398.10–GDC/7–2651: Telegram
The United States High Commissioner for Germany (McCloy) to the Secretary of State
792. Urtel 443 dated July 17,1 and urtel 585 dated July 23,2 indicate that we have failed to make entirely clear our views certain aspects contractual relationship.
[Page 1498]We agree that retention legislative power is inconsistent with nature of Council of Ambassadors. However, we are unable avoid conclusion that only Allies can exercise the essentially legislative function of depriving quadripartite control council legislation of effect in the territory of the FedRep. So far Germans themselves have not been able to suggest any other solution this problem. Similarly, seems inevitable that Allies wld exercise certain legislative powers in event internal or external emergency situations. Germans have not disputed this proposition either. We and UK at present see no other areas in which Allies might exercise legislative powers after conclusion contractual arrangements, though Fr insist that Allied power shld be reserved in areas of scientific research, disarmament and demilitarization, and prohibited and limited industries.
It is not our intention to require Germans to be bound by all international agreements of Allies affecting Ger. We wld require Germans recognize large number purely technical agreements concluded their behalf, which will be specifically listed, in order prevent disturbance of rights under such agreements. Most such agreements are obsolete and we believe none controversial. Secondly, we wld require Germans recognize small number specified agreements relating reparations such as Safehaven and final act of Paris. Finally, in order retain adequate basis for dealing with Sov and establishment ultimate peace settlement, Germans wld agree to take no action prejudicing those international agreements which are basis of Allied position in Ger. Neither we nor Germans regard this as same thing as Ger commitment to be bound by such agreements.
We do not contemplate retention of unilateral Allied right to impose decisions on Germans in the arbitration process. As HICOM special committee has explained to Ger delegation, our idea is that arbitration tribunal wld order defaulting party to take necessary remedial action within stated time; if defaulting party failed to take such action within stated time complainant party itself wld be authorized by tribunal to take specified action to remedy the breach. Foregoing, of course, applicable regardless of whether Allies or Germans are complainant. Ger initial reaction to this statement generally very favorable.