Foreign Relations of the United States, 1951, European Security and the German Question, Volume III, Part 2

762A. 022/2–1451: Telegram

The Director of the Berlin Element of HICOG (Page) to the Office of the United States High Commissioner for Germany, at Frankfurt¹

secret   priority

Berlin, February 14, 1951—3 p. m.

1173. Re Bonn’s 609, February 7 to Frankfort² and 184, February 9 to Berlin.³ Facts re Staaken incident set forth in British letter to Soviets quoted Berlin’s 1165, February 10 to Frankfort repeated Bonn 252, Department 1031.⁴ Agreement based on recommendation tripartite US-British-Soviet Committee on Berlin boundaries dated August 7, 1945 which proposed boundary adjustments between British and US sectors and Soviet Zone. Adjustments involving Staaken were implemented in British-Soviet agreement dated August 30, 1945 for primary purpose bring Gatow Airfield under British and Staaken Airfield under Soviet control. Proposed adjustments US sector-Soviet Zone boundary included transfer to Soviet Zone control of three small areas legally part of Bezirk Zehlendorf in US sector but physically isolated in Soviet Zone. In return it was proposed that boundary in vicinity of Wannsee-Babelsberg be relocated to follow center of Teltow Canal, thus incorporating in US sector small enclave administratively part of Babelsberg in Soviet Zone. These recommendations were never implemented.

In French sector incident involving Gutshof on Frohnau-Soviet Zone boundary reported Berlin’s despatch 500, January 30.⁵ This area legally part of Soviet Zone although administered since 1945 as part of Bezirk Reinickendorf (French sector). Unlike Gatow-Staaken boundary this situation on French sector boundary not covered by written agreement. As noted in despatch mentioned French representative advised by General Vinogradov that Soviets proposed make general revision Berlin Soviet Zone boundary to conform actual legal situation. Literal implementation this policy could result cutting main road from center Berlin to Frohnau which at one point passes for 200 yards through edge Soviet Zone. Since 1945 Soviets have raised no objection to use this road by Western occupation forces, but no written agreement on subject exists.

So far as we can discover boundary US sector-Soviet Zone follows legal boundary Berlin accordance original tripartite agreements. Tripartite Kommandatura working party established last December is engaged detailed study West sector’s boundary with Soviet sector and Zone.

Commandants discussed Staaken incident and boundary question in general at private meeting February 9, British CDT reported no reply yet received to his letter of February 2 to Dengin. French CDT reported tentative agreement proposed for settlement Gutshof-Frohnau on basis: (1) Withdrawal Soviet and East Zone police and no occupation Gutshof by anyone and (2) Acknowledgment that area is in Soviet Zone. French CDT stated he did not like latter specification and was consulting his HICOM. British CDT reported Reuter has again urged action to eject Soviets from Radio Berlin building in British sector arguing that this action desirable for psychological effect on West Berlin population somewhat disturbed by boundary incidents. General Bourne recalled that action to resolve this vexatious problem has been considered from time to time in past two years, particularly during Deutschland Treffen last spring.⁶ Since Soviet soldiers stationed in building British attempt occupy might be resisted by force thus creating serious incident. Alternative suggestion building be isolated would involve use British troops to prevent access Soviet representatives or military personnel. Such action would receive great publicity here and abroad and might be long-drawn-out affair if Soviets decided stand siege. CDT’s agreed consider advisability action re Radio Berlin. They agreed if action taken it should not be publicized as “reprisal” for Soviet action re Staaken. Final decision any action would of course have to be taken on HICOM or governmental level.

Page

1. Repeated to Washington and Bonn. The source text is the copy in the Department of State files.
2. Not found in Department of State files.
3. Not printed; it reported, inter alia, that the political advisers had requested their Commandants to consider whether Soviet pressure on Berlin might continue in view of the two incidents described in telegram 1173. (Berlin Mission files, lot 58 F 62, 370.3)
4. Not printed; it transmitted the text of a letter from General Bourne to General Dengin, protesting the action of the East Sector Magistrat in including Staaken administratively in East Berlin. (762A.022/2–1051)
5. Not printed; it transmitted the texts of letters from General Carolet to General Chuikov, protesting the occupation of a farm, “Neuer Gutshof”, in the French Sector by Soviet soldiers, and from General Carolet to General Taylor, reporting the nature of the incident. (662A.62B/1–3051)
6. Regarding Deutschlandtreffen, held in Berlin on May 29, 1950, see telegram 1046; June 2, Foreign Relations, 1950, vol. iv, p. 861.