Foreign Relations of the United States, 1969–1976, Volume XL, Germany and Berlin, 1969–1972

184. Memorandum From Helmut Sonnenfeldt of the National Security Council Staff to the President’s Assistant for National Security Affairs (Kissinger)¹

Washington, February 17, 1971.

SUBJECT

• The Berlin Talks: The Issue of Federal Presence

In the SRG meeting last week² you properly highlighted the critical nature of this issue and the importance of getting from the FRG a statement of their fallback position, or that they will have a fallback position at some future point, or that there is no fallback. In light of this, I thought you might like to have some more detailed information on just what the parties are talking about with respect to Federal presence. To keep the focus narrow, this memorandum does not include any discussion of Federal representation of Berlin abroad, Berlin’s representation in the Bundestag or Bundesrat, or the so-called “hostile activities” in West Berlin such as the NPD and demilitarization. The memorandum also does not cover the basic status questions, such as the provision in the Western draft agreement and the Allied suspension of the Basic Law provisions relating to the incorporation of Land Berlin will remain suspended.

The Western position on Federal presence was presented to the Soviets in the proposed draft agreement, as Annex III; it is at Tab A.³ The last Soviet document on Federal presence was its paper of November 4, which is at Tab B.⁴ The detailed discussions in Berlin on the Western draft have not yet reached the Federal presence section, though the Soviets have made it clear that the Western concessions as recorded in the draft are inadequate.

The Bundesversammlung. There is no issue here. The Soviets have made it perfectly clear that further meetings of the Federal Assembly must be eliminated, and the Western draft states that “the Bundesversammlung will not be held in the Western sectors” (paragraph 3 at Tab A).

Bundestag and Bundesrat. Plenary sessions of the Bundestag have not been held in Berlin (at Allied request) since 1965, and the Bundesrat has not met there since 1961. The Western draft states merely that the “Bundestag and Bundesrat in plenary session, will not perform official constitutional acts in the Western sectors.” The Soviets hold firmly that there can be no sessions of either body in Berlin, whether or not they refrain from performing official acts. (Admittedly, it is difficult to understand how either body could hold a plenary session without performing official acts.)

Committees and Fraktionen. There is a split over this issue. The Soviets include these as organs of the Bundestag, which must not meet in Berlin. In an interview published in East Berlin on February 8, between Stoph and SED chairman Danelius,⁵ the GDR stated that all sessions of the Bundestag committees and party groups must be discontinued as a prerequisite for an agreed settlement.

The Western draft agreement contains no provision on committees or fraktionen. However, during the Western drafting sessions, the FRG had included the following provision:

Committees of the Bundestag and the Bundesrat and the Fraktionen of the Bundestag will meet in the Western sectors to consider draft legislation to be taken over by the appropriate authorities in the Western sectors, to review legislation which has been taken over, and to consider matters relating to obligations undertaken by the FRG regarding the Western sectors.

Before final Western agreement was reached on the draft text, the FRG representative withdrew this language, noting that the FRG did not feel it could support any language which would restrict the activities of these groups until it had been cleared with party leaders in the Bundestag. If the Three Powers felt that at some point advancing some language to the Soviets became unavoidable, he continued, then the Federal Government would at that point consult with Bundestag leaders with a view to providing a formal Federal German position.

It should be noted that the withdrawn German language would in effect permit virtually all committees and fraktionen to meet in Berlin. The Defense committee and the emergency committee would be the only ones clearly excluded. Since probably 85% of Federal legislation is in force in Berlin, the limitation which restricts committees and fraktionen meetings to those reviewing previous legislation actually amounts to hardly any restriction.

Visits of the President, Chancellor and Cabinet. There is less divergence on this point. The Western draft states that the President, Chancellor and the Cabinet will not perform official constitutional acts in West Berlin, whereas the Soviet paper of November provides that FRG officials may visit West Berlin as guests of the occupation authorities and Senat without, however, carrying on in the city any acts of supreme state authority. The President maintains an official residence in Berlin, and both he and the Chancellor travel to Berlin on US air force planes.

Political Meetings. All Federal political parties have held congresses in Berlin, as well as meetings of the Laender political leaders. The Soviet paper of November states flatly that “Federal conventions and congresses of FRG political parties or organizations are not held in West Berlin.” The Western draft contains no provision for these meetings. The lists at Tab C⁶ indicate the number of Federal and Laender party officials, as well as Cabinet members, who plan to visit Berlin in the coming month (the schedule is unusually heavy because of the Berlin elections in March).

Federal Institutions and Agencies. There are some 42,000 employees of the Federal Government and quasigovernmental offices and organizations in West Berlin. Most Ministries maintain offices in the city; the largest employers are the Federal Revenue Directorate, Printing Office, Post Office, and Social Security Administration. The Soviet paper of November includes “the functioning of offices of FRG agencies” in the listing of Federal activities which will no longer take place.

Brandt and Bahr and others on the FRG side have maintained that there can be no substantial reduction of Federal personnel in Berlin (indeed, several months ago Bahr told Berlin leaders that not a single employee will ever have to leave his job). To circumvent this, the FRG has chosen to apply cosmetics. Thus, the Western draft contains the provision that:

The Government of the FRG maintains liaison offices with the French, British and US authorities and with the Senat. These offices are subordinate to the Federal Plenipotentiary who represents the FRG to these authorities and the Senat. The point of this provision is that it will become clearer (and so more acceptable to the Soviets) that the Federal agencies in Berlin do not govern there, but rather merely represent the Federal government in Berlin, and are tucked under the Federal Plenipotentiary who in turn has a quasi-diplomatic representational role in Berlin. In fact, the office of the Federal Plenipotentiary already exists and there is already some relationship between it and the Federal agencies. Unfortunately, however, there is a great lack of clarity on the Western side over exactly what is meant by the language in the draft agreement. State has asked the Embassy for a precise description of the organization of Federal offices at present and as foreseen for the future, but so far we have not received anything.⁷

1. Source: National Archives, Nixon Presidential Materials, NSC Files, Kissinger Office Files, Box 58, Country Files, Europe, Berlin, Vol. 1. Secret. Sent for information. Kissinger initialed the memorandum indicating that he had seen it.
2. See Document 177.
3. See Document 173.
4. Attached but not printed.
5. Gerhard Danelius, SED chairman in West Berlin.
6. Attached but not printed.
7. Neither this request from the Department nor a response from the Embassy has been found.