (e), (f), (i) and (j) of the current Statement of Principles;3
- (c) controls to ensure that the Berlin authorities act in accord with Allied legislation at present in force, with Allied policy and, insofar as practicable, with undertakings of the Federal Government under the contractual agreements.
- 3. To secure (a) above, the Commandants are agreed that they must retain an unquestionable right to intervene in case of need. To secure (b) above, the Commandants are agreed that in the specified fields they must be able to act themselves in certain instances (which would be kept to the necessary minimum) and be informed of German intention to act. To secure (c) above the Commandants find themselves in a difficulty. They consider that, in general, all that is necessary in these fields is to ensure that the Berlin authorities adhere to the substance of the contractual agreements. Berlin will not, however be bound by those agreements and it is contemplated that no direct mention will be made of them in the Berlin instrument of control. The Commandants have accordingly considered several devices to meet the case, and these are embodied in the attached drafts.
- 4. In submitting these drafts, the Commandants wish to point out that the wording of the powers and rights retained has been taken, for the most part, from the current Statement of Principles and is subject to modification in the light of the final texts and scope of the contractual agreements.
- 5. The US Commandant prefers the draft attached as Annex “B”. The French and British Commandants prefer that attached as Annex “A”, although they see some merit in paragraph 4 of Annex “B” as a possible solution of the difficulty referred to in paragraph 3 above.
- 6. Both drafts refer, in several instances to “Occupation Authorities” and “occupation legislation”. This phraseology has been taken over from the present Statement of Principles, but, in the opinion of the US Commandant, it would be preferable in the new instrument of control to eliminate use of the term “occupation”. He suggests that if this cannot be done otherwise, it might be accomplished, without detriment to clarity, by revising Allied Kommandatura Law No. 2 (“Definitions”). The French and British Commandant see little advantage in abandoning the old terminology, particularly for “occupation legislation”, and little disadvantage in underlining the difference between the Allied position in Berlin and the Federal Republic.
- 7. The Commandants wish to make the following comments which
apply to both of the attached drafts:
- (a) As the progress of the Allied programme of restitution in Berlin is far behind that in the Federal Republic, the contractual agreements may not fully cover Allied requirements in Berlin. It may therefore be necessary to consider retaining restitution as a specifically reserved right under paragraph 3 after the provisions of the contractual agreements have been determined.
- (b) Reparations, decartelization, deconcentration and foreign interests and claims should be left within the scope of paragraph 4.
- (c) “Respect for the Constitution” is eliminated from the specifically reserved fields but is covered by the insertion of the word “status” in paragraph 2, and by paragraph 1, which defines Berlin’s rights, etc., as those “set forth in its Constitution”. Notification is still required for [Page 1961] amendments to or replacement of the Constitution, but the requirement of prior approval has been renounced.
- (d) For ordinary purposes, control over trade and exchange, monetary and fiscal policy and other economic matters has already been transferred to the Federal Republic. In paragraph 2, powers are reserved which would cover these matters in an emergency. These subjects are not therefore retained in paragraphs 3 or 4.
- 8. The British and US Commandants recommend that, before a final decision is taken on the attached drafts or on any formula which the Allied High Commission might itself propose, they be given the opportunity to seek the views of the Berlin Authorities on such aspects of any agreed draft as might appropriately be discussed with them. The French Commandant is of the opinion that those aspects to be discussed with the Germans should be clearly specified and that any discussions on the draft as a whole should be avoided.
Gaugain
Commandant
- For the text of the Foreign Ministers instructions on Berlin, see editorial note, p. 1944.↩
- Not printed, but see footnote 2, supra.↩
- Ante, p. 1900.↩
- Brackets appear in the source text.↩
- It may be possible, in the light of the final text of the contractual agreements, to revise this sub-paragraph and/or transfer it to para. 4. [Footnote in the source text.]↩
- “Agreements entered into by their governments” is intended to refer to the contractual agreements. [Footnote in the source text.]↩
- It is proposed that the Berlin Senat, perhaps with the approval of the House of Representatives, might issue a “Declaration of Intent” or some similar document indicating Berlin’s adherence to the policies and commitments set forth in the contractual agreements on restitution, reparations, decartelization, deconcentration, foreign interests in Berlin and claims against Berlin or its inhabitants; displaced persons, and the admission of refugees. This might be done, by setting forth the applicable policies contained in the pertinent contractual agreements, but without referring to the agreements themselves; or, preferably, by a simple brief statement of intent to adhere to the policies adopted by the Federal Government in such-and-such agreements. (It is uncertain whether the contractual agreement covering restitution will be adequate to cover Allied requirements in Berlin due to the fact that the restitution program in the Federal Republic is much further advanced than that in Berlin.) [Footnote in the source text.]↩