862.00/12–1245: Telegram
The United States Political Adviser for Germany (Murphy) to the Secretary of State
[Received December 12—2:55 p.m.]
1242. Dept’s 962, Nov 29, 5 p.m.86 There is a good deal of contradictory evidence bearing upon the desirability of starting elections in Jan. This evidence might influence our decision if we were considering the matter for the first time, but since the decision was made by General Eisenhower and announced some time ago, I feel that Military Govt should carry it through. The Dept will also recall that in its telegram No. 507 of Sept 19, it suggested the desirability of holding the elections before Jan.
Admittedly many of the Military Govt field reports indicate fairly consistent political apathy throughout the US zone (as in the rest of Germany) and these reports also reflect the view of German officials that elections should not be held before next spring or early summer. [Page 1015] It is pointed out that Jan winter conditions and preoccupation with farming problems will discourage political interest in the rural communities where the elections are to be begun. Furthermore latest available reports indicate that in half the Kreise in the US zone no parties exist at present. At their meeting of Dec 4,87 the three German Minister Presidents petitioned General Clay to postpone the elections until about April 1, and they advanced as reasons the lack of political organization and certain administrative difficulties particularly in qualifying voters on the basis of the present exclusion directive.
On the other hand an information control survey based on 500 interrogations in our zone indicated that 52% of the persons approached endorsed elections “in the early months of next year”; 7% desired them earlier and 11% later, while 23% had no opinion. 82% intended to vote; 55% were firmly convinced of how they would vote, and 19% were fairly sure.
It is my belief that a renunciation of our announced intention to hold elections in Jan would be interpreted as a lack of firmness and conviction in our Military Govt program. The absence of parties in certain areas need not be an obstacle, since citizen groups who are properly screened may nominate candidates who may prove to be better community leaders than professional politicians. To the argument that democracy will not be given a fair chance in the scheduled early elections, the retort may be made that we have waited a long time for democracy to develop in Germany and that the desired ideal conditions cannot be envisaged in the foreseeable future. We can look for neither perfect results nor a total justification of democracy in these first elections but I think we should stick by our purpose in proposing them as a useful experiment which may help break down present inertia and serve as a first step in initiating the German people in democratic procedures and an all too belated acceptance of responsibility.
It must be remembered that the Jan elections are local elections for officials in small towns and villages where party politics should not be significant. It was part of our philosophy to make these initial elections reflect the views of voters in individual candidates rather than party issues, thus developing election interest and procedure without creating zonal issues. We consider this important.
- Not printed; it requested the Political Adviser’s comments on reports that a January date was too early for the first elections in the U.S. zone in view of political apathy, lack of organization of the political parties, and German unpreparedness for democratic self-government (862.00/11–2945).↩
- For a report on this meeting, see despatch 1698, January 18, 1946, from Berlin, p. 1029.↩