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

396.1–ISG/1–1651: Telegram

The United States High Commissioner for Germany (McCloy) to the Secretary of State

secret

Frankfurt, January 16, 1951—8 p. m.

5873. For Byroade. It was not our intention in Bonn’s 427¹ to propose procedure inconsistent with terms of reference for HICOM and ISG approved in Brussels, but merely to point out that little progress could be made on some of subjects suggested Deptel 4585² for initial ISG consideration until discussions had taken place with Germans. This had particular reference to status of treaties and membership in international organizations. In latter connection, procedures have already been agreed and are in operation.

We fully appreciate it will be necessary for ISG to deal with certain matters requiring multilateral consideration and agreement as well as with matters held over from New York but have been awaiting preliminary tripartite discussions here before making final recommendations as to allocation of work.

A special committee was set up at last council meeting and starts its work tomorrow to draw up such recommendations and to consider series of agreements necessary to establish relations between occupying powers and Germany on as broad contractual basis as possible.³ As we see it here, the matters to be dealt with fall roughly into four main groups.

1. Security and support of Allied forces in Germany. This raises such questions as those relating to change from an occupation to garrison status, reduction of occupation costs, facilities and other support to be supplied by Germany.

2. Germany’s contribution to Western European defense system. The problems in this group relate to agreements to be reached within agreed NATO framework in respect to Germany’s armed forces and their component parts, production of military supplies, etc.

3. International questions which effect not only the occupying powers, but other countries as well, i.e. Germany’s role in foreign affairs, settlement of claims, assumption of treaty obligations, further steps in respect to reparations, restitution etc.

4. Other questions primarily concern three occupation powers which roughly corresponds to your group A–2.

Preliminary work on preparation of studies under these general headings, has already begun here and shows that many more subjects will have to be included than those listed in Deptel 4873.⁴ List follows by air mail.⁵

As reported in recent telegrams, our preliminary informal talks with Germans indicate Federal Government is insisting upon necessity of arriving at agreement upon the question of Germany’s future status prior to developing the series of contractual agreements necessary to bring this about. This would immediately raise question of supreme authority and is undesirable in that it will result in agreeing to concessions to Germans for local political reasons without obtaining more in return than general assurances which may not be readily convertible into realities due to parliamentary delays and possible opposition. Furthermore, it would undoubtedly give rise to difficulties with French and possibly British.

We will report further following preliminary talks this week with British and French.

McCloy

1. Not printed, but see footnote 3, p. 1449.
2. For text, see Foreign Relations, 1950, vol. iv, p. 817.
3. The composition and tasks of the Special Committee in its preliminary work, beyond those indicated in the numbered paragraphs below, have not been further identified. Regarding the regular meetings of the Special Committee starting April 13, see editorial note, p. 1472.
4. Dated January 12, p. 1449.
5. The list under reference has not been identified further.