319. Telegram From the Delegation at the Foreign Ministers Meetings to the Department of State 1
Secto 158. 1. Sixth session Foreign Ministers November 3 began with statement by Secretary noting Soviet Delegation failure comment on Western reunification proposals submitted at outset conference.2 He proceeded compare Western and Soviet proposals3 on German problem on basis four elements directive: reunification, free elections, national interests of German people and European security. He said that while revised Eden Plan4 fulfilled these provisions Soviet proposal on Germany was lacking in all respects since it based on continued division Germany contrary to German national interests and conducive insecurity in Europe. Secretary said Soviet claim that social gains of GDR could not be sacrificed amounts to elevation of sectional viewpoint above national freedom of German people to determine own internal and external policy. This was retrogression from Soviet position at Berlin Conference.5 Secretary reviewed provisions Brussels Treaty which operate to limit military capacity of Federal Republic and together with NATO commit it to purely defensive posture indefinitely.
He asked what Soviet Government found objectionable about this. Recalling mistaken policy of Versailles Secretary urged that four powers benefit by this lesson in history and avoid creating militant nationalism in Germany which would be inevitable result prolonged delay of reunification. He said Germans themselves wished cooperate in creating situation designed avoid further folly of aggression. Four powers should help them toward this end by true effort bring about German unity now.
2. Pinay said directive clear on substance German problem as well as method for its solution.6 He rejected Molotov’s theory that [Page 673] only a certain social system can bring about peace-loving state. Such theory contrary facts of history and would make Soviet thesis re peaceful coexistence ridiculous. He said French Government would be most responsive if Soviet Union would pursue path of German unity and get down to “when” and “how” of free elections throughout Germany.
3. Macmillan said conference to date had only one proposal before it for reunification.7 Soviet proposal for all-German Council is collection irrelevant prerequisites and procedures which would delay reunification for years. Unlike Eden Plan, Soviet proposal does not meet tests of speed, acceptability to German people and assurance of European security. An appointed all-German Council would be unrepresentative body incapable reaching representative decisions. Apparent intention that it not be proportionate to populations also objectionable. Since East German members could not be considered as representing any portion of German people, they would form tiny minority capable of blocking decision. Eden Plan provides for rapid reunification by free elections which acceptable to German people thus enabled choose own leaders. Nothing “mechanical” about free elections. Only “mechanical” elections are type in which results known in advance and turn out to be say “ninety-nine percent”. Eden Plan should be examined fully and adopted by all four Ministers as basis conference discussion on German problem.
4. Molotov then reviewed documents submitted thus far by Soviet Government pointing to fact that preamble to proposal on all-German Council quoted language of directive on reunification as evidence proposal intended fulfill instructions of Heads of Government.8 In long statement repeating many previous arguments, Molotov attempted defend total Soviet position on terms directive. He argued that Soviet proposal on Germany was only realistic and practical proposal before conference in light emergence two sovereign German states and advent Paris Agreements9 since Berlin Conference. Apparent Paris Agreements were imposed on German people since socialists, Communists and workers throughout Germany as well as majority GDR population opposed them. Molotov said single-list elections represented utmost democracy though they admittedly only suitable in those countries such as USSR and GDR where population had achieved sufficient unity of purpose. Single-list elections need not be model for all-German elections. This question [Page 674] should be decided by Germans themselves. Molotov urged that all-German Council be tested. No chance that one part of Germany could impose its will or system on other part under Soviet proposal. Decisions would be put to vote. Soviet Delegation regrets point out nothing else can move German matter forward on practical basis.
5. During speech Molotov returned to criticism of Western security proposals pointing out inter alia that they (1) had dropped Eden suggestion that demarcation line of special zone might be Federal Republic-GDR border, (2) were not clear what would happen if reunified Germany rejected all treaties and took independent course and (3) failed explain how security of states bordering Germany such as Poland would be guaranteed. Molotov said Western statements designed to clarify second and third points had not been satisfactory.
6. Secretary stated Heads of Government had agreed on close link between reunification and security in directive. Their instructions were that Germany shall be reunified through free elections. Soviet Government has not submitted any plan for reunification through free elections nor has it considered Western proposals for same. Secretary concluded by stating that conference now confronted with problem whether it was going to try in good faith to carry out directive. He said he wished to think about that before commenting further.
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 396.1–GE/11–455. Secret. Repeated to London, Paris, Bonn to pass to Berlin, and Moscow. Copies of the U.S. Delegation verbatim record of the sixth meeting of the Foreign Ministers, which took place at 3 p.m., USDel/Verb/6 Corrected, November 3, and the record of decisions, MFM/DOC/RD/6, November 3, are ibid., Conference Files: Lot 60 D 627, CF 574.↩
- For text of Dulles’ statement, circulated as MFM/DOC/31, see Foreign Ministers Meeting, pp. 105–112, or Cmd. 9633, pp. 54–59; for text of the Western reunification proposal, see Foreign Ministers Meeting, pp. 27–33, or Cmd. 9633, pp. 99–103.↩
- Presumably Dulles is referring to the November 2 Soviet proposal for the establishment of an all-German Council. For text of this proposal, see Foreign Ministers Meeting, pp. 98–99, or Cmd. 9633, pp. 107–108.↩
- The Eden Plan was circulated as part of the Western proposal on German reunification.↩
- For documentation on the Berlin Conference, January 25–February 18, 1954, see Foreign Relations, 1952–1954, vol. vii, Part 1, p. 601.↩
- For text of Pinay’s statement, circulated as MFM/DOC/33, see Foreign Ministers Meeting, pp. 112–114.↩
- For text of Macmillan’s statement, circulated as MFM/DOC/32, see Ibid., pp. 114–119, or Cmd. 9633, pp. 59–62.↩
- For text of Molotov’s statement, circulated as MFM/DOC/34, see Foreign Ministers Meeting, pp. 119–126, or Cmd. 9633, pp. 63–68.↩
- For text of the agreements signed at Paris, October 23, 1954, see Foreign Relations, 1952–1954, vol. v, Part 2, pp. 1435 ff.↩