762A.00/2–951: Telegram
The United States High Commissioner for Germany ( McCloy ) to the Secretary of State 1
524. AGSec from Slater. Following is brief summary report of executive sessions HICOM Council held 8 February on implementation of Brussels decisions:
1. Contractual Agreements.
Kirkpatrick announced receipt of Foreign Office cable which:
- (a)
- Expressed misgivings re proposed declaration which included reference to Federal Republic defense contribution (reference paragraph 3 of Bonn’s sent Department 481, repeated Paris 130, London 130, Frankfort 5512). Foreign Office concerned that Germans would enter into series of contractual arrangements and then declare that they were not disposed to go through with defense contributions;
- (b)
- Implied that HICOM, in view of fact that it was maintaining supreme authority, could not state that it was ready to proceed to adjust the relationship between itself and Federal Republic by contractual arrangements which would be binding on both parties. (Kirkpatrick pointed out that if we told Federal Republic that these were not binding contracts, they would have no value at all.);
- (c)
- Raised doubts re value of submitting to Federal Republic as detailed a list of problems to be studied in relation to political decisions of Brussels Conference, as that proposed by HICOG. Kirkpatrick explained that London did not realize that this list was not a list of topics for negotiation but rather was designed to give some notion of the magnitude of task of adjusting HICOM–Federal Republic relationship on a contractual basis.
I pointed out that above statement represented complete reversal of decisions previously reached in HICOM Council; whereupon Kirkpatrick admitted that there was misapprehension in Foreign Office as to purpose of HICOM program and that he would go to London in an attempt to straighten this matter out.
[Page 1462]During course of discussion, I made following points, inter-alia:
- (a)
- That relationship between contractual agreements and German defense contribution was already announced at Brussels and Federal Republic had accepted this concept;
- (b)
- That Council had already discussed question of supreme authority with Adenauer (see Bonn’s sent Department 414, repeated Frankfort 467, Berlin 160, Paris 107, London 106 of 22 December3);
- (c)
- That Adenauer had already asked questions which indicated that he and other German authorities did not comprehend scope of problems involved in placing HICOM–Federal Republic relationship on contractual basis. Thus, if we show him what is involved and what HICOM requires, which is the purpose of list referred to above, he will be forced to give more thought to matter and to make counterproposals rather than merely expressing, as he has in the past, the general German point of view in Bonn which is that High Commissioners afford Federal Republic at once a security treaty, equality, adequate forces in Germany, financial support, et cetera. Furthermore, if HICOM puts forward its proposals now, it may get greater concessions than at a later date when its bargaining power would probably not be as great. I agreed that list referred to above should be handed to Blankenhorn informally and without commitment on HICOM’s part. HICOM would inform him upon transmission that this list was merely designed to indicate magnitude of problems involved and to reflect HICOM’s present approach.
Poncet pointed out that HICOM’s retention of supreme authority does not negate possibility of individual HICOM–Federal Republic contracts because if contracts were faithfully carried out, they would remain in force. He agreed that list could be discussed informally with Federal Republic but that extreme care should be taken in order to prevent any HICOM commitments at this point. In his opinion, Adenauer’s more recent requests are leaning toward Schumacher position i.e., full sovereignty and equality for Federal Republic before affording any defense contribution. Poncet also expressed concern that Bundestag might refuse, even after pledge of Adenauer Government, to vote credits for defense, thus leading to a situation where HICOM had given everything and received nothing.
Kirkpatrick concluded by expressing concern that Adenauer’s program might be “to take HICOM down the river” in stages; i.e., three months ago he stated that it would take considerable time to conclude contracts; now he states that they should be concluded at once; and in April he might state that political situation is such that HICOM should not ask for defense contribution first but should agree immediately to contractual arrangements in order to help him get support in the Bundestag.
Council agreed to defer further discussion of list and draft declaration until Kirkpatrick returned from London.
[Page 1463][Here follows part 2 of this telegram in which the High Commissioners discussed a German defense contribution, printed page 1011.]
McCloy