863.014/5–1646: Telegram
The Acting Secretary of State to the United States Political Adviser for Austria (Erhardt)
488. Series of telegrams concerning South Tyrol, including urtels 121 Jan 25; 550 Apr 17; 584 Apr 21; 618 Apr 26; 650 May 2, and 662 May 4,3 noted with interest by Dept. In view CFM decision Sep 1945 regarding Austro-Italian frontier4 and difficulties of reaching four-power agreement, President’s letter to Renner concerning presentation of Austrian case to CFM is considered an appropriate answer to various appeals addressed to Dept by Austrian Govt. Dept assumes that action in inviting Austrian representatives to present South Tyrol case and other problems involving national reconstruction will come directly from CFM after four-power agreement is reached on this subject. It is assumed also that Austria will present claim to Kanalthal (urtel 376 Mar 15; 486 Apr 8, 529 Apr 145) at this time as any consideration of this case would have to be discussed by CFM in connection with drafting of Italian treaty.
In event consideration by CFM unfavorable to immediate Austrian claims for minor rectifications in frontier, Dept hopes that action will not be interpreted as irrevocable and that Austrian Govt will be able to raise question in future in appropriate international agencies to permit a determination by plebiscite of the wishes of local population.
Intense campaign for acquisition of South Tyrol has apparently weakened Figl’s6 personal position and endangered coalition by providing opportunities for attacks on failure of South Tyrol policy. Adoption of active policy for territorial acquisition is understandable as effort to unite four zones on nationalist aim and to take advantage of popular local issue. However, intense campaign at expense of other issues is regrettable, particularly when specific internal problems are used in AC as excuses to block four-power agreement. Consensus here holds that Austrian Govt should more properly direct activity to formulation of realistic plans for national reconstruction, particularly in the economic field, and to affirmative action within limits necessarily imposed by present situation. If Austrian Govt could produce a plan for national reconstruction, taking into account present military occupation or situation which may exist in event of acceptance [Page 342] of Brit draft proposal, US would be inclined to give strong support in AC. Numerous constructive proposals have already been made by occupying powers, but examination of record does not indicate that Austrian Govt has produced any far-reaching plan for national reconstruction which is couched in realistic terms.
You may in your discretion discuss this problem informally with Austrian officials and urge them to plan for their future in terms of internal changes in same comprehensive way in which various occupying powers now proceed in AC. Dept considers that action in this regard would facilitate four powers discussions and would hasten agreement on Austria’s future status.
Sent to Vienna as 488; repeated to Paris as 2382, Secdel 238.
- None printed except telegram 550, p. 331.↩
- At their 3rd meeting, September 14, 1945, the Council of Foreign Ministers decided that the frontier of Austria would not be changed, subject to the decision to be reached by the Council on any case which Austria might present for minor rectifications in her favor. For the record of the 3rd meeting of the Council, see Foreign Relations, 1945, vol. ii, p. 158.↩
- None printed.↩
- Leopold Figl, Austrian Chancellor.↩