Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, Germany and Austria, Volume VII, Part 1

Conference files, lot 59 D 95, CF 113: Telegram

No. 119
The Secretary of State to the Department of State ¹

secret

Vienna , June 29, 1952—7 p.m.

Secto 50. Hallstein breakfasted with Secy and McCloy this morning.² Perkins, Jessup and interpreter also present.

Hallstein had read text draft reply³ before mtg and commented on basis first reading, reserving Adenauer’s position after study of text.

Hallstein emphasized Adenauer’s desire delay mtg until after Ger ratification now expected middle Sept. However mtg on proper conditions and with limited agenda does not seem objectionable.

Two most important points to mention are free elections and freedom of all Ger Govt to associate with West. However reply did not emphasize these to exclusion of others, since otherwise impression created West Powers giving in on those points not specifically reiterated.

Other points of equal importance re (1) Ger participation in Peace Treaty negots (2) freedom of action before and after ratification, rejection of Potsdam and four-power control (3) freedom to continue under agreements signed with West Powers and rejection of neutralism and (4) no abandonment of Eur Federation, no natl army, and no recognition Oder-Niesse line.

In connection with free elections important to emphasize necessity for appropriate guarantees both before and after elections.

Chancellor also attaches great importance to making clear that reply does not open new era of confs which wld preclude further discussion of other issues in exchange of notes.

Hallstein repeated familiar arguments about not losing momentum and stressed recent SPD resolution favoring four-power conf unification.⁴

After some detailed discussion of particular sentences in draft reply, Secy summarized situation. He anticipated another confused reply from Sovs which wld try to broaden the basis for a conf. Since Fr and to some extent Brit opinion were urging that a mtg be held on a broader basis, we might find ourselves engaged in further argument on this question during Aug. Since we had succeeded in London in reaching agreement on present text overcoming some Fr reluctance, Secy hoped it wld not be necessary to reopen the negot on the draft. It is quite possible Fr attitude may have stiffened by Aug. Recent development Fr Socialist attitude fol Guy Mollet was one encouraging aspect. Moreover Secy doubted whether Sovs wld accept invitation to proposed mtg.

Hallstein said he appreciated difficulty of reopening negot with Fr and wld bring this point to Adenauer’s attention.

Secy said he and Eden and Schuman had agreed that if conf was held, we sld refuse to be drawn into prolnged propaganda discussion. If Sovs attempted to go outside of fixed agenda we wld walk out of mtg.

Hallstein will report to Adenauer in Frankfort tomorrow and McCloy with other commissioners will see Adenauer in Bonn Tues. In agreeing on these arrangements Secy noted three Mins in London had agreed to accept one week delay which Adenauer had requested.

After Hallstein’s departure Gen Mathewson joined in discussion of procedure for consulting Reuter. Mathewson recalled May 13 note was discussed with Reuter in the month as [he?] was chairman and tactful handling had resulted in Reuter’s approval contrasting with irritation induced on previous occasion by brusque handling of Fr chairman. Since Fr commandant is again chairman, McCloy will discuss substance of reply with Reuter at dinner this evening.⁵ Mathewson will seek immed concurrence Fr and UK commandants for formal mtg with Reuter tomorrow.⁶

Acheson

1. Repeated to London, Paris, Moscow, Bonn, and Berlin.
2. The breakfast was held at 8:30 a.m. in Berlin. Regarding Secretary Acheson’s visit to Berlin, see telegram 1375, Document 551. Regarding his trip to Vienna, see Document 805.
3. Supra.
4. For the statement by the Executive Committee of the SPD, May 27, concerning the Soviet note of May 24, see Documents on German Unity, vol. ii, p. 96.
5. According to McCloy’s diary (lot 57 F 24, box 14), he had tea with Reuter at 5 p.m. on June 29, but no record of any discussion at that time of the reply to the Soviet note has been found in Deparment of State files.
6. On July 2 Reuter was shown the text of the draft reply and on the following day he told the British Commandant that he had no comment or objection to make on it. (Telegram 14 from Berlin, July 3, 662A.00/7–352)