PREVENT WORLD WAR III

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 52
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Sequence Number: 12
• Content Type: REPORT

Publis.hed by
ociety for the Prevention of World War III, in
515 MADISON AVENUE, NEW YORK 22, N. Y.
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF WORLD WAR III
A Non-Profit Educational Organization
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
MARK VAN DOREN
Honorary Chairman
REX STOUT
Vice President
DR. ALBERT SIMARD
Secretary
ISIDORE LIPSCHUTZ
Treasurer
REV. HENRY A. ATKINSON
THOMAS CRAVEN
JULIUS L. GOLDSTEIN
WILLIAM HARLAN HALE
EMIL LENGYEL
WILLIAM I. LUYTEN
ERIC MANN
CHAT PATERSON
HARRY LOUIS SELDEN
JAMES H. SHELDON
WILLIAM L. SHIRER
PIERRE VAN PAASSEN
MAJ. M. WHEELER-NICHOLSON
MRS. BELLE MAYER ZECK
ADVISORY COUNCIL
GEORGE BACKER
KONRAD BERCOVICI
REV. ROELIF H. BROOKS
STUART CLOETE
MORRIS L. COOKE
RICHARD DE ROCHEMONT
WALTER D. EDMONDS
LIONEL GELBER
MARY B. GILSON
SHELDON GLUECK
ALBERT GUERARD
BEN HECHT
FREDERICK G. HOFFHERR
JOHN R. INMAN
FRANK E. KARELSEN, JR.
CHRISTOPHER LA FARCE
HAL LEHRMAN
MAT. ERWIN LESSNER
MRS. DAVID ELLIS LIT
CLARENCE H. LOW
MRS. HAROLD V. MILLIGAN
HERBERT MOORE
LEWIS MUMFORD
ADELE NATHAN
ALLAN NEVINS
LOUIS NIZER
QUENTIN REYNOLDS
LISA SERGIO
G. E. SHIPLER
CHARD POWERS SMITH
MRS. H_IORDIS SWENSON
R. I. TtH1OMAS
FRITZ VON UNRUH
CHICAGO
COURTENAY BARBER, JR.
MRS. ROBERT BIGGERT
J. J. ZMRHAL
LOS ANGELES
F. E. BROOKMAN
MAT. JULIUS HOCHFELDER
SAN FRANCISCO
VERNON E. HENDERSHOT
ALBERT RAPPAPORT
SIDNEY ROGER
ST. LOUIS
1. LIONBERGER DAVIS
ALL OF THE ORIGINAL MATERIAL IN THIS BULLETIN MAY BE REPRINTED OR QUOTED
WITHOUT FURTHER PERMISSION UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED. CREDIT LINE TO
THE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF WORLD WAR III IS DESIRED BUT NOT
NECESSARY. AS PART OF ITS EDUCATIONAL SERVICE, AND BECAUSE OF THE
PARTICULAR QUALIFICATIONS OF THE INDIVIDUAL, PREVENT WORLD WAR III PRINTS
FROM TIME TO TIME THE PERSONAL OBSERVATIONS OF MEMBERS OF THE BOARD
OF DIRECTORS AND ADVISORY COUNCIL ON TOPICS OF CURRENT INTEREST.
DANGER AND OPPORTUNITY
EDITORIALS:
TILE SOVIET GAMBIT
NAZIS IN WONDERLAND"
6
MALMEDY KILLER PAROLED
7
TILE STRATEGY OF STALLING
8
ON U. S. FOREIGN POLICY
hl Senator Hrrberl H. Hunrphrei
12
THE SOVIET MENACE IN TILE MIDDLE EAST
bJ In ing Miller
TI IE GREAT DANGER
hJ Prier Miika
EGYPT'S NAZI PROPAGANDIST
by Mrrlkarh Ralvnirt
NOW THEY MARCH AGAIN'
NOTES ON A GERMAN JOURNEY
hJ Ilan, /. AIortyen/ha/r
21
A I RITISI I OPINION
22
TI IE UNITED NATIONS AND THE MIDDLE EAST CRISIS
2-i
T H E FREE DEMOCRATIC PARTY'S FUTURE __.-.
28
GERMAN REALPOLITIK IN THE MIDDLE EAST,
33
NATIONALISM IN YOUTI I ORGANIZATIONS.. ....-_
36
INSIDE GERMANY
38
RECO:l1,1Ili.A'DED READING:
SS: ALIBI OF A NATION BY GERALD REITLItNGER
Reviewer/ hl Terence Prit/ie -_..._.._...-....-. -- ---
40
WORLD CRISIS GERMAN OPPORTUNITIES _.-
41
ITEMS OF INTEREST
DULLES AND THE SUEZ RIDDLE
AN EYE t'ITNESS REPORT-- NASSER'S RAIDERS
bT 1--rank Gervad
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
Published by the SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF WORLD WAR 111, Inc.
515 Madison Avenue. New York 22, N. Y.
Winter-Spring, 1957
IDag!Pvt ,cad' 61*,0A u1c.~;t,
EASTERN EUROPE AND THE MIDDLE EAST
The spirit of freedom beckons the satellite nations
of Eastern Europe. The death-like silence of the
past 11 years has been smashed. The historic up-
heavals in Poland and Hungary show clearly that
the peoples of these lands were never reconciled to
the ruthless overlordship of the Kremlin. By their
dauntless opposition they have unmasked the Soviet
despotism and have given new hope to others who
have shared their tragic plight.
However, candor compels us to state that we have
watched the intrepid struggle of the Poles and the
Hungarians with mixed emotion. We have been
troubled by the thought that the sacrifices of these
peoples may be in vain. Yet, we cannot help but
feel that developments in Eastern Europe hold great
promise, if only the U. S. and her Allies discard
stereotype approaches to the problem of European
freedom..
Current Allied propaganda seems to be character-
ized by an, almost conceited belief that the only
barrier standing between the Soviet satellites and
their ' desire to seek friendship with the West are
the Russian tanks. It has been made to appear as
though a gigantic propaganda campaign, developed
by our best advertising and public relations experts,
is sufficient to "win over" the peoples of Eastern
Europe and to relieve them of the intolerable Rus-
sian occupation. No matter how well conceived this,
propaganda may be in terms of techniques, it is at
best a palliative and at worst may turn out to be a
source of disillusionment which could strangle the
cause of freedom.
The peoples of Eastern Europe need less of
"moral support" and more of a realistic long-term
policy by the Allied powers and in particular the
USA. The struggle for freedom in Eastern Europe
is not an abstract concept. Those who give their
blood for this mighty cause must have a perspective,
for in this fight the burning question inevitably
arises: After freedom-what? It is to this question
that our policy makers must devote their energies.
They must be able to answer in terms that make
sense to the peoples of Eastern Europe.
Not so long ago these brave nations were lan-
guishing under the jackboot heel of German mili-
tarism and Nazism. Their lands were laid waste,
their farms and factories wrecked, and millions of
their kin incinerated in the hells of Auschwitz,
Buchenwald, etc. History tells us how the "inferior"
nations of the East were enslaved by the Prussian
warlords. On other occasions The Russian Czars,
operating under the guise of Pan-Slavism, tried to
absorb them in their Empire. There were other times
when the power of the German eagle and the Rus-
sian bear more or less balanced each other. In such
instances the Kaiser and the Czar would join hands
and carve up neighboring peoples in the name of
"mutual interests." The Hitler-Stalin marriage de
convenance was but the continuation of this latter
policy,
? What shall it be this time? Will the bright vista
of freedom from Russian hegemony turn out to he
the cloak for a new master, the Germans? Or will
this "freedom" be "guaranteed" by the combined
power and mutual understanding of the Russian
bear and the German eagle. Whichever the case, it
is obvious that the peoples of Eastern Europe would
find themselves in chains again.
These tragic alternatives are by no means inevita-
ble if the West, in the words of Walter Lippmann,
discard the "old stale shibboleths about Germany
and the satellite countries." The Society has fre-
quently stated that the rebuilding of Germany's war
potential and military might "strengthens the Soviet
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
grip over her Eastern satellites whose peoples dread
the resurgence of the German power which dcv-
as-ated their lands." ("German Realities," No. 42,
Summer Issue 1953 of PREVENT WORLD WAR
III, inserted in the Congressional Record by Senator
Wayne Morse, 8-3-53.) It is precisely this contradic-
tion-the desire to see freedom in Eastern Europe
and rehabilitating the German powerhouse, which
threatens to negate the sacrifices of the Hungarians,
Poles, and the other peoples oppressed by the Soviet
tyranny. The net effect of this dualism in US policy
is to obstruct the growth of friendship and under-
standing between ourselves and the satellite nations.
"To believe that the peoples of Europe will move
closer to the US when they behold the rhythmic
marching of a new Wehrmacht, is to expect a
miracle." ("The Failure of Diplomacy," No. 45,
Winter Issue 1954-1955 of PREVENT WORLD
WAR III.)
Those who are under Russian subjugation today
do not want a German master tomorrow. That is
why freedom in Eastern Europe is in reality part
and parcel of the general problem of European
security.
Unfortunately, US policy under Secretary Dulles,
fails to see this truism. In October 1956 the State
Department addressed a note to the Bonn Govern-
ment which said in part that "a sound system of
European security.... can be achieved only if Ger-
many is reunited." The facts of life do not support
this contention. The unity of Germany is but one
aspect of the problem of European security. We did
not fight World War 11 for the unification of Ger-
many but rather for the security and peace of Europe
and our own country. That security and peace, above
all, must first be assured. Secretary Dulles' position
is precisely one of the shibboleths about Germany.
There is another shibboleth, namely, that a power-
ful Germany is the most reliable bulwark against
Russian totalitarianism. History proves the reverse.
When both, Germany and Russia, were relatively
equal in strength, mutual agreements were reached
always at the expense of the small nations of Europe.
The peoples of Eastern Europe earnestly want
the friendship of the West, but let no one he mis-
taken that this desire will per se bear fruit. "If the
United States appears in Europe as the sponsor of
Western Germany, it will never achieve a new
relationship with Poland or Hungary or Czechoslo-
vakia...." (Prof. Geoffrey Barraclough, professor
of international affairs at the Royal Institute of In-
ternational Affairs; The Nation,12-1-56.)
Walter Lippmann had this in mind when he
wrote: "A European policy is urgently needed to
provide a framework of guarantees within which
the occupied European countries can be made sale
against their neighbors and safe for their neighbors.
It is impossible to imagine the end of the military
occupation, which remains from the World War,
except reithit a European sytsem of security" (New
York Herald Tribune, 12-11-56). Toward the estab-
lishment of such a system of European security the
Society proposed in the No. 46 issue of PREVENT
WORLD WAR III the following steps to be taken
with regard to Germany:
(a) That both East and West Germany be perma-
nently demilitarized under United Nations control.
(b) That the territorial integrity of East and West
Germany becomes the responsibility of the United
Nations.
(c) That the United Nations shall establish armed
force contingents to be located in the states border-
ing Germany for purposes of implementing that
responsibility.
(d) That both East and West Germany shall pay
in. cash to the United Nations a sum in an amount
roughly equivalent to the cost of any occupation
forces, or any other forces, which would have to be
sited on German territory for the protection of
peace and the maintenance of the balance of power
in Europe. Such funds shall be employed to sup-
port the armed forces established by the United
Nations for the protection of Germany's territorial
integrity.
It is our considered judgment that an agreement
on Germany along these lines would give concrete
assurances to the peoples in Eastern Europe that the
winning of their freedom would not wind up in the
blind alley of a new tyranny. Indeed, it would rally
them still further at this time to oppose the Soviet
occupation,
The freedom, security and peace of all Europe
was a fundamental aim in the fight against the Ger-
man aggressors during World War IL We are con-
vinced that the magnificent resistance of the Hun-
garians and the other peoples of Eastern Europe
show that this goal can be reached by dynamic
policies.
Through the years the Society has devoted much
of its attention to European problems and their
impact on peace and security. However, we have
not for one moment discounted the other burning
questions which confront the West. One of these is
the Middle East which only a few months ago threat-
ened to convulse the world in a new holocaust.
Because of the gravity of the situation there, the
Society made known its views to the United Nations,
to the Government and to the press (see page 24,
"The Middle East Crisis and the United Nations").
The Society's purpose in making this statement
were designed primarily to stimulate action through
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-013158000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-013158000400480012-6
the United Nations for a peaceful solution. In our
opinion, the genesis of the Arab-Israeli conflict in-
volves many complicated factors. Efforts to achieve
a settlement will be seriously impeded if either side
prefers to indulge in recriminations and accusations
against the other. The Society's main concern has
been to get both sides to sit down at the conference
table and work out an agreement based on the civ-
ilized principle of "to live and let live." We mean
this in the very literal sense of the word because
millions of innocent lives are at stake.
The Middle East is an area where great things
have happened in the past. It has also been a region
where backwardness, disease and poverty have
plagued the inhabitants. Friendship and cooperation
between the Arab states and Israel would cause "the
deserts to bloom again" and bring a measure of pros-
perity to these populations who are entitled to their
God-given right to enjoy life, free from fear and
from want.
This is why we have supported the United Na-
tions' efforts toward bringing about a peaceful solu-
tion. This objective can be reached more speedily
by the renunciation of propaganda which enflames
the emotions, maintains prejudices, and creates blind
hatred. The atmosphere for negotiations becomes
clouded when responsible leaders speak in a war-
like vein. For example, the Foreign Minister of
Iraq, Burhanuddin Bashayan, recently declared in a
broadcast: "Israel as a state was built on aggression
and cannot live but on aggression. Therefore, its
removal from the Middle East is essential.... The
time is ripe for regaining Palestine in a manner
outlined in Iraq's note (of Nov. 13 to UN mem-
bers). The Iraqi government insisted on the uproot-
ing.and removal of Israel from the Middle East and
forcing the usurpers to return to where they came
from" (Reuters, 12-5-56).
Such outbursts cannot contribute toward a SOJ1LI-
tion of the present crisis. A leadership indulging
in this type of abuse does not lend dignity or respect
to a country which presumably seeks the good will
and approbation of the civilized community. Indeed,
it displays a deplorable irresponsibility in the con-
duct of foreign relations that can only lead to further
aggravation of the existing dangers.
Those leaders who purvey poisonous propaganda
help to create a climate of blind hatred which may
prove to be uncontrollable among peoples who are
kept ignorant as to the real state of affairs. AS a
result a change from a policy of hostility to one of
peace and mutual accommodation becomes virtually
impossible, even when the long term interests of the
country concerned require it. When a people are?
infected by artificially whipped up hatred, those
who are responsible for this state of mind becomee
prisoners of it. They are no longer able to act in a
statesmenlike manner which is imperative if the
country's welfare is to be safeguarded.
World public opinion will never reconcile itself
to perpetual hostility between the Arabs and the
Israelis. Those who persist in encouraging tension
and hatred in the Middle East are working against
the spirit and letter of the United Nations Charter.
That is why it is of the greatest urgency that re-
sponsible Government leaders the world over, as
well as leaders of the major religious faiths, join
together in the demand that Israel and her Arab
neighbors settle their mutual problems by negotia-
tions. We must all bear in mind the wise words of
the noted Norwegian staesman, Halyard M. Lange,
"Real world peace is inconceivable without peace in
the Middle East. Peace in the Middle East is equally
inconceivable without peace between Israel and her
Arab neighbors."
"GETTING HIS OAR IN"
(Graham "n The Arkansas Gazette}
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6 ,
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
THE SOVIET GAMBIT
In November 19-10 Berlin was the scene of intense
negotiations between tl;e Russians and the Germans. The
Hitler-Stalin Pact of the previous year had set the stage
for these conversations whose main participants were
former Foreign Minister Molotov, Hitler and his Foreign
Minister von Ribbentrop. Both, Molotov and von Rib-
bentrop regarded the Hitler-Stalin Pact as "good busi-
ness" for initiating future cooperation on the basis of
agreed spheres of influence.
In this connection von Ribbentrop spoke about Russia's
opportunities in the "new order of things." He referred
to the advantages Russia could gain "in the direction of
the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea." Ribbentrop as-
sured Stalin's representative that other "aspirations" of
Russia in this part of the world were also recognized
by Germany. The delimitation of spheres of influence
formed an important part of the conversations between
Molotov and Hitler. The Fuehrer told Molotov that
Russia's adherence to the Rome- Berl in-Tokyo Axis Treaty
would help to define the "special interests" of the powers
concerned. Needless to say, Molotov liked the idea but
he insisted that in such a pact the Russians be treated
as an equal partner. Furthermore, he expressed the need
for a more precise delineration of these spheres of in-
fluence.
Following his return to Moscow, Molotov outlined to
the German Ambassador Russia's "aspirations" in more
concrete terms. He said that Russia was prepared to accept
the Four Power Pact provided, among other things, that
it stipulated "that the area south of Baturn and Baku in
the general direction of the Persian Gulf is recognized as
the center of the aspirations of the Soviet Union."
It turned out, however, that the negotiations on this
Pact became stalled in the growing climate of mutual
suspicions between Hitler and Stalin. By the spring of
1941, the strains between the erstwhile partners increased
and in June Hitler gave his signal for the invasion of
Russia.
Recent events in the area of the Middle East show that
the abortive partnership between Germany and Russia
may come to life. For 200 years the Russians have dreamed
of dominating the Middle East. Sixteen years ago they
suffered great disappointment when their German part-
ners turned against them. Today, the' situation has changed
with bewildering speed. The Russians are in the Middle
East with both feet, so to speak and their influence is felt
from Cairo to Damascus.
Russia's avenue for penetrating the Middle East was
Egypt, where the Nasser Government, surrounded by
Nazi advisors and well versed in dictatorial rule, wel-
comed the Soviets with open arms. In September 1955
Egypt announced to the world that it had completed
an arms deal with the Soviet satellite state, Czechoslo-
vakia. Nasser later revealed that the deal was, in reality,
with Soviet Russia---Egyptian cotton for Soviet arms and
tanks. Recent estimates place the figure of this deal in
the neighborhood of $250 million.
While the Nasser Government hailed this agreement
as a stepping stone toward Egyptian independence, it
turned out that the Egyptian economy was virtually mort-
gaged to the Kremlin. What this has meant in terms of
the welfare of the Egyptian people is seen by the fact that
her national gold reserves have dropped by one-half
billion dollars, while the average per capita income is
about $5.60 per month by Nasser's own evaluation.
A report in the New York Times (8-26-56) stated
that by reason of her barter arrangements with the Soviet
bloc, Egypt has now placed her economy "in a critical
state of dislocation." Nevertheles, Nasser continued to
tell his people and the world that the deal with the
Soviets was a triumph over "imperialism."
While the Egyptian people required economic help,
Nasser gave them Soviet guns and spurred them on with
anti-Western slogans. This was all to the liking of Soviet
agents in Egypt. As far as the Russians were concerned
their chance to convert the Middle East into a satrapy
of the Communist empire was the main thing regardless
of how this would be achieved.
With regard to Soviet policy Senator George H. Bender
noted: "The Russians have everything to gain and noth-
ing to lose by dealing with the Arab states. They would
like to make Egypt a Russian Mediterranean base. Wars
between nations are the Communists' meat. Whatever
happens, no matter who wins or loses, communism is
always waiting to claim the spoils" (Congressional Rec-
ord, 6-4-56). The Senator warned that a war between
Egypt and Israel would be the greatest calamity in that
area of the world and urged that the United States exert
its influence to prevent the realization of Russian intrgue.
Communist penetration in the Middle East involving
arms investments supplemented by so-called cultural mis-
sions and the exchange of political leaders has made
alarming headway. Communist China has become Egypt's
largest customer. Egypt has concluded trade deals with
most of the members of the Communist bloc. Russian
economic aid pledged to Egypt includes the building of a
nuclear laboratory in Cairo. The Soviet bloc has sent trade
missions to various Arab countries, including Syria, Leba-
non, and Yemen. Soviet technicians, politicians, trade, art,
sport and religious leaders are being exchanged with the
Arab countries.
Syria together with Egypt seem to be the major points
of Russian concentration. The Syrians, following the
example of Egypt, consummated a S80 million barter
deal with the Russians for tanks, planes and guns. On
March 6, 1956, the first issue of a Communist French-
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
language paper appeared in Damascus. Shortly thereafter
a Soviet "cultural" mission arrived in Damascus to present
the Stalin Peace Award to the Syrian religious leader
Sheikh Mohammed Al-Ashmar.
On July 25, 1956, the Syrian Prime Minister was
quoted to the effect that Russian technicians were ex-
pected to arrive in Syria to advise on elevators and other
installations in connection with the export of cereals.
One of Europe's best-informed correspondents, Sefton
Delmer, wrote recently in the London Daily Express:
"In my many visits since the war to Syria and to its Arab
neighbors in Lebanon, Iraq, and Jordan, I have been
forcibly impressed by the progress made by the Soviets
in Syria since the war as compared with the other Middle
Eastern states." Mr. Delmer described Syria "as the most
important secret satellite of Moscow in the Middle East"
besides "the advent of Nasser in Egypt." Even the Greek
Orthodox Church of Syria, according to Mr. Delmer, is
receiving "subsidies from the Church in Moscow."
The intense preoccupation of the Russians with the
Middle East is indicated by the fact that the Middle East
Department of the Soviet Foreign Office is headed by the
former Ambassador to the Nasser Government, Daniel
Solod, a specialist in political warfare. The mutual attrac-
tion between the Soviet dictatorship and the Pan-Arabic
leaders was recently described in an editorial by the well-
known French newspaper Figaro : "Birds of a feather f lock
together-the old proverb is still true-Marxist totalitari-
anism is attracted, as by a magnet, by the apparently oppo-
site totalitarianism. Nobody in the world can deny that
the Egyptian dictator has imperialistic ambitions. He has
proclamed them himself in his Philosophy of Revolution,
the Bible of Pan-Arabism.
"Hitler invoked the `living space' necessary, so he said,
to the Great Reich. He saw it, in part, in the most pros-
perous regions of Soviet Russia. But it does not seem that
the projects openly exposed in Mein Kampf disturbed the
master of all the Russias.
"Nasser has in his turn intrigued the successors of
Stalin, even though he does not hesitate to claim for his
own the Moslems living under Soviet law. They think,
in fact, that for the moment this is only a side issue, and
that the essential thing is to dissociate the Western alli-
ance as much as possible by favoring Pan-Arab and Pan-
Islam imperialism. If the poker playing of Farouk's suc-
cessor succeeds, a wound which will perhaps prove fatal
will have been dealt to the free world.... Two enormous
continents, Asia and Africa, will have become the proteges
of Moscow."
The Soviet penetration in the Middle East has had a
devastating effect on the economic and political position
of our main Western allies, Britain and France. The
Russians are striving, according to Joseph and Stuart
Alsop (12-5-56) to do "everything in their power to
eliminate British interests in the Middle East, thus reduc-
ing Britain to a third class power and destroying the
Western alliance." They warn that Bulganin and Khrush-
chev are banking on America's vacillating attitudes to
undermine the strength of our allies-and if this is
achieved, then the United States will find herself isolated
and bereft of strong allies.
It has been said in defense of present policy that we
must maintain the friendship of the Arab peoples as if
such friendship is in contradiction to our historic bonds
with France and England. Nothing could be further from
the truth. We hold that peace in the Middle East, friend-
ship between the Arabs and the United States, and the
strengthening of our ties with Britain and France are
essential to each other. One of the major factors militating
against the realization of these objectives is the rapidly
growing influence of the Soviets in the Middle East,
thanks to those Arab leaders who hope to employ this
influence as a leverage in their blackmailing tactics against
the West, while not realizing that they themselves may
become vicitms of their own game. Only joint Allied
policies which are designed to defend the integrity of
all of the nations in the Middle East and to uphold the
basic principles of international law in conformity with
the Charter of the. United Nations will protect the na-
tional interests of our country.
JUST A GOOD NATURED HUGI
(Courtesy N. Y. Daily Mirror)
Approved For Release 2006/12/01: CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
NAZIS IN WONDERLAND
On October 1, 1956, a black limousine roared out of
the Spandau prison gate, careened left and sped away
down a side street. Newsmen who endeavored to cover
the event, were surrounded by scores of menacing armed
guards. German police threw a road block of trucks
across the street to prevent reporters from pursuing.
The elaborate measures to assure the privacy and com-
fort of Grand Admiral Karl Doenitz were executed with
clockwork precision. The entire military-like operation
must have impressed the Admiral who had been chosen
by Hitler as his successor to lead Nazi Germany. Perhaps
Doenitz recalled another day when his movements and
those of his Nazi associates were closely guarded by the
armed retainers of the Third Reich. Whatever went
through his mind as he relaxed in his limousine, this
much was reality: he was a free man after having served
ten years for war crimes and crimes against the peace.
Doenitz continued to avoid the searching questions of
reporters after he had reached his destination in Dussel-
dorf. "My task," he said, "is to remain silent and to feel
my way back to life." In other times Docnitz did not
show a reluctance to speak out forcefully and with con-
viction. Thus, when he directed U-boat warfare resulting
in the sinking of 15 million tons of World War II ship-
ping, costing the lives of thousands of Allied personnel,
he sharply commanded his officers to "kill and keep
killing. Remember, no survivors. Humanity is weakness.
At Dusseldorf lie preferred silence.
Yet, in other times, Docnitz spoke up with authority
and confidence. On the day when he was chosen by Hitler
as the new Fuchrer of the Thousand Year Reich, lie issued
a declaration to the Nazi Wehrmacht: "German armed
forces, my comrades. The Fuehrer is dead. Faithful to his
great idea to save the people of Europe from Bolshevism,
he had devoted his life and has died the death of a hero.
With him one of the greatest heroes of German history
has gone. With proud respect and sorrow we lower the
flags for him."
It was precisely at this time when the Nazi regime
was on the verge of collapse, that Docnitz together with
General Keitel, hanged as a war criminal, initialed a top
secret memorandum entitled "The Overcoming of the
Catastrophe." In this document Doenitz calls for a post-
war tie-up with Bolshevist Russia. Such a collaboration,
the Doenitz memorandum stated, would have the follow-
ing perspectives: "A colossal bloc of world-doininaling
greatness, economic power, energy and numbers of popu-
lation would be created from ocean to ocean. Not only
would the danger of future tears for generations be elimi-
nated from Europe but also from the double continent
of Eurasia. The two great peoples, the Russians and the
Germans, have extraordinary possibilities for development
without collision of their interests. The chief emphasis in
this bloc will shift more a,!d more to the ran-ally superior,
intellectually more active, and more energetic (people),
that means to Europe. Thus would be formed an alliance
between the young Socialist forces against the old rotten
entrenched powers of the West."
Thus, Herr Doenitz who publicly posed as the new
savior against Communism, secretly advocated an alliance
with Soviet Russia at the expense of the West!
Doenitz' crimes were thoroughly catalogued at the
Nuremberg War Crimes Trials. He was described by the
U. S. Prosecutor, the late justice Robert Jackson, as
"Hitler's legatee of defeat. He promoted the success of
the Nazi aggressions by instructing his pack of submarine
killers to conduct warfare at sea with the illegal ferocity
of the jungle."
Though Doenitz prefers the privacy of silence for the
time being, his supporters- -and there are many-hail
him as the legitimate chief of the German nation.*
The Bonn Government has not dealt with this question
but it has recognized Doenitz' claim for a pension. This
pension will be granted to the Admiral, according to the
Ministry of Finance, on the basis of his "rank and length
of service." If the Ministry of Finance regards service to
Hitler as legitimate grounds for receiving an annual pen-
sion that may run as high as $6,000, will the day come
when his claim to speak for all of Germany will also be
recognized;
One week following Doenitz' release, the German Dc-
fcnse Ministry announced that over 13,000 former officers
in Hitler's Waffen SS had applied for posts in the new
*Indeed, the Grand Admiral ree,nr to haze some enthusiastic ad-
herents in the C. S. A. For instance. 11. Keith Thompson and George
Sylre.uer Viereck, whose pro-Naze actiritier could fill many pages,
sent a wire "to the legitimate Pre,ident of Germany, Grand Admiral
Karl Doenitz." They called his release "the day of the triumph of
your steeled will over the plans of your vengeful persecutors ..."
Ir''bile they hailed Doenitz. they denounced his trial as having been
"brought about b) the criminal co-guilt of the USA and world
tewry . . .
The men who are running the anti-Adenauer
campaign are sure of several things. The Rus-
sians will allow him to make no progress what-
ever toward reunification. The slowdown in
economic expansion will continue and will be-
come more noticeable as young men are drafted
into the armed forces. German youth, already
averse to military service and indulging in out-
breaks of mild hooliganism, will tend ever more
to took for political change.
The next year will be remarkable for the fact
that there is a campaign to unseat Dr. Adenauer
but no clear plan to put anything in his place.
There is an unhappy suspicion that there is not
a new generation on the march but a new gang
on the move.
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6 7
German army. The month before, the Defense Ministry
announced that all members of this criminal organization
would be welcomed back to the fold after "screening."
Several months prior to this declaration, the Defense
Ministry stated that former Field Marshal Erich von
Manstein had been given access to NATO military secrets.
Von Manstein has been found guilty and imprisoned for
war crimes committed in Italy during World War II.
Now he was awarded an office in the German Defense
Ministry and was asked by the Parliamentary Defense
Committee of the Bundestag to serve as an advisor on
the future organization of German armed forces.
The release of Doenitz, the reactivation of the Waffen
SS, and the appointment of von Manstein mark a signifi-
cant stage in the setting up of the "new" Wehrmacht.
These events are not disconnected. They are part of the
pattern of things to come as the German General Staff
develops plans for the future. It is therefore surprising
that the German Defense Ministry refused to recommend
for use in army libraries the book "The Third Reich and
the Jews"? This volume contains official German docu-
The American Legion today blasted Amer-
ican officials who had anything to do with
releasing Nazi Col. Joachim Pelper, trigger-
man of the 1944 Malmedy massacres.
National Commander W. C. Daniel singled
out Spencer Phenix, Chocorua, N .H., the
American member of the board. In an open
letter to families of the victims, Mr. Daniel
said:
"I pledge to you-in what must be a
moment of heartsick disgust and despair-
that the American Legion will not rest until
Spencer Phenix and all other government
officials responsible for the release of the
Malmedy murderers are removed from office
and replaced by Americans who believe that
the lives of your loved ones and of every
American fighting man cannot be traded for
a few years in jail."
Peiper, with his boss, Col. Gen. Sepp
Dietrich, first was sentenced to die for
machine-gunning 160 disarmed Americans at
Malmedy, Belgium, during the Battle of the
Bulge. Dietrich's parole last year aroused a
storm of protest.
Peiper's release over the holidays ap-
parently caught veterans' groups by sur-
prise.
In his letter, Mr. Daniel called Peiper's
release "the most sordid travesty on justice
in the history of international law."
One of the few Malmedy survivors,
former It. Virgil P. Lary, Columbus, Ohio,
last year warned that Peiper's release would
"dishonor" the nation's war dead.
"The screams of my men . . . still ring
in my ears," said Mr. Lary.
(Jim G. Lucas, N. Y. World-Telegram
& Sun, 12-29-56)
ments on Nazi war crimes and, apparently, this is regarded
as bad for the morale of the "new" German army. On
the other hand, German book shops are doing profitable
business on the sale of such books as W. V. Assenbach's
book, "Adolf Hitler: His Fight Against the Inferior
Being."
In the face of these sinister developments the Chancel-
lories of the Western Democracies remained silent. Reply-
ing to the Society's protest over the appointment of von
Manstein, the State Department declared, "These matters
lie within the competence of the German Federal Re-
public, which has been a sovereign governme'zt since May
5, 1955."
But what about the responsibility which our State De-
partment owes to the hundreds of thousands of GIs who
gave their lives for the cause of freedom and human dig-
nity? And what of the generations of youth to come? Will
they, too, be called upon to make the supreme sacrifice
because we allow "these matters" to lie "within the com-
petence" of the West German Government?
BUT HOW DID WE GET Ht,tE, r OSTERe-,
(Reprinted from St. Louis Post-Dispatch)
Approved For Release 2006/12101: CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
,7/R SLaiQqq
The maneuverings and motives sur-
rounding West Germany's decision to
renege on her NATO commitments shed
new light on her value as an ally to
Western powers,
Financial Veto
In the beginning of 1956 the Bonn
Government declared that it would refuse
to continue financial support for U. S.
and Allied forces in Germany after May
1956. This decision was made known
through the German press before word
of it was sent to the Allied authorities.
Through this unusual diplomacy the Bonn
Government was able to trigger a cam-
paign of slander and incitation against
her NATO partners. The Western Allies
including the U. S. were accused of
looting the German Treasury and employ-
ing underhanded tactics at the expense
of the well-being of the German people.
This press barrage served as a prepara-
tory assault for the official announcement
that the Germans would refuse to pay
for the support of the Allied forces.
The Bonn Government based its posi-
tion on the Contractual Agreement which
made no provision for German financial
support of the Allied forces subsequent
to May 1956. Though the Germans stuck
to the letter of this agreement, it was
patently obvious that they had violated
its spirit.
The Contractual Agreement assumed
that the Germans would cease financial
support when they had sufficient armed
forces of their own to take over the
responsibilities which the Allies had
shouldered for defending German soil.
However, the German army was still in
the blueprint stages in early 1950 and
therefore the Allies were being asked to
continue to protect West Germany with-
out any costs to the Germans themselves.
The Society called this crucial issue to
the attention of the Congress of the
United States. We declared that the Ger-
man decision threatened to undermine the
NATO defense system. We charged that
Germany's refusal to make a contribution
and the dishonest and insolent attacks
levied against the Western Allies was
"not indicative of a government profess-
ing friendship with the West." We also
raised the question as to whether thiswas
it maneuver on West Germany's part "to
force U. S. and Allied forces out of Ger-
many with the view towards making a
deal with the Russians on that basis."
Unfortunately, the Western Allies beat
it retreat before the Bonn Government's
brazen challenge. They agreed to a 55
her cent slash in the funds which were
originally requested from the Bonn Gov-
ernment to support the Allied forces. As
far as we know, the Allied authorities
continue to accept the Bonn Govern-
ment's professions of good faith. We,
on the other hand, interpreted this epi-
sode as but a prelude to further efforts
by West Germany to go back on her
pledges.
Watering Down Conscription
Our suspicions were justified for by
September 1956 Chancellor Adcnauer an-
nounced that the period of military serv-
ice for German conscripts would be fixed
at one year instead of eighteen months.
This decision, too, was made public in
an unusual way. The Information Oflicc
of the German Federal Government is-
sued a statement that Chancellor Ade-
nauer had scrapped the eighteen months
conscription plan when he had learned
from American newspapers that Ameri-
can forces in Europe would be reduced
under the so-called Radford Plan. This
alibi was so fantastic that even the Social
Democrats who opposed the idea of con-
scription described it as the "most gro-
tesque explanation any federal govern-
ment ever made to the public" (Chris(ian
Science Monitor, 9-28-56).
Diplomatic protocol was ignored by
llerr Adenauer since the decision was
made public through the German press
before the Allies were officialy notified
of it. Needless to say, the Western Allies
were taken aback by Adenauer's blunt-
ness. The decision was viewed by them
as a gross violation of his pledges to
supply necessary armed forces, as pro-
vided in the agreements between West
Germany and NATO. The NATO Coun-
cil stated flatly that "the NATO mili-
tary authorities have made clear the diffi-
culty, if not the impossibility, of accom-
plishing this objective with a service
period of only twelve months." In this
connection it is noteworthy that all of
the members of NATO with the excep-
tion of tiny Luxembourg, have a much
longer conscription service than that pro-
posed by the Germai for themselves.
The "New" Arnry
However, this is only one aspect of
the issue. It is now freely admitted by
Allied military authorities that Bonn's
decision will make inevitable the develop-
ment of a professional army, the kind
which always was the bulwark of Ger-
man militarism. It is also of significance
that together with the abolishment of
the eighteen months plan for conscription
Chancellor Adenauer approved the ad-
mission of former members of Hitler's
Waffen SS into the new German army.
It is a matter of record that the Waffen
SS was one of Hitler's most notorious
organizations. Its crimes helped to turn
Europe into a vast graveyard. For its bar-
barous deeds it was condemned and out-
lawed by the International Military Tri-
bunal at Nuremberg. Yet, it is precisely
these professional cutthroats who will "be
the backbone" of the new German army
(Christian Science Monitor, 9-28-56).
As for the so-called Radford Plan,
Adenauer admitted that he assumed its
existence on the basis of reports in U. S.
papers. The U. S. Government has offi-
cially denied that there ever was such a
plan, but Adenauer, in desperation to
justify his unilateral action, endeavored
to give the impression that the unauthen-
ticated press reports were tantamount to
the official policy of the U. S. Govern-
ment. In the face of Allied reaction to
his alibi, Adenauer was compelled to
speak with more candor. Thus, he told
his party leaders that his government
was determined to make it clear to the
NATO Council that West Germany had
"'overcommitted herself with regard to
the number of troops" (New York
Times, 10-17-56). Np longer was Ade-
nauer able to hide behind the alleged
Radford Plan. Now he had to admit that
Germany had its own ideas about con-
tributing to NATO. Of course, candor
is not one of the characteristics of West
German diplomacy, and that is why
many of our policy makers seem con-
fused over Germany's attitude. When
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
German rearmament policy is guided by
a number of considerations which are-
masked by the plethora of platitudes
which are found in Adenauer's speeches
before Western audiences. Among these
factors we cite the following:
(1) Profitability: Today Germany is
enjoying an unprecedented economic
boom. In no small degree this is due to
the fact that the Germans are able to
apply virtually all of their resources and
energies to peacetime production while a
substantial portion of the resources of the
Western Allies is tied up in armament
production. The New York Times (1-
18-56) reported that the Ruhr barons
find it more advantageous "for West
Germany to continue to expand its civilian
economy and use its surpluses for the pur-
chases of armaments abroad." The views
of this group are shared by top govern-
ment officials and members of the Ger-
man Parliament who believe that West
Germany should "pay the barest mini-
mum for armament compatible with its
commitmerits to NATO." The Times
notes that this position is based on the
doctrine that armament "must not inter-
fere with the normal development of the
civilian economy and if it does, it is not
worth having."
Some months ago the Minister of
Finance Fritz Schaeffer delivered a speech
in Bavaria in which he said that Germany
was not anxious to build an armaments
industry. He contended that it would be
more profitable to purchase arms from
abroad while "the Ruhr remains the
workshop of peaceful industries" (Lon-
don Financial Times, 8-27-56). In a
moment of frankness Herr Schaeffer ad-
mitted that the Western Allies might not
take to the idea that they shall devote
money and plant space "for arms pro-
duction while we (the Germans) utilize
ours for export goods" (Time Magazine,
9-10-56).
While recognizing this difficulty Herr.
Schaeffer and the leaders of the German
economy insist that the rearmament pol-
icy must be guided by the single standard
of profit and loss. At times they will try
to rationalize this position by the rather
comical argument that Germany's most
effective contribution to NATO would be
to strengthen her peacetime economy and
to widen her export markets.
(2) An up-to-date Wehrmacht: After
World War I German rearmament pro-
ceeded at a slow pace because of the
Versailles Treaty. Yet, Germany was able
to turn the prohibitive clauses in the
Versailles Treaty to her own advantage.
While other countries were still employ-
ing relatively obsolete weapons and shap-
ing their strategy accordingly, the Ger-
WHO IS FOOLING WHOM?
Defense Minister Theodor Blank said West
Germany would have 96,000 men under arms
by the end of this year. He denied there was
any lag in the armament program....
"At the risk of being called a liar later, I can
assure you that we shall carry out our NATO
obligations this year to the fullest extent,"
Herr Blank told a group of visiting United States
editors and commentators.
The West German armament program calls
for the creation of a twelve-division, 500,000-
man armed force as the Bonn Government's
contribution to the Western defense forces.
(U. P., 3-27-56)
A West German spokesman today said the
goal of a 96,000-man army by the end of this
year will have to be abandoned....
As a result, the new Defense Minister, Franz
Josef Strauss, will have to inform the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization council in Paris
later this fall that "certain delays" have arisen.
Mr. Strauss was named to succeed Theodor
Blank yesterday in a move which suggests
eventual abandonment of the goal of a 500,-
000-man "citizen-soldier" army. The former
Minister for Atomic Affairs has favored a
300,000-man professional force armed with
atomic weapons.... (Gaston Coblentz, N. Y. Her. Trib.)
man General Staff was able to proceed
with deliberation and without overcom-
mitting itself until "all of the returns
were in." In short, Germany began to
rearm in a big way only when the latest
weapons of war were available. Many of
these weapons had been created by other
countries but Germany was in the posi-
tion to exploit their possibilities to the
fullest without going through the enor-
mous expense of experimenting over a
long period of time. This approach to
rearmament was of decisive importance
in producing the most modern war ma-
chine under Hitler.
After the defeat of Germany in World
War II the decks were clean again. As
in the past Germany had the opportunity
to start afresh in developing the most
modern weapons of war. This is the way
the Germans have reconstructed im-
portant branches of their economy. For
example, some months ago Franz Josef
Strauss, former Federal Minister for
Atomic Questions, declared that West
Germany was faced with the task of
"catching up with the progress. made by
other nations during the last ten or
fifteen years" in the field of atomic
energy.
.. In reply to those in West Germany
who voiced concern over West Ger-
many's backwardness in atomic energy,
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
Herr Strauss stated: "We shall build on
the experience of other nations and turn
to research and training in the field of
the peaceful utilization of atomic energy.
We shall not, however, construct large-
scale atomic power stations, which by the
time they are completed in five or six
years will become unprofitable and out-
moded because of technical progress. It
is not a matter of doing something fast
but of doing what is necessary in the
right way" (The Bulletin, 6-7-56). A
similar line of thought has been ex-
pressed by the leaders of the German
aircraft industry. The steel industry, too,
has boasted that the destruction of plants
has enabled the industry to reconstruct
on the most modern basis available.
There is no doubt that this is the
general position taken by German strate-
gists in mapping Germany's plans for
the future, Herr Strauss who has now
been appointed Defense Minister, has
made this crystal clear. According to the
New York Times (9-23-56) Strauss
warned "against the hasty building up
of an army that might become obso-
lescent before it was fully formed," He
was reported to have said that the army
blueprinted five years ago for Germany
"might produce only a second rate army
today." Consequently, he urged that the
Bonn Government "'go slow now" so as
to make sure that the new German army
would be the most modern war machine
possible. Time Magazine (9-10-56) in
discussing Germany's reluctance to rearm
as originally pledged, also referred to
this factor: "Weapons are in a transi-
tional state and Germans do not want to
commit themselves to large scale produc-
tion until the weapons of the future
have taken clear shape."
The Chairman of the German Bunde-
stag Defense Committee, Richard Jaeicr,
criticized what lie alleged was the Allied
attempt to load West Germany with out-
dated arms. "We do not want to pay
for a false investment with the bones
of German panzer (tank) troops," he
said (New York Herald Tribune, 10-
3-56). To repeat, the Germans prefer
that the Western Allies devote huge re-
sources to the development of new
weapons so that Germany can ultimately
reap the rewards.
(3) C'Jwejri0ns from i/ e U. S. A_-
The Germans are Mill hoping that they
can extract additional bounties from the
U. S. Treasury as their price for rearming.
Chancellor Adenaucr's Minister for Eco-
nornic Affairs, Ludwig Erhard, assured
the Bonn Parliament that defense ex-
penditures would not exceed $2 billion
annually. When he was asked what he
would do if costs would be greater than
this figure, Herr Erhard retorted, "then
let the Americans pay!" (New York
Times, 2-27-55). Finance Minister Schacf-
fer has also expressed the same view.
A New York Times dispatch (2-5-56)
reported a statement by Schaeffer to the
effect that "West Germany could not
meet its commitments to NATO unless
the U. S. were to meet the deficit-" From
time to time Chancellor Adenauer has
also expressed this view, namely, that the
major cost for German rearmament must
be underwritten by the American tax-
payers. The New York Times (1-25-56)
ported that the views of the German
political leaders were shared by all im-
portant groups in West Germany.
Besides the notion that Uncle Sam must
foot the bill for German rearmament, the
Germans are beginning to sound out our
Government on a program that would,
in effect, subsidize Germany's export
drive. Indeed, this is the very heart of
the so-called "Point 4;/z Program" spon-
sored by the Krupp interests. While pub-
licizing this plan as a move to help under-
developed countries, Krupp hopes to be
able to secure a dominating position in
these markets. The Point 41/2 Program
is still in the preliminary stages of dis-
cussion and it remains to be seen whether
the United States will grease the way for
the Krupp venture via the U. S. Treasury.
Unquestionably the Germans will show
more sympathy to "rearmament" when
and if they can milk Uncle Sam for ad-
ditional billions, (Sec No. 18, p. 19,)
(i) lI"ar Guilt and ll 'ar Crrntrrtalr:
The Society has frequently pointed out
that Germany's top leaders including
Chancellor Adenaucr have resented the
implications of the Nuremberg War
Crimes Trials. They are bitter about the
punishment meted out to those who deny
that they were war criminals in spite of
all of the evidence to the contrary, In
the past German leaders and militarists
have railed against the United States for
keeping in prison those who were "hon-
orable" soldiers and politicians. The Al-
lies have been warned and threatened that
:o long as one of these "heroes" remains
in prison the German people will not
show enthusiasm for military cooperation.
At the rate that the Allies are freeing
these criminals, one would expect that
this factor would lose its importance. But
one should not underestimate the other
side of this question of war criminality,
i,c,, the role of the Allies in World
War 11.
There are powerful voices in Germany
today who say that the Allies must admit
that they were in wrong when they op-
posed Hitler who, after all, was only
trying to save Europe from Bolshevism.
If the past is any guide to the future,
then we can anticipate that in due time
"public opinion" in Germany will de-
mand that the Allies must admit their
"guilt" before the Germans will whole-
heartedly cooperate with the Allied
powers,
(5) A Gerrrran-Soviet Deal: Of deci-
sive importance in West Germany's cal-
culations with regard to rearmament are
her relations with the Soviet Union.
There are many important leaders and
groups who insist that West Germany
go slow on rearmament for the sake of
cementing her relations with the Russians.
This position is held by two of Ger-
many's most important parties, the Social
Democrats and the Free Democratic Party.
It is a view that is shared widely in
West Germany, This is confirmed by the
Christian Science Monitor's well-known
correspondent in Germany, J. Emlyn Wil-
liams, who reported, "Most West Ger-
mans see remilitarization tied too closely
to the Western powers as a hindrance (to
German unification) because of Soviet
objections" (9-21-56).
To the German military no less than
to the big industrialists of the Ruhr
whose mouths water when they think
of the markets in the East, and to the
growing number of politicians, the idea
of a Russo-German deal is a worthwhile
goal. If they could prove to the Russians
that their military cooperation with the
West is of a pro forma character, then
the way Could be paved for an under-
standing. This vision of an embrace with
the Russians unquestionably enters into
the disarmament picture.
(6) German Acsels: From Chancellor
Adenauer down, the Germans have been
working overtime to regain the assets
of 1. G. Farben which were vested by
the U. S. Government. Adenauer ]-,as
publicly declared that the return of there
assets was of the greatest importance in
strengthening friendship between the
U. S. and West Germany. On March 8,
1954, he said, "Any just solution of this
question will strengthen the confidence
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
of the German people in the principles
of the free world, will make fast the
friendship between the American and
German peoples and will relieve the Ger-
man Government of a great worry." The
Suddeutsche Zeitung (3-6-55) was more
to the point about the "great worry"
when it asked why German property
should not be returned since the Germans
and the United States have undertaken
"military pledges of alliance to one an-
other ..."
A more blunt comment on the rela-
tionship between the return of the assets
and Germany's military cooperation with
NATO was made by Der Tag (3-5-55)
when it stated, "The situation is more
serious here in Germany than people in
America realize. If Mr. Abs (Hitler's
paymaster and leading German banker)
does not win a satisfactory solution (for
the return of the Farben interests) on
his trip to Washington, General Gruen-
ther loses a battle." To our knowledge,
no paper in the United States reported
this interesting comment. The voice of
Farben, just as under Hitler, has special
influence on Bonn policy and Herr Ade-
nauer wil hardly move quickly to fulfill
his pledges to NATO so long as Farben
is not paid off.
"Anti-Militarism"
In assessing West Germany's attitude
toward rearming at the present time one
cannot ignore the factors mentioned
above. Unfortunately, most commentators
have evaluated the general slowdown in
German rearmament as an indication of
the growing anti-militaristic spirit in
Germany. We do not deny the fact that
there are many people in West Germany,
particularly among the youth, who have
no enthusiasm for a new German Wchr-
macht. We do not even doubt their sin-
cerity and we are even willing to concede
for argument's sake that they are in the
majority. However, a similar situation oc-
curred after World War I. Then as now,
most Germans were caught in the wave
of disillusionment and embittcr!_-ent to-
ward the futility of war and militarism.
This general feeling was symbolized by
the great novel "All Quiet on the West-
ern Front" by Erich Maria Remarque.
Yet, there was a radical change of feeling
at the beginning of the 1930s and those
who shouted "nie wieder" in the 1920s
began to echo the cries of the Nazis for
revenge and for regaining tie glories of
the Fatherland.
As for today, we say that all encour-
agement should be given to these anti-
militaristic sentiments but-let us not con-
fuse the immediate mood with the long-
range factors and plans that are operat-
ing on the German scene. Even Krupp
has publicly declared his disgust with
war, but who would dare to say that
Krupp has turned pacifist? The confusion
on the so-called anti-militaristic spirit in
Germany became even more pronounced
when Adenauer fired Herr Blank and
appointed Franz-Josef Strauss to the de-
fense post. The New York Post writer,
Theodore Kaghan, who is thoroughly fa-
miliar with the German problem, hailed
the Strauss appointment as "a concession
to the rising resentment toward rearma-
ment throughout the country ..." (New
York Post (10-18-56). If it were only
true !
The New Defense Minister
Who is Herr Strauss? According to
published records Strauss is a Bavarian
who, in his youth, distributed Nazi
propaganda in Munich, the birthplace of
1Iitlerism (Time Magazine, 10-29-56),
and during World War .II served in
Hitler's Wehrmacht as an artillery lieu-
tenant. According to the Christian Science
Monitor Herr Strauss "inclines much
more toward the old military tradition"
(10-16-56). In our lexicon this can only
mean that he its an admirer of "the good
old days" when the German General Staff
reigned supreme.
Thus, Time Magazine reports that Strauss
is determined to reestablish "a military
planning group, tantamount to a German
Geenral Staff." Strauss has insisted that
the German army must be equipped "with
the most modern weapons available in-
cluding atomic arms ..." (New York
Times, 10-18-56). Parenthetically, it
should be noted that when Strauss visited
the United States in the spring of 1956,
he gave public: assurances that Germany
would strictly adhere to her pledges that
the Germans would not employ the atom
in her military setup (Washington Post,
5-17-56). Time Magazine (.l. c.) re-
ports that Strauss demands. "a national
German army of professional soldiers."
Moreover, he insists that the new German
army must "be as independent as pos-
sible, because he felt that the NATO
strategy was not in Germany's best in-
;crests."
In. the face of these facts it is difficult
to agree with the interpretation that
Strauss' appointment represents a victcry
for anti-militarism. It is true that Strauss'
army will not be large quantitatively.
However, if it is organized along the
lines envisaged by him, equipped with
atomic weapons, its quality will make up
for the shortage of numbers. The profes-
sional character of this army is indicated
by the fact that it will be dominated by
career soldiers, one out of every three
being an officer or a Lion-commissioned
officer.
The Atom
Strauss' insistence on putting ato_ s
bombs in the hands of his professional
army has been fully endorsed by Ade-
nauer. The story goes that, when Ade-
nauer visited Belgium in September 1956
he asked the Western statesmen to support
his request that Germany be equipped
with atomic bombs. Adenauer's position
"startled Belgium's Paul Henri Spaak"
(Time Magazine, 10-8-56).
Certainly these plans of Adenauer and
Strauss can hardly be regarded as further-
ing the cause of anti-militarism. Yet, the
German bigwigs are pleased that there
is an anti-militaristic feeling in Germany
for this sentiment serves a twofold pur-
pose: (1) to delay rearmanent on the
basis of the factores outlined above, (2)
to carefully plan the new German army
so that it will be even mightier than that
which fought for Hitler.
Therefore, while we are pleased to see
that there is a wave of anti-militarism in
Germany and believe it should be sup-
ported, we must beware of the fickleness
of German sentiment as we must beware
of the Krupps, the Kesselrings and the
Doenitzes.
Some of our readers have interpreted
our strictures against West Germany's
failure to abide by her armament com-
mitments as an indication that the Society
favors German rearmament. Nothing can
be further from the truth. As in the past
we remain unalterably opposed to the
remililarization of West Germany and
East Germany since we believe that the
rearming of the former enemy will turn
out , to be a long step toward World
War III. By exposing Germany's failures
in meeting her NATO commitments we
have tried to re-emphasize the fact that
Germany's pledges to the Allies are not
worth the paper they are written on, be
it in military or other matters.
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
on u SO
. ,7DA2* &0a&s
by
SENATOR HUBERT H. HUMPHREY
'is from a!t address by Senator Humphrey al the
Overseas Preis Club in New York Cily)
We are almost at the end of the most momentous year
since World War IT. It has been a paradoxical year-one
in which both the United States and the Soviet Union have
suffered severe diplomatic defeats. The United States saw the
North Atlantic alliance shaken to its roots when war broke
out in the Middle East. And the Soviet Union lost its grip
on the captive countries of Eastern Europe.
It is too soon to attempt to strike a balance as to who lost
more. It is not too soon, however--indeed, we have waited
too long already-to begin an urgent reappraisal, however
agonizing it may be, of the world situation and of our own
posture toward it.
Quite obviously, fundamental changes of enormous con-
sequence have taken place. No man can foresee where they
will end. The old, static condition has ended; conditions are
more fluid than at any time since 19-15. The cold war has
changed from one of fixed positions to one of maneuver.
This increases somewhat the dangers; but it also greatly in-
creases the opportunities for statesmanship that is both wise
and bold, imaginative and judicious.
Our first task is to assess the nature and implications of
these changes that are taking place.
The first thing we must realize is that in today's world
there can be no effective foreign policy without risks. There
is no risk-proof insurance policy that will guarantee freedom
and security in today's world.
One of the basic facts of our time is the spirit of national-
ism which dominates the thinking of most of the underde-
veloped areas of the world. We are ill familiar with the
manifestations of this force-the anti-Westernism throughout
much of Asia and Africa and the irresponsible fashion in
which the Soviet Union has tried to take advantage of this
feeling and use it for its own ends. What we are now seeing
is the re-emergence of this same spirit of nationalism in the
Soviet countries of Eastern Europe.
Nationalism is challenging international communism on its
home grounds, and the end is not yet. This point, up, as
clearly as anything possibly could, the truth of what many
Americans have been saying for years-- namely, that inter-
national communism is fundamentally inconsistent with na-
tionalism and that it presents the most serious threat of all to
the hard-won independence of the new states of Asia and
Africa.. . .
One reason we need the U. N. is to provide a constructive
focus for this tremendous force of nationalism which other-
wise would be running wild. The U. N. does not control
nationalism, but it does provide a framework in whuh na-
tionalism can find its proper and responsible place in a world
society that is becoming increasingly interdependent. The
U. N. can likewise protect and encourage nationalism.
The problems we now face in Eastern Europe and the
Middle East have little in common, but it can be said, I
think, that the roots of the problems in both instances
are nationalist in origin. The challenge, both before the
U. N. and before our own government, is how we deal
with these problems in a responsible manner calculated to
promote the principles of the United Nations Charter, to ad-
vance the national interests of the United States, and to bring
some greater measure of peace and freedom to the people
of the areas concerned.. . .
The ferment in Eastern Europe obviously presents oppor-
tunities; but it also places a great obligation on us to act in
a sober, responsible manner.
We should he prepared to discuss sympathetically economic
aid with the independent governments of Eastern Europe, as,
for example, Poland. . . .
Much can be done through other policies if we but have
the wit to think of them. And we had better think of some
pretty fast, because the manifestations of nationalism in East-
ern Europe increase the urgency of finding some sort of se-
curity system that Europe can live with. In some respects, the
ohs ious weaknesses of communism in the captive countries
may well give the Soviets pause. But in other respects, this
situation could trigger World War Ili-either as a Soviet
tactic to re-establish control or as a consequence of some as
yet more violent explosion in one of the satellites.... -
We should continue, of course, to use every avenue avail-
able to put increasing pressure on the Soviets through the
United Nations in regard to the Hungarian situation. By
their arrogant defiance of the UN, they are increasingly iso-
lating themselves from the rest of humanity.
The UN actions in regard to Hungary have not been as
vigorous as I would have liked and the situation has dragged
on longer than I would have liked, but by proceeding one
step at a time we have been able to resolve some of the
doubts that troubled many of the Asian-African states at the
beginning.
It is my personal view, however, that the UN should go
further in regard to Hungary. In commenting upon the UN
action in regard to the Middle East, Vice President Nixon
recently said that it upheld the rule of law--'the same law
for the powerful and the strong as for the weak and the
defenseless." What the UN must now do in regard to I iun-
gary is to apply the same law to the scoundrels and aggressors
as to the decent and honorable. .. .
Certainly the UN cannot content itself with condemna-
tory resolutions, no matter how strongly worded. We should
not only take steps to insure against the return of the spurious
Hungarian representatives who walked out of the UN last
week; we should also give consideration to economic and
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
diplomatic sanctions against the Kadar regime in Hungary
and against the Soviet Union itself.
As of now, the Soviet Union and her puppet regime in
Budapest have refused to let U. N. observers come into
Hungary. We must continue to press hard to demand that
these observers be admitted.
Even without observers, the world has learned several
things from these recent horrors in Hungary.
First, these uprisings show that there still exists in satellite
lands the same love of freedom which is the natural heritage
of man everywhere.
Second, we have learned how totally unrealistic it is to as-
sume that the people of the satellite countries will automat-
ically support Moscow. That is a very important lesson.
. Third, we have learned that you. cannot easily crunch the
spirit of liberty. It keeps glowing in spite of years of totali-
tarian repression and in spite of foreign armies.
Fourth, we have learned that even the youth brought up
during such periods of repression still desire liberty and are
willing to fight for it. . . .
We have also learned that food is tremendously important
as a weapon-both in a cold and in a hot war, and this has
become something of a hot war.
Our policy with regard to food assistance has not been
clear. It is disgraceful that we should receive dispatches about
food shortages, even in Austria, when we have adequate sup-
plies, including supplies of milk, that we could easily have
sent. We should dramatize the airlift which we're using to
bring in refugees, by sending-every plane back on the return
trip loaded to capacity with powdered milk and other food
supplies, so that our response could be immediately seen and
our aid would be dramatic, .and inspiring to those who are
fighting for freedom.
We should also extend the use of American food to any
country that takes refugees and needs such aid, besides
Austria. . .
Revelation of the Soviet oppression in Hungary has had
the most damaging effect on the Communist party of anything
since the Stalin-Hitler pact of 1939. It has increased the
chances of the breakdown of the Soviet empire and has con-
tributed to the unrest of students and intellectuals in Russia
itself. Now is the time when America should speak not only
in terms of good-will, but in terms of definite actions--ac-
tions which may involve risks, but as I said before, there is
no risk-proof insurance policy covering such things as freedom
and security.
Turning now to the Middle East, we find an area where
the problems are so many and so complex that one hardly
knows where to start. It is now truly a power vacuum. Al-
though Soviet influence has greatly increased, American pres-
tige is also at a new high. As the Soviet threat makes solutions
to the area's problems more urgent, so does the new American
position, coupled with the new solidarity which has developed
in the UN, offer hope of finding solutions.
The UN has an especially important role to play. It is
dangerous for either the United States or the Soviet Union to
try to be the dominant power in the Middle East; this is an
area ready-made for the kind of, international ministrations
that the UN is peculiarly equipped to undertake.
As Germany is the key in Europe, so 'I think the Arab-
Israeli conflict is the key in the Middle East. It is idle to
expect peace ever to come to that unhappy area until some
settlement of this conflict is reached.
It has been amply demonstrated that the UN will not
tolerate aggression in the Middle East. It is also, I think be-
coming increasingly clear to the states of that area that it is
not in their own interests to rely on the Soviet Union. What
we must now do is to make it still more clear to the Arabs
and Israelis alike that it is in their own interests to reach a
settlement, that they hurt themselves more than anyone else
by stubbornly insisting that the world has not moved since
1947. In the last analysis, this dispute can be settled only by
the parties concerned, and we cannot expect them to do that
until they realize that they will be better off with it settled
than with it unsettled.
The United States and also the United Nations must be
firm and just with both sides. As we acted to halt the invasion
of Egypt, so we should now take steps to halt persecutions
of Jews in Egypt. We can certainly not stand idly by in the
face of increasing reports of anti-Semitism as an official policy
of the Nasser government.
In the best of circumstances, it will take at least a genera-
tion for the hatreds of the Middle East to entirely abate. The
more each side retaliates against the other, the longer it will
take.
It is unrealistic to expect an Arab-Israeli settlement to
spring fullblown from any single set of negotiations. A settle-
ment in the Middle East must be pursued one step at a time.
The first step is obviously to bring about a complete with-
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
drawal of foreign forces from the area, in prompt compliance
with U. N. resolutions.
The second step is a settlement of the Suez Canal problem
over and above the physical work of clearance. Here the six
principles unanimously agreed to by the UN Security Council
offer a good starting point for reaching an agreement on the
Canal's operation.
With these immediate issues out of the way and with a
groundwork of quiet, careful diplomatic preparation, we can
approach negotiations for a general settlement. There arc
other things, however, that we can also be doing in the mean-
time. What the Middle East desperately needs is economic
development-not simply for its own sake but as a construc-
tive endeavor to occupy the minds and energies of the people
and their leaders. We have furnished a considerable amount
of economic and technical assistance to the area; yet, with a
few exceptions, it has not been particularly effective. We have
tried very hard, and have failed, to get agreements on regional
projects, such as the Jordan River plan.
The time may now be more propitious for such undertak-
ings, and we should vigorously renew our efforts, not only to
get the Jordan River and similar projects underway but also
to get some action on the refugee problem.
It might be useful, in this connection, to consider estab-
lishing, under United Nations auspices, a Middle East De-
velopment Authority. Most of the economic, as well as the
other, problems of the area are international in their scope.
Most of them also require outside assistance, either in the
form of capital, of technical aid, or of good ollires. Why not,
then, have an international agency to deal with them? The
kind of Middle East Development Authority that I have in
mind would have, on its hoard of directors, representatives
of all the states of the area as well as representatives of the
states furnishing capital and technical assistance. Ample pro-
vision could be made to protect national sovereignties.
In any event, it appears obvious that we are going to have
to extend more aid to the Middle East-and do it more
effectively.
Perhaps the most unfortunate aspect of the whole Suez
affair is that innocent bystanders, both in Europe and in the
Middle East, are getting hurt. All of Western Europe is
suffering from oil shortages along with Britain and France,
though none of the other countries in Western Europe can
be charged with any responsibility for their present troubles.
And in the Middle East, the oil-producing states are suffering
from lack of markets, though two of the states-- Iraq and
Iran-had nothing to do with the events which brought this
situation about. . . .
To sum up:
In the Middle East we must insist that the Canal be opened
and cleared. We must insist upon the use of British and
French and any other available equipment in helping achieve
a purpose that is vital to all of us.
We must keep U. N. forces in the Middle East large
enough to cope with any danger in the area, and as long as
is necessary, until a permanent settlement has been worked
out.
That settlement must be one which opens the Suez Canal
and guarantees that it will remain open, free and unfettered,
for the safe conduct of the shipping of all the world, includ-
ing Israeli ships. The question of national ownership is sec-
ondary--but the cllectiveness and enforcibility of these guar-
antees must be absolute.
In the end, an Arab-Israeli settlement must be brought
about in Palestine. While the Arabs refuse to recognize the
existence of Israel such a settlement is impossible. We must
use every device available to American diplomacy, operating
through the United Nations and otherwise, to overcome this
intransigence, to make it clear that we expect to see a settle-
ment reached, and that we insist upon an ending of the
interminable border raids from either direction. Meanwhile
we must move forward with it bold regional plan for eco-
nomic aid, such as I have already outlined.
Political factors must not be allowed to prevent settlement
of the refugee problem. Wherever these refugees came from
--and there are Jewish refugees from Arab countries as well
as Arab refugees from Palestine--they are all of them people,
and our first concern must he to get these human beings
settled and re-integrated as part of the permanent economy of
an area in the world that is easily able to support them, given
some sensible economic plan and reasonable assistance.
Now to conclude, the year 1957, which is almost upon us,
is likely to be even more crucial than 1956. We have got to
be both steadfast in principle and flexible in tactics. Today I
have had time only to scratch the surface of some of the
problems we face. I have raised more questions than I have
answered.
I think we can find the answers, but it will take more
imagination and courage, fewer platitudes and less blinking
at facts, than we have shown heretofore.
People who have experienced the rise and
fall of Hitler and the growth of the Muscovite
Empire, know that in President Nasser's Cairo,
Soviet and Nazi technicians are once more
cooperating with all the intimacy inspired by
their dead leaders' 1939 pact. Hence few men
and women of the Old World can grasp the
Administration's masochistic solicitude for
Egypt's ruler. Nor can they understand the
heartlessness with which Washington has been
trying to use oil-hungry Europe's dire need as
a means of diplomatic pressure, and showing
not the slightest concern for NATO members
who have been hurt at least as hard as the
so-called "aggressors" in London and Paris.
Mr. Dulles, or his successor, will somehow have
to restore an Allied unity that, cordial words
notwithstanding, U. S. deeds have denied. If
the Secretary of State has succeeded in tem-
porarily buying the friendship of Messrs. Nasser,
Nehru, Sokarno and Tito-rulers of nations that
lack the rudiments of democracy-his job now
is to regain friends who are far more essential
to the U. S. and whom he has insulted, humili-
ated and harmed economically.
(Barron's, 12-3-56)
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01: CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
jhui 5avvet 9Mizac,? in Ike, WidalGe ~~d
by
IRVINGG MILER
We have reached a dangerous turning point in the Middle
East, and a sweeping reevaluation of United States policy in
that area has become essential. The future of the Middle
East cannot be left to leisurely diplomatic maneuver in and
out of the United Nations. It is now a matter of extreme
urgency what that future is to be, because the survival of the
free world hinges upon it. What is required at present is an
objective reappraisal of the current economic and political
forces at work in the Arab world and a determined effort to
deal with them courageously.
Although some perennial optimists in the State Department
try to gloss over the fact, it is absolutely correct to say that
Gamal Abdel Nasser's seizure of the Suez Canal on July 26
marked a crucial turning point, not only in relations between
East and West, but also among the partners of the Western
Alliance. Perhaps, as Britain's Foreign Secretary Selwyn Lloyd.
put it with diplomatic tact, the rift between the U. S. and its
British and French allies has as yet. "developed no irreparable
damage."
The tragic fact, however, remains that while the Western
alliance is fraying apart, Soviet Russia is becoming the domi-
nant power in Egypt, Syria, Jordon, and other parts of the
Arab world. Lenin, Stalin, and their uneasy successors in the
Kremlin were never able to achieve this on their own, through
revolutionary intrigue, cold war strategy, or the smiling face
of "peaceful coexistence." The Egyptian dictator has accom-
plished it for them through his policy aimed at the destruction
of Israel and his seizure of the Canal.
At the most critical juncture in the development of the
Middle East in modern times, Washington has found itself
with no policy at all, or rather a "policy" based on wishful
thinking about and complete ignorance of Soviet intentions
in the Middle East. The Washington experts were so used to
viewing world events from their own end of the spectrum
that they completely failed to grasp the fact that in Nasser's
wake Soviet penetration of the Middle East was increasing
by leaps and bounds.
Washington hoped as usual to muddle through by ignor-
ing the storm signals and refusing to see the Soviet menace.
The State Department still naively believed that economic
and technical assistance, increasingly resented by xenophobic
Arab governments, accompanied by pious sermons about the
virtues of democracy, would win corrupt and reactionary Arab
politicians to our side and dispel the lure of demagogic
Communism for disgruntled Arab intellectuals in search of
a place in the sun.
While the U. S. was offering technical aid and Point Four
loans, the Kremlin oligarchs, working through Nasser and
his imitators in Syria and Jordan, tightened their strangle-
hold on the Middle East by lavish supplies of heavy arms.
While we were offering them bread, the Soviet Union was
presenting them with a sword and inflaming them with
dreams of a Pan-Arab empire.
The present situation in the Middle East cannot be realis-
tically appraised without some knowledge of Russia's past
and present aims in the Middle East. Russian policy-makers,
Tsarist or Communist, have long been convinced that the
road to world domination runs through the Middle East into
the heart of Asia. Once the Middle East and the rest of
Southern Asia had been brought under Russian control, they
reasoned, Europe would surely follow; Historical parallels
are sometimes misleading, but there is a strikingly similarity
between present-day Soviet policy and the aims that shaped
Tsarist policy in the Middle East during the 19th and early
" If I dropped
my fig leaves-I
could reach for
my gun-if only I
wanted to drop
my fig leaves."
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
20th centuries.
In 1900, Tsarist General Kuropatkin described Russia's
long-range plans in the Middle East as follows:
"When we gain control over the Bosporus (Turkey) and
the entrance to the Mediterranean, we shall be able to tackle
the Egyptian question with energy and snake the Suez Canal
our thoroughfare. When we have won this entry into the
Indian Ocean, we can constantly threaten India. Russian com-
petition on the world market will intimidate the highly de-
veloped countries of Europe and America and we shall
extend our tentacles towards the Atlantic.-
Kuropatkin's ambitions were eclfaed by the Tsarist politi-
cian, Skobelev, who declared: "The stronger Russia is in the
Middle East, the weaker England becomes in Asia and the
more conciliatory she will be in Europe.-
Contemporary Soviet interests match those of the Tsars.
Forty years after Kuropatkin's blueprint for world conquest,
Stalin and Molotov, in secret negotiations with Hitler in
November 1940, made it clear that Soviet "territorial aspira-
tions center in the direction of the Indian Ocean and the
Persian Gulf." Moscow's current policy in the Middle East
presents an amalgam of "new" revolutionary slogans and
tactics combined with century-old aims.
At the beginning of this century, Russian ambitions in the
Middle East were held in check by the rivalry of Germany,
Austro-Hungary, France, Italy, and Britain. However, at the
conclusion of the second World War, Britain remained vir-
tually alone as guardian of Western strategic and economic
interests in the area and the sole bulwark of military power
against Soviet incroachment. One of the basic assumptions of
U. S. foreign policy--insofar as we had a cicarcut foreign
policy-was the preservation of British power in the Middle
East.
We have now, through our cooperation on the Suez Canal
question at the United Nations with Moscow and its Euro-
pean and Arab satellites, inflicted possibly irreparable dam-
age on Britain's position, not only in the Middle East but
in the world at large. With Britain no longer of military and
political significance in the Middle East, and the United States
maintaining, at least for the present, a policy of benevolent
neutrality, the region has become a vacuum, irresistibly at-
tractive to Soviet power, the influence of which is already felt.
Partisans of current Washington policies contend that the
U. S. refusal to support Britain, France and Israel will disarm
Communism's ideological weapons and weaken Soviet influ-
ence among the hungry and disease-ridden Arab masses. They
ignore the fact that it was U. S. indecision and failure to take
seriously Nasser's plans to wipe out Israel and the necessity
of preserving the international character of the Suez water-
way that brought about the rift in the Western alliance, and
prompted Britain, France, and Israel to undertake military
action against Egypt.
Until the crisis in the Middle East is resolved, one thing
remains abundantly clear: the East-West conflict continues,
the cold war is renewed, and the threat of Soviet domination
of the free world is still a burning issue. This conflict cannot
be ended by the temporary palliative of a UN police force,
but only through the maintenance of the political unity and
military preparedness of the Western alliance and by unstint-
ing support-military, economic, and diplomatic-for the
State of Israel.
Moscow is fully aware-even if the State Department is
unconvinced-that today Israel is the main bastion of the
free world in the Middle East and the sole barrier to Soviet
domination of Syria, Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, and probably
of oil-rich Saudi Arabia. It is just because of this that the
Soviet Union continues its vicious and unbridled attacks
against Israel's right to exist.
BUNDLES FOR GERMANY?
I read with some dismay of the efforts of the
Germans, with the apparent sympathy of the
United States Administration, to recover some,
if not all, of the German property seized in the
United States.
By the Paris Act of 1946, the Allies undertook
not to return the German property they seized.
By the Bonn Convention the validity of the
seizure was recognized by the West German
Federal Republic, which undertook to compen-
sate its nationals accordingly.
It is hard to understand why the United States
should apparently be willing by a unilateral act
to disregard such treaty obligations.
Moreover, what will be the effect on our Euro-
pean Allies? .. .
The Germans occupied these countries and
subjected them to economic pillage and, as you
reported in an earlier issue, the claims of
Holland for the restitution of securities looted
during the occupation are as yet denied by the
Germans....
(Roger W. Sewill, Director-General, Aims of Industry.
The London Economist, 9-15-56)
West Germans are rounding out their most
prosperous year since the war. .. .
The return of the Saarland on Jan. 1 will
open a rich new market for German products.
This border area has been controlled by the
French since World War It. With its coal and
steel production, the Saar will further entrench
Germany's position as the leading economic
force of West Europe.
The Middle East crisis may actually help
Germany by opening markets long dominated
by Britain and France. And the West Germans
are clearly better off than most other West
-European nations in the current oil shortage
resulting from the blocking of the Suez Canal....
(AP, 12-22-56)
NEVER AGAIN]
Alfried Krupp today reiterated that he will
never produce arms again.
The former munitions producer said through a
spokesman that the firm would "not compete"
for any orders connected with German rearma-
LAP, 3-23-56)
The United States awarded Krupp its first
military jet-plane license. (Look, 10-2-56)
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6 17
JJtQ 9A!t
by
PETER MISKA
Once again we have more than two dozen garrisons, as
well as tanks, armored infantry, navy and airforce schools
and two officers academies. The great danger is not that re-
cruits are being rigidly trained again. It lies elsewhere: At
one of the new airforce training schools an instructor officer
delivered a so-called lecture on civics before the future young
pilots. The topic of the talk: "The Lost Homeland between
Vistula and Memel." An officer of the Bundeswehr with the
rank of battalion commander recently remarked to' a civilian
visitor: "Your apprehensions are all good and well but for
me only one fact exists: the Russians have killed my father-
I will never forget that."
Approximately 50 percent of the Bundeswehr officer corps
originally come from East Germany. Of course, they do not
talk all day about what was taken from them; but the concept
of the lost homeland has already become part of the official
schedule. The slogan "national injustice" is making the
rounds amongst the troops. Intentionally or not, officers stir
up resentments; knowingly or unknowingly, they do awaken
thoughts of revenge. And therein lies the danger.
This danger is especially great because this time it does not
apply to Alsace-Lorraine, Danzig and the Polish Corridor;
rather, it concerns itself with half of Germany, with the "lost
homeland" east of the Elbe and, because not only displaced
persons but nearly every one of us is close to someone or
something behind the iron curtain, even if it be a mother's
grave. Though the attempt to liberate it is senseless, it is a
holy cause. He who opposes it, is automatically branded.
The danger is great for, after all, there is a difference if
the civilian Karl Schulze from. Koenigsberg and his dear little
spouse are still raving about beautiful East Prussia or if the
Major of the Bundeswehr Karl Schulze indoctrinates his men
with the thesis of the "lost homeland" and the "injustice
wreaked upon us." The danger here is especially great because
the thesis does hold some truth and because the men who
are indoctrinated are just learning how and for what purposes
arms are to be used.
Hardly do we have soldiers, and already we have again
something for which-and against which-they could march.
"Start marching to any place? Out of the question. That is
technically impossible," say authoritative Bundeswehr strate-
gists.
The objection betrays in which direction the military think.
It is correct-that within this limitation for the present it is
technically still impossible for us "to march." The Bundeswehr
is still in its infancy, American and (a few) British soldiers
are still stationed in West Germany and Soviet soldiers in East
Germany. Some day, however, the Bundeswehr will stand
in force, perhaps even-as per the Chancellor's order-in
strenth of 500,000 men; some day, the last companies of
Americans here and Russians there will have left. It is un-
likely that the West German officers who today speak already
of the "lost homeland" and the "inability to ever forgetting"
will then become more reticent. Whether the politicians will
then be able to, or even want to, check the military is a
question which, in view of some of our present political
personalities, cannot readily be answered in the affirmative.
The people will not exactly rejoice if matters ever become
earnest. But, rejoicing or not, as usual they will not be con-
sulted but will just be called to the colors. Not all the regi-
ments are in possession of their flags as yet but already the
commandants and instructors are busily engaged in embroider-
ing the battle cries upon them.
These are age-old battle cries, but they retain their appeal
and will ever continue to do so. The most telling slogan will
again be the "the fight against the injustice done to us and
our people." This is enough to touch off warlike impulses
even in the most pacifist German.
Of course: it has not come to this yet. But, "the future has
started already." To express it in military terms, danger is
in the offing.
(Courtesy, Frankfurter Rundschau)
"JUST LOOK HOW HARMLESS HE IS!"
(Deutsebe Volkszeitung)
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
by
MALKAH RAYMIST
A few months ago a Canadian journalist, William Steven-
son of the Toronto Star, and a British journalist, Ann Sharp.
ley of the London Evening Standard, were expiled from
Egypt for getting around too much and too fast, but not
before they managed to get some glimpse of the truth about
the Nasser regime. The official reason given for their expul-
sion was that they had attempted to interview Egypt's ex-
President Naguib who is held incommunicado under house
arrest. But, in fact, they were ousted from Egypt for another
reason, for having attempted-and succeeded --in interview-
ing almost as inaccessible, if free and even privileged, a
personage, Professor Johann van Leers, a former top Nazi
propagandist, who was and is probably still masterminding
Egypt's anti-Jewish and anti-Israel propaganda campaign as
head of a corps of Nazis reputedly numbering 200 in the
service of President Nasser.
Professor von Leers was first smoked out by Ann Sharpley.
She walked into his oflice and addressed him by name and
then refused to swallow his attempts to conceal his identity.
She confronted him with irrefutable facts and data about his
past. When he realized that further denials about his identity
were futile, the professor sought to dismiss his importance
by asserting that his function was limited to translating for
President Nasser articles in the world papers hostile to Egypt
or the president himseif.
What is the background of this shadowy figure who acts
as adviser to Egypt's Minister of National Guidance and who
occupies with his staff an entire floor in that ministry? Re-
cently a Dutch newspaper Trouut published an incident in
which Professor von Leers figured and which of itself is
revelatory.
The story goes back to 1933. In that year, according to
the newspaper, an attempt was made to revive the Interna-
tional Students' Organization by bringing together students
from Germany, Britain, and France in order to influence them
to help maintain peace in the world. The Dutch university
city of Leyden was chosen as the meeting place. The Dutch
delegation, acting as host, participated in the mainly Anglo-
Franco-German students' conference.
Since the efforts of Britain, France and I Tolland were
directed at influencing the German students to help maintain
peace, the German delegation was naturally the focal point of
attention. Its president became therefore the central figure
of the conference. His arrival was deliberately shrouded in
mystery by the Germans; his name was not disclosed until
he appeared; and he arrived only after all the other members
of the conference had already gathered in Holland. Ito turned
out to be a jovial and affable young man with several uni-
versity degrees attached to his name. The name was: Dr.
Johann von Leers.
The conference proceeded fairly smoothly for several days,
But then Dr. Huizinga, the Rector of Leyden University,
urgently summoned the chairman of the Dutch delegation
and requested him to find out whether the Dr. von Leers
presiding over the German delegation was the author of a
recently published virulent anti-Semitic pamphlet. It was titled
Die Juden Sehen Dich An (Jews Are Looking at You).
Among the many slanders contained in the pamphlet was the
ritual murder libel, presented as an established fact.
Young Dr. von Leers was summoned and questioned by the
Dutch hosts. He readily admitted that he was the author of
the pamphlet. When asked whether he himself believed in
the ritual murder accusation, he fidgeted and laughed ner-
vously, "You see, that was written more than a year ago. It
was before the general elections. The National Socialist party
wanted something with a catchy slogan, something to get
hold of the masses.... So they asked me to write a booklet
with a strongly anti-Semitic angle. But really, between our-
selves, there is no need to take it so seriously."
But the Dutch professors, not easily put off, insisted that
he state whether or not he believed in what he had written.
After this preliminary interview, von Leers was requested to
appear next morning before the University Senate which was
obviously determined to inquire into his views and activities.
Dr. von Leers tried to avoid the issue, going off on a tangent
and attempting to involve his interrogators in a lengthy argu-
HAILING HITLER
Bashir al-Auf, the editor of a leading Syrian
daily, Al Manor, wrote recently:
"One should not forget that, in contrast to
Europe, Hitler occupied an honored place in the
Arab world. His name awakened in Arab hearts
feelings of love and enthusiasm... .
"The Arab world should be congratulated on
producing in its midst this Hitler who has
shaken the world from end to end. . . . English
and French journalists are mistaken if they think
that by calling Nasser Hitler they are hurting us.
On the contrary, his name makes us proud. Long
live Hitler, the Nazi who struck at the heart of
our enemies! Long live the Hitler of the Arab
world who has opened the gates of victory and
eternity for his people!"
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
ment. But they pressed him hard for an unequivocal yes or
no, and finally he admitted that he did not believe in what
he wrote. "No, of course not," he mumbled.
As soon as they heard this admission, the Dutch professors
asked him point-blank whether he was prepared to correct his
error publicly and in writing. He replied that it would be
impossible since this would mean the end of his scientific
career, and of his career altogether. On hearing this, Dr.
Huizinga pointed to the door and exclaimed: "Out with you !
such an individual does not deserve to breathe the air of
Leyden!" (This was not forgotten. Dr. Huizinga became one
of the first hostages immediately after the establishment of the
Nazi regime in Holland.)
Johann von Leers, who is now 54 years old, was in his
youth a member of the Freikorps Viking, one of the pre-
cursors of the Nazi movement. He grew with the movement
and with the party and, as early as 1929, he was an official
of the German Foreign Office and a member of the Nazi
party. In 1932 he joined the S.A. Brownshirts and in 1936
became a member of the German General Staff with the rank
of major. He became an important figure in the racial research
department, headed the department of foreign policy in the
Nazi Political College, and was the chief editor of the Nazi
journal Wille und Weg (The Will and the Way) published
by the German propaganda Ministry.
But in 1941 his star dimmed. He fell afoul of his chief,
Alfred Rosenberg, the ideologist of the Nazi Party, and was
sent in disgrace to Vienna, to fill the place of a professor
who had been murdered by the Nazis. There he fell deeper
into disgrace and. was charged with plagiarism and tried by
a court of teachers. But he survived all this and n_anaged to
emerge unscathed from the war and even from disgrace
within the Nazi party. After World War II he returned to
Germany and lived for some time in Bonn, but later emi-
grated to Argentina. It was there that he was discovered by
agents of Nasser.
Von Leers is a prolific writer specializing chiefly in pseudo-
scientific pamphlets. He tries sedulously to imitate Goebbels
but lacks the latter's brittle brilliance and shrewdness. He
plods along in heavy fashion, and his pedestrian efforts at
propaganda are joined to the bombast and violence that mark
the Arab fulminations against Israel and Jews.
(Courtesy, Congress Weekly)
EGYPTIAN BEST-SELLER
Israeli forces found stacks of Hitler's "Mein Kampf," in Arabic, in Egyptian army camps in Sinai.
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
441.1
uqa,
"The true Germany must still remain silent, but some day
it will act." These words, rendered with screaming pathos,
come from the mouth of former SS Gruppen and IlJ Banner-
fuehrer Kosche. He talked thus at the party convention of
the German Reichs Party in Wiesbaden. For the time being
the party is still desperately looking for some sort of demo-
cratic guise; however, the above quoted sentence is not the
only indication that the German Reichs Party is nothing but
the heir to the Socialist Reichs Party which, a few years ago,
was characterized and prohibited by the Federal Constitutional
Court as a subversive organization.
Also, some details in the make-up of the party convention
point to the great "spiritual" pattern of the Nazi party of the
Third Reich. For example, on the main wall of the largest
auditorium in the casino there was a white eagle on a black
backdrop. In its claws it held a black, white and red banner,
above this the motto: "The Springs Will Flow Forever."
Actually, this is the motto of Wiesbaden, the spa city and
thus has nothing to do with politics. But the gentlemen of the
German Reichs Party are not shareholders of the spa admin-
istration. For them other springs are more significant: warmer
ones, much more potent and invigorating ones. They are the
well-springs of the Third Reich, such as Hitler's "Mein
Kampf," or Alfred Rosenberg's "Myth of the Twentieth
Century," the theory of "Blood and Soil" by Rcichsbanner-
fuehrer Walter Darre and, finally, the racist theory, a folly
which developed into something more than just a plague for
mankind. These are the "ever-flowing springs" of the German
Reichs Party.
To continue with the outer signs, there was the so-called
Saalschutz (bodyguard in the hall), admittedly also known
to other parties and employed against "disturbers of the
peace" (these are chiefly people of diverging views), but the
Saalschutz of the German Reichs Party possesses distinctive
earmarks. These are the riding hoots, black shirts and field-
grey riding breeches. .. .
But now we must introduce the Chairman of the German
Reichs Party. He is Wilhelm Meinberg, formerly a Councilor
of State under Goering, SS Gruppenfuehrer, Deputy of the
Nazi Party to the Reichstag, Chief Reichs official for Food,
and owner of the Golden Medal of the Nazi Party. However,
the actual manager is the very young former Member of the
Bundestag and now Member of the State Diet of Lower
Saxony, von Thadden, who looks somewhat like a young
gigolo but is possessed of immense shrewdness for, in spite
of seeming so naive, he is an apt wirepuller and an effective
speaker.
Is this German Reichs Party to be taken seriously? In any
event, it proves through its party convention that these polit-
ical circles are no longer confined to meeting in backrooms
(a fact which was proudly pointed out at the convention by
von Thadden). In our opinion, the situation is more serious.
A seasoned politician of the Christian Democratic Union who
recently returned from Lower Saxony, closed his remarks on
the political situation in that state as follows: "The appeal
of the German Reichs Party in the forthcoming Federal elec-
tion should not be underestimated. It is very possible that the
party will obtain five direct mandates and enter the Bonn
Parliament with 10 or more deputies."
No: Neo-Nazism in Germany, as a "spiritual" manifesta-
tion, and viewed as a political fact, is definitely not dead.
(Courtesy, Luxemburger Wori)
Germany is the only place in the world where
the armed forces of the two main antagonists
are in close contact....
In such circumstances, there would be no
way on earth to isolate the explosion, as in
Hungary.... The two Germanies would meld
together, and somehow, somewhere-most
probably in Berlin-the fatal first shots of the
third world war should be exchanged between
the American and Soviet forces.
There are responsible officials who believe-
or perhaps hope is a better word-that this
nightmare prospect is now as vivid to the Krem-
lin as to the American government, and that
the Kremlin may really be searching for a way
out. There are other equally responsible officials
who contend that the Soviets will never, under
any circumstances, withdraw the Red Army
from East Germany, just because they know
that the Communist Pankow government could
not survive without it....
(Joseph and Stuart Alsop, N. Y. Herald Tribune, 12-6-561
Those with keen memories, especially our
GIs who helped liberate Buchenwald and whose
nostrils captured the stench of the crematoria,
must have recoiled as they read of the Nov. 1
night arrests of Jews in Egypt.
In the meticulous records kept by the Nazis,
and especially in the minds of those who were
the tortured victims, the nights of early Sep-
tember, 1935, when compared with contem-
porary events, the memories seem sadly remi-
niscent.
But what must stir the conscience is the
apathy displayed today, just as it was when
the world was warned that boxcars of human
beings were being shipped from German cities
to concentration camps. There were no special
sessions called in the League of Nations just as
there were no special sessions called in the UN
as Israeli outposts were attacked by Arab
marauders.
(Barry Gray, The N. Y. Post, 11-26-561
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01: CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
.ate a qRX*U-M sby
HANS J. MORGENTHAU
In Bonn, contrast strikes the observer: the difference be-
tween the prestige Adenauer and his policies enjoy in the
United States and the support they command in West Ger-
many. While American editorial opinion greeted Adenauer
with paeans of praise during his June visit to Washington,
there was nothing but reserve, skepticism and outright oppo-
sition in Bonn. This negative attitude is by no means limited
to the opposition; it is shared by members of the Cabinet,
civil servants and members of the Chancellor's own party.
The reasons for these contrasting attitudes are both personal
and political.
For Washington, Adenauer is first of all "our boy," the
Western statesman who is most completely and reliably iden-
tified with United States policies. Other statesmen have rec-
ognized Communist China; more still would like to. Others
want to trade with the Communist bloc or like to make
neutralist noises; Adenauer is virtually the only statesman
in the world who has done nothing to embarrass the State
Department and who is most anxious not to. Thus we have
taken him to our hearts as in the inter-war period we did
"little Finland who pays her debts," the only decent, trust-
worthy fellow among so many doubtful customers.
Bonn sees in Adenauer primarily an old autocrat who is
losing his grip and whose political days are numbered. There
is something in the political air of Bonn which reminds one
of Washington in the last year of a President who does not
stand for re-election. There is impatience on all sides. The
politicians and civil servants prepare for new alignments and
mend their political fences in anticipation of a new distribu-
tion of power; they chafe at the reins which have kept them
in place so long. The old Chancellor, feeling the pull and
seeing the disorder, tries in vain to restore his authority. His
public squabbles with the most prominent members of his
cabinet, ending typically in an abject public apology on his
part, have become notorious. Thus everybody in Bonn who
can afford it tries to move toward the outer confines of the
old man's orbit lest the new masters might find him too
closely identified with the ancien regime. The press is en-
couraged to treat the old Chancellor with a lack of respect
which, in view both of his exalted office and his obvious
personal merits and political achievements, comes as a shock
to the foreign observer.
But the malaise of Bonn and the disenchantment of West
Germany have deeper roots than Adenauer's waning authority.
They lie in the fiasco of Adenauer's approach to the over-
riding issue of German foreign policy: unification. The
Adenauer policy has come up against a stone wall which
forces it either to stand still without the slightest chance for
advance or else to retrace its steps completely without any
assurance of advance even then. The professed goal of Ade-
nauer's foreign policy has been to negotiate with the Soviet
Union from strength. The element of strength was to be
provided by the German military contribution to the Western
alliance. In actuality, however, Adenauer, or in any event his
principal advisors, intended to use this military contribution
in a bargain with the Russians. They figured that the Soviet
Union would grant unification in exchange for the elimina-
tion, or perhaps the mere limitation, of the German military
commitment to the West.
While Adenauer's professed policy was contingent upon
the unconditional surrender of the Soviet Union, and hence
doomed to failure from the outset, the recent radical changes
in the technology of war have doomed the actual policy of
bargaining as well. The Soviet Union has made it perfectly
obvious that it is not West German rearmament that worries
her but the Western orientation of a united Germany.
Adenauer and the main opposition parties are, of course,
at one in refusing to have anything to do with the East
German Government. Yet this cannot be the last word in
the matter. For if it were, it would seal the division of
Germany for the foreseeable future after the model of Korea
and Indo-China. The Social Democrats try to convince them-
selves that there must be a loophole somewhere in the Russian
insistence upon negotiations between East and West Germany
and that only Adenauer's intransigence stands in the way of
"Go Back and Tell 'em You're a Sovereign State"
Approved For Release 2006/12/01: CIA-RDP88-013158000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
a deal with the Russians. The leaders of other parties want
to offer the Soviet Union economic and other concessions in
return for unification. Some government officials play with
the idea of offering the Soviet Union German renunciation
of military ties with the West in order to test their intentions.
One party has openly come out in favor of negotiations with
the East German regime, provided two of its most notorious
members be eliminated from public life.
All these proposals are borne by an undercurrent of fear,
bordering on despair, which flows through all parties and
groups, notably the Foreign Office. All recognize that Adc-
nauer's policy has failed and unless West Germany takes the
initiative for a new approach, Germany may again remain
divided for generations to come. Yet what can be done? Is
the core of the problem perhaps the elemental fact that the
Soviet Union is more afraid of the power of a Germany
united in freedom than of a divided Germany, diminished
in power and limited in her freedom of action? I low is one
to reconcile the power of a united Germany with the security
of her neighbors and of the world?
To that question the world has sought an answer for almost
a century and has not found it. The men of Bonn, with the
apparent exception of the Chancellor's office, earnestly grope
for it today.
Nowhere in the world is there a more hardworking, con-
scientious, competent and uninspiring group of men than the
parliamentarians and civil servants of West Germany. In
their general intellectual and moral attitude to things political
they are seemingly quite representative of the German people.
But derision for them, either good-humored or spiteful, is
well-nigh universal. Private conversations, even with chance
acquaintances, the daily and weekly press, the political cab-
arets are full of it. I have still to find a German not con-
nected with the government who would speak with enthusi-
asm, affection, or even decent respect of the Bonn regime.
The Germans regard it as something to which at present there
is no alternative, but which they would not have chosen if
they had had a choice. No German knows what he would
have chosen instead, nor does anybody worry much about it.
For the German scene today is dominated by a tact which
is not political but economic: unprcced-nted proslseri.y.
All the vital energy, passion and singlemindedness which
in former times were absorbed by politics now go into work.
To produce, to make money, to own and to travel---such
seems to be at present the compass of Germany's national
purpose. The main issue between the German unions and
management is not shorter hours of work, higher wages or
fringe benefits, but the opportunity to work overtime' How-
ever, that concern with the production and enjoyment of
material things is not likely to be permanent. It is rather
like an unexpected and surprisingly ample feast after a long
period of scarcity. Furthermore, business curves have a way
of going down as well as up, And the direction the German
national purpose will take when it can no longer find full
satisfaction in the production and enjoyment of material
things worries the more thoughtful leaders of German opin-
ion. I shall not soon forget the tone of urgency in the voice
of one of the ablest and most genuinely liberal German
leaders when he asked me to tell America to come to the
aid of German democracy at the first sign of a business down-
turn. Such a downturn would be the first real test for German
democracy, and he doubted that it would pass it.
But this is certainly the opinion of a small and submerged
minority. Hardly anybody in Germany is willing to admit
the determining fact of recent German history: that Nazism
was not a philosophy, political system, and way of life im-
posed from above upon an unwilling or, at worst, passive
German people, but the fulfillment of their intensely held
aspirations, a true mandatory of the national will, enthusi-
astically supported in success and still maintained with stoic
faith in the face of disaster. For most Germans, Nazism has
become a disembodied thing, an instrument of fate, not to be
associated with living human beings. However, that associa-
tion, not as an historic recollection but as the actual experience
of the present, stares one in the face at every turn. Proven
anti-Nazis, people who risked their lives for their convictions,
suddenly use a phrase or make an observation whose under-
lying values bear, without their being aware of it, the marks
of the intellectual and moral revolution which Nazism has
wrought upon Germans, friend and foe alike. An American
student who studies Romance Languages at a German uni-
Russia believes that her ultimatum deviled the issue, and hopes
the Arabs will be duly grateful. America thin',s her action decided it,
and that, afraid of Russia, the Arabs will gratefully lean towards
.America. We shall see who is right.
Both America and Russia think Anglo-French influence has been
destroyed in the Middle East, and, for quite different reasons, both
think that to be desirable.
Eisenhower's point of view is that his action was entirely justified
because the rule of low has been violated. He also thinks that- it is
still possible to do business with the Soviets, and that if he is
allowed to cultivate the Peace Party, which he is convinced exists
and Includes Malenkav, Bulganin, and Khrushchev, he can organise
a tasting world peace as a result of America's having proved herself
to be a disinterested upholder of law-even against aid friends.
Britain says that Egypt was the true aggressor and that Israel
merely retaliated to a whale series of aggressive acts which U.N.O.,
and its supervising commission under General Burns, had been in-
capable of stopping.
Britain says that Egypt, armed by Russia, was soon going to strike
still more strongly and in wider spheres. The result would have been
the loss of the whole area from Casablanca to Kabul. If France and
Britain did nothing it would be too late, unless, after long discus-
sions of U.N.O., America then intervened with all her forces. By that
time, however, Russia would be fully committed and the result would
be world war. France and Britain were fully convinced that if
American wishes had been followed nothing-repeat nothing-
would have slopped events from leading to a general war within
a short time. They think that if they have been allowed to finish
the job without American opposition, if not with support, the danger
of a world war over the Middle East would have been greatly
reduced.
It seems impossible to reconcile those sharply opposing views.
America thinks France and Britain broke the law and were aggressors
worthy of punishment. Britain and France think they did not break
the law but that America, voting with Russia, and threatening puni-
tive action, has come very near to wrecking all hope of peace.
The Hungarian situation has made Britain still more angry. Russia
is clearly an unprovoked aggressor in Hungary and America admits
that to be true. Britain asks why America has not threatened Russia
with punitive action over Hungary, whereas she did threaten France
and Britain over Egypt? Bitterly angry people in London ask whether
it is because America is afraid of Russia but was not afraid of
Britain and France? If so, is that the rule of law? These angry ques-
tions are widely asked.
The overall British reaction is that America will find out that Eden
was not either so foolish or so bad as he was painted and that, in
consequence of American policy, a far graver situation will shortly
arise in the Middle East.
(Courtesy, Weekly Review, London)
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
versity told me that his professor distinguishes between Aryan
and non-Aryan French writers as a matter of course, the dis-
tinction being accepted by the students as a matter of course.
I had myself an experience which illuminated with the
sudden impact of a great and lasting shock the presently hid-
den abysses of the German mind, which are no less real for
the reluctance of most to recognize their reality. One evening,
I sat in the Cafe Kranzler, the most elegant cafe of Frankfort,
when my attention was drawn-away from Verdi's music to-
ward an animated conversation, carried on by the two men
at the next table. The man who did most of the listening
was an elderly, distinguished-looking gentleman who, as the
conversation revealed, was a retired businessman from a
neighboring town who had just made the acquaintance of
the other man by sitting down at his table. This man, who
did most of the talking, must have been in his middle forties;
he was of striking appearance and impressive bearing, ele-
gantly dressed, obviously intelligent and well educated. This
man told a story from his student days. One evening, he and
five of his fellow students had gone to a neighboring town
to drink wine. When they boarded the train for the return
trip, they found one compartment holding six people half occu-
pied while in the next one they found two passengers who hap-
pened to be Jews. They decided to ask the Jews to leave.
When the latter refused and one of them rose with a threat-
ening gesture, the students opened the two windows of the
compartment and threw the Jews out. "We threw them out,
luggage and all, mind you, out of a speeding express train,
and in a matter of seconds it was all over. Of course, anybody
else but Jews would have left without a fuss."
What is remarkable in this story is not only its content
and the fact that it was told at all, but also and in particular
the way it was told and received. It was told with animation,
A disturbing example of the Eisenhower Ad-
ministrations' failure, in the field of foreign
relations, is revealed in the handling of landing
rights awarded to international air carriers. Our
State Department awarded the rights to Ger-
many's Lufthansa Airlines in New York, Mil-
waukee, Chicago, Detroit and Los Angeles.
This gives them precious leave to land, sell
tickets, and originate flights in those metropoli-
tan areas. The Japanese Airlines, and Iberian
(Spanish), have landing rights on both coasts.
In contrast, the Holland air carrier, KLM,
world's largest purchasers of American-made
aircraft, was turned down when they made a
simple request, namely, the privilege of land-
ing and refueling in Los Angeles and Houston.
Holland, a member of NATO, our former ally,
and the first and only country to tell the U. S.,
"thank you for World War II help-but now
we wish to finish without charity-and stand
on our own feet." This is the nation shut out
by the U. S. while we hand $1,000,000 privi-
leges to German, Japanese, and Swedish air-
lines. I have no wish to see the latter suffer.
But I hope the Dutch get their delayed "good
conduct" award.
care for picturesque detail, and unemotional detachment. To
call the narrator an anti-Semite is to miss the point completely.
For the narrator, a Jew was no more the possible object of
hate or, for that matter, any other human emotion than a
mosquito. The foreordained destiny of the Jew, as of the
mosquito, was, to be killed. Only at one point was there a
trace of emotion in the narrator's voice: when he pointed with
a sense of pride to the speed and technical neatness of the
operation. Even the criticism of the Jews' refusal to move
was added in a matter-of-fact way as an afterthought, which
really had no bearing upon the issue.
It would indeed be most hazardous to draw any general
conclusions from such an incident. However, the fact that it
occurred at all and the circumstances under which it occurred
give one pause. I shall not tell a total stranger whom I just
met, say in a parlor car, a story about myself which is likely
to evoke his moral indignation. To the contrary, I shall tell
him a story which will put me in a good light. Most certainly
our narrator would not have told his chance acquaintance
that he had cracked safes as a student or run a disorderly
house. But he did not expect moral disapproval for his par-
ticipation in the killing of two Jews, and the listener did not
disappoint him.
There are men in all walks of German public life-gov-
ernment, universities, press, and literature-who are aware of
the moral chasm which' Nazism has opened between Germany
and the rest of the world. My two neighbors in Frankfort
were not aware of it. How many more like them are there?
On which side does the weight of opinion lie? In which
direction is opinion likely to move? Answers to these ques-
tions, more than to questions more concrete and seemingly
more urgent, if we but had them, would tell us much of the
story of Germany's future.
(Condensed, Courtesy, The New Republic)
Twice in our time, America's youth has been
killed and mutilated by the instruments of war
produced by an extremely knowledgeable and
efficient outfit called Krupp Industries of Essen,
Germany. Krupp has now come to the United
States with an elaborate idea for getting tax-
payers' money to finance this huge, rich com-
pany in its expansion in underdeveloped coun-
tries.
The plan-which has an attractive surface
gloss-will be presented to three branches of
government, including a Presidential Committee
on Foreign Aid headed by Benjamin Fairless,
former president of United States Steel, and the
Foreign Affairs Committees of both the Senate
and the House....
Currently, Krupp is engaged in construction
of major installations in Asia and Africa....
This, essentially, is merely a way for Ger-
many to increase its exports, with the United
States footing the bill. There are other friends
in Europe, also struggling with the export prob-
lem, who would get no such help from us.
There is no reason to hit the United States
taxpayers with an added bite for a particular
company in Germany.
(Donald T. Rogers, N. Y. Herald Tribune, 11-25-56)
Approved For Release 2006/12/01: CIA-_RDP88-0131,5R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88=01315R000400480012-6
:11112 ZGt&?d 92afiona and .thp Midd.Ge baet Chi414
It is the considered judgment of the Society that the Middle East Crisis constitutes a major threat to world
peace. Bearing this in mind, the Society sought to acquaint the United Nations with its views on this crucial
problem. For the benefit of our readers use publish below the complete text of the Society's statement.
Introduction
We respectfully call your attention to the enclosed state-
ment on the Middle Eastern crisis issued by the Society for
the Prevention of World War III. The Society is a non-
governmental organization accredited to the United Nations
and unreservedly supports United Nations efforts to achieve
a just and lasting settlement.
Among the major purposes for which the Society was
founded in 1943, are
(a) "to prevent the occurrence of another world war by
creating a permanent body of experts on international politics
and economics to search and study the impelling forces and
causes which have led to two world wars ..."
(b) "to observe and examine changing conditions in world
politics and economics and possible causes which might lead
to a third world war"
(c) "to announce and publish its findings, conclusions and
opinions ..."
In accordance with these aims the Society deems it a duty
to make known its views on some aspects of the Middle East
crisis. We seek an objective evaluation of the decisive in-
gredients which have turned the Middle East into a caldron
of hatred and strife.
The Society's search for the truth and its endeavor to pre-
vent World War III are the sole standards by which we dis?
cuss the critical situation in the Middle East.
The United Nations and the Middle East Crisis
Dedicated to the cause of a just and lasting peace, the
Society for the Prevention of World War III supports un-
reservedly the efforts of the United Nations to master the
present world crisis. At this dangerous moment, the United
Nations possesses an unmatched opportunity to fix firmly its
moral and material authority as the guardian of world peace.
The immediate focal point for United Nations action lies
in the Middle East where the flames of war threaten to engulf
the world in unprecedented catastrophe. The root cause under-
lying the ever growing discord in the Middle East is the
failure of the states in that area to conduct their external
relations on the basis of mutual respect and good will. If the
United Nations succeeds in normalizing conditions in the
Middle East, it will have a profound effect on lessening ten-
sions and strife throughout the world. On the other hand,
if the United Nations cannot prevent further deterioration,
the danger of World War III will increase.
In making these observations the Society hopefully assumes
that the realities of the Middle Eastern situation will no
longer be masked. For years it has been politically expedient
for statesmen to pretend that there was peace in this vital
area. By maintaining this false front, the forces of war have
been encouraged while the United Nations has been inhibited
from taking positive and effective action.
The Society does not pass judgment on the relative merits
of Israel's case against her Arab neighbors or vice versa. We
seek an objective evaluation of the decisive ingredients which
have turned the Middle East into a caldron of hatred and
strife. The Society's search for the truth and its endeavor to
prevent World War III are the sole standards by which we
discuss this critical situation.
The State of Israel born under United Nations' aegis
found itself in a region turbulent with social discontent and
militant nationalism. The populations of this area, however
they strove to live in peace with their neighbors, have been
caught in the maelstrom of ceaseless warfare. At first they
were the victims of a war launched by the Arab governments
to destroy Israel. Subsequently, the warfare became more
subtle although in many ways deadlier. It was warfare based
on terror and attrition. It involved hit-and-run raids, skir-
mishes, infiltration, sabotage, subversion and blockade. This
..new type" of warfare was powerfully stimulated by hate
inciting propaganda. Reason and self interest were terrorized
into silence by artificially whipped up passions.
The blockade against Israeli shipping in violation of the
armistice agreement of February 24th, 1949, and Security
Council resolution of September 1st, 1951, signified continua-
tion of the war by other means.
On March 23rd, 1954, eight members of the Security Coun-
cil voted for a resolution to reaffirm the previous resolution of
September 1st, 1951. This was vetoed by the Soviet Union
while the Egyptian Government continued the blockade.
The determination to continue the blockade of Israel is
seen by the fact that, after Egypt had seized the Suez Canal,
it again refused the freedom of passage of Israeli ships and
of shipping bound for Israel. The New York Herald Tribune
(8-29-56) quoted President Nasser as stating, "since the Suez
Canal runs through three Egyptian cities, the vessels of Israel
with which Egypt is technically at war, are excluded." Thus,
President Nasser publicly admitted that his Government was
at war with Israel and that the blockade policy was part of
the war strategy.
The war has taken its toll of human lives and property.
Thus, incursions, into Israel from July 1949 to October 1955
resulted in the slaying of 1039 unarmed Israeli men, women
and children. In addition, a total of 2231 armed attacks by
Arab forces upon the Israelis took place (Congressional Rec-
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01: CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
ord, 6-4-56, Senator George H. Bender). In this connection,
the Israeli Government more than a year ago, pointed out that
the Mixed Armistice Commission had registered 1006 viola-
tions of the . Armistice Agreement by Egyptian forces within
a 7 months period.
The ceaseless ambushes against the Israeli population are
symptomatic of never ending war. Prominent in these raids
were forces called "Fedayeen" encouraged and organized by
the Egyptian Government. On May 28, 1956, President
Nasser publicly declared:
"The Fedayeen, the Palestine army, which started as a small
force of 1,000 men last year, is today great in numbers and
training and equipment. I believe in the strength, the ability,
the loyalty and the courage of this army. Its soldiers will be
responsible for taking revenge for their homeland and people."
On August 31, 1955, the official Cairo radio declared:
"Egypt has decided to dispatch her heroes, the disciples of
Pharoah and the sons of Islam, and they will cleanse the land
of Palestine. Therefore, ready yourselves; shed tears; cry out
and weep, .0 Israel, because near is your day of liquidation.
Thus we have decided and thus is our belief. There will he
no more complaints and protests, neither to the Security Coun-
cil, nor to the United Nations, nor to the Armistice Commis-
sion. Nor will there be peace on the border because we de-
mand vengeance and the vengeance is Israel's death."
"The Egyptian Fedayeen have begun their activities inside
the territory of Israel after repeated clashes on the border
during the past week. The Egyptian Fedayeen have penetrated
into Jewish settlements spread out in the Negev to Beersheba
and Migdal Ashkelon at a distance of 40 kilometres from the
Egyptian border, and have taught the aggressive Israelis a'
lesson they will not forget. The Egyptian Fedayeen sowed
fear and consternation among the citizens of Israel."
The character of the propaganda deluging the Middle East
is' also indicative of the never ending war. It goes beyond the
normal practices of exhortation to patriotism as it whips the
minds of the people into a state of blind hatred. Through this
ceaseless barrage of hate-inciting propaganda the war psy-
chosis is maintained at fever pitch. At that point the enflamed
passions of the people merge with the physical assaults per-
petrated by such armed forces as the Fedayeen. It is total war.
The Cairo Radio, 9-17-54, broadcasting in Arabic to the
Arab world, said:
, we repeat Salah Salim's slogan: 'There would be no
Egypt, no Egyptian revolution and Egyptian Army if Egypt
would make peace with krael.' Let all of us, 0 Arabs, repeat
it once more: 'There would be no Egypt, no Egyptian revolu??
tion, and no Egyptian Army if Egypt would make peace with
Israel.'
On September 21, 1954, the Cairo Radio, broadcasting in
Arabic to the Arab world, declared:
"The UN General Assembly opens its new session today.
Each time we examine the UN Charter, we read its seemingly
plausible effort to free peoples, to bring them happiness
through peace, and to protect them from destruction ... The
Voice of the Arabs wishes to tell you today not to believe in
the United Nations, not to be deceived by its charter, and
not to expect any good from it."
The Cairo Home Service (12-27-55) quoted Col. Anwar
Sadat, Egyptian Minister of State:
"Our war against the Jews is an old struggle that began
with Mohammed and in which we achieved.many great vic-
tories. Today, we fight them in Gaza and in Sabha and every-
where. It is our duty to fight the Jews for the sake of God
and religion, and it is our duty to end the war which Mo-
hammed began."
On January 12, 1956, the Cairo Home Service stated:
"Peace between us and the Jews is impossible. As far as
we are concerned the problem is a matter of life and death
and not a dispute over frontiers or interests. Nor is it a dif-
ference of viewpoints which require mediation for settlement
... This part of the world, that is, the Middle East, cannot
hold both of us. It is either we or they. There is no other
solution ... Thank God that our leaders ... know that poems
will not achieve our aims. It is steel and bullets which will
realize these objectives."
On April 9, 1956, the Cairo Radio broadcast:
"The Arabs are determined to stress one fact, even by
bloodshed. Israel must be wiped out."
It would be a disservice to truth were we to ignore the fact
that the tone and content of this type of incitement have been
continuously employed by the leaders of the various Arab
countries. We cite below some examples:
President Gamal Nasser as quoted in "Al Ahram," Cairo,
10-15-55:
"I am not fighting solely against Israel, but also against
World Zionism and Jewish capital. My task is to deliver the
Arab world from destruction through Zionism intrigues which
have their roots in the United States, and which receives aid
from Britain and France ... The hatred of the Arabs against
the Zionists is very strong and there is no sense in talking
(Courtesy N. Y. Times)
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88.-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
about peace with Israel. There is not even the smallest place
for negotiations between the Arabs and Israel."
President Nasser in a cable to Syrian President Kuwatly:
"Egypt will be glad when both her and the Syrian armies
meet on the ruins of this treacherous people, these Zionist
gangs, so that our dead may rest in peace with the knowledge
that our countries have been liberated of all foreign encroach-
ment" (Near East Arab Broadcasting Station, Cyprus, 12-
18-55).
President Nasser:
"The Palestine Army (Fedayeen) rained by Egypt has be-
come a powerfully armed and trained force, and the duty of
its soldiers is to take vengeance for Their land .. ." (Radio
Cairo, 5-20-56).
President Nasser (7-26-56) :
"The fight in which the are now engaged is against im-
perialism and its supporters and against imperialistic methods.
It is a fight against Israel, the tool of imperialism created in
the heart of the Arab world to obliterate our nationalism. But
we will all defend our freedom and Arabism and will struggle
to see the Arab Motherland extend from the Atlantic Ocean
to the Persian Gulf."
King Hussein of Jordan:
"Jordan will fulfill its mission of vengeance in Palestine
to the very end" (Radio Ramallah, 1.23-56).
? "We swear before Allah and history to iacrific a our prop-
erly and everything dear to us for the sake of Palestine, to
guard all her holiness and Arabism. lt''e will not lay down
our arms until we regain our rights completely" (Radio
Ramallah, 3-9-56).
On October it, 1956, an o11-itial Iraqi spokesman stated:
"... They (the Arabs) must fight Zionism and its ally, the
new imperialism, with the sane spirit they fought before ...
Iraq and the majority of the Arabs consider that the question
of fighting the Zionist cancer should cone first. because this
constitutes a great danger to the Arabs" (Radio Baghdad,
Home Service, 10-11-56).
President Shukciri El-Kuwatli of Syria:
"The present situation demand r the mobilization of all
Arab strength to eliminate that state which has arisen in our
midst. Israel is like a cancer, not only saris feed to feed on her
own manpower but is also assisted by world Zionism." (Ad-
dress before delegation of Lebanese Moslem youths, 4-2-56.)
President Camille C:hamoun of Lebanon:
"The Egyptian revolution was the beginainng of the end of
Israel. My belief is that Israel will not be eliminated except
by military states that are prepared to destroy her. Egypt
today is a military state of the first magnitude and I think
that she alone can eliminate Israel I hope in the near future
all the Arab stales trill be organizalionally and ;niltarily pre-
pared in a similar manner to Egypt. Then trill Ire he able to
say-openly and with certainty-that Israel has arrived at her
inevitable end, and not just at the beginning of her end."
(Akhir Sa'at, Cairo, 10-12-55.)
King Saud of Saudi Arabia:
"The Arab nations should sacrifice up to 10 million of
their 50 million people, if necessary, to wipe out Israel.. .
Israel to The Arab world is like a cancer to the human body
and the only remedy is to uproot it just like a cancer. . . .
We don't have the patience to see Israel remain occupying
Palestine for long." (New York Times, 1-4-54.)
Emir Fahd Saud:
"Israel represents western imperialism and world Zionism.
Both are a cancer which has to be cut out of the body of the
Arab nation. My opinion is that The Palestine Army will ful-
fill its task." It will achieve that which Abdul Nasser said
about it: "I desire that the Palestine Army will write the most
glorious page in the history of Palestine." (Al Abram, Cairo
Daily, 6-27-56.)
The facts mentioned above do not detract from the problems
besetting the Arab peoples. Economic backwardness, disease
and illiteracy weigh heavily on them Such conditions breed
unrest and do not create a climate conducive to peace. These
factors form the backdrop of Arab attitudes towards other
vital issues. For example, they strongly resent the plight of
Arab refugees, victimized by' the Arab war against Israel.
They have noted with apprehension some extremist voices in
Israel urging expansionist policies. Yet, it is a matter of record
that extremist views have been categorically rejected by the
overwhelming majority of the Israeli people and by their
government.
By grossly exaggerating the importance of these voices,
Arab propaganda has tried to depict Israel as an "interloper,"
a tool of "Western imperialism" whose main purpose is to
exploit and humiliate rather than to deal with the Arab
peoples on an equal basis.
No matter what shortcomings may be ascribed to Israel's
statesmen, they recognize that peace and progress for the
whole Middle East depends in the first place on solid under-
standing with the Arab countries.
The Israelis know that the great economic and social prob-
lems including poverty and sickness in the whole Midle East
can only be tackled on the basis of friendly cooperation.
On May 14, 1948, the independent state of Israel came
into being. Its first proclamation was an offer of peace to the
Arabs.
He extend the hand of peace and good neighborliness
to all the neighboring states and their peoples and invite
their co-operation and mutual assistance. The slate of Israel
is ready to make its contribution to the joint effort towards
the progress of the Middle East as a whole."
On May 1 1 , 1949, upon Israel's admission to the United
Nations, its Foreign Minister told the UN:
"The pursuit of peace is a treasured part of the Jewish
heritage ... That pledge becomes an earnest and urgent appeal
when addressed to our closest neighbors, the Arab states, and
other nations of The Middle East . . We are not aware of
any serious conflict behreen us and our neighbors which
could not today be resolved by peaceful negotiations."
On May 8, 1950, Israel's Foreign Minister told the Pales-
tine Conciliation-Commission:
`'I wish to reaffirm categorically that the Government of
Israel is trilling to negotiate with any stale which announces
its readiness to conclude a final settlement of all outstanding
questions with a view to the establishment of permanent
peace."
On September 21. 1951, Israel informed the Paris Confer-
ence of the Palestine Conciliation Commission of the United
Nations that:
"Ire are prepared here and now to extend to each and
every one of the Arab slates the offer of a pact of non-aggres-
sion. We should see in acceptance of this offer a real token of
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
the Arab states' willingness to work toward the essential goal
of this Conference-the restoration of peace in the Middle
East."
On January 2, 1952, Israel's representative at the United
Nations told the Ad Hoc Political Committee of the General
Assembly:
"My Government instructs me to reiterate that a formal
understanding with the neighboring Arab states remains a
central objective of its policy ... We sincerely invite the Arab
world at this important juncture in its modern history to
reflect carefully upon its decisive choice. If it desires, it can
establish with Israel the relations which normally govern the
intercourse of civilized states."
On September 28, 1953, Israel's representative told the
United Nations General Assembly:
"My Government continues to uphold the vision of the
Middle East at peace with itself, uniting all efforts of its two
kindred peoples to heal the wounds of aggressive violence and
reawaken the rich potentialities of the region for political,
economic and cultural progress."
On May 10, 1954, the Foreign Minister of Israel told the
Parliament:
"Israel is ready at any time to enter into negotiations with
any of the neighboring states concerning either a final and
comprehensive peace settlement, or any partial or interim
arrangement aiming at paving the way towards peace."
On July 24, 1955, Israel's Prime Minister told a United
Press correspondent:
"If there is any Egyptian statesman who is ready to meet
me to consider ways and means for the improvement of rela-
tions between Israel and the Arab states, I am ready at any
The notion that the United States could suc-
ceed in winning the long-term sympathies of
the Arabs may be a short-lived one. Quite
apart from the fickleness of the Arabs if to-
morrow, for instance, the United States quarrel
with Communist China over the Formosa Strait
should reopen-and the likelihood is that it
will-then Arabs and Asians will very quickly
forget the favors the United States has done
them. Britain and France may be well advised
to let the United States lead if she is willing
to do so, and be satisfied with a silent partner-
ship in the Middle East, but in the process the
United States must not forget that to sacrifice
Britain in the Middle East would have its in-
evitable repercussions on the European security
system. Stalin was not quite right when at
Yalta, during the discussions about the veto
in the UN Charter, according to Churchill's me-
moirs, he predicted that Britain and France
would want to use the veto to prevent Egypt
from bringing the Suez Canal question to the
United Nations. Egypt, as it turned out, grabbed
it without asking. But he may prove right in
his prediction that the capitalist nations will
destroy themselves by fighting among them-
selves-over the Middle East.
(Harry Brandon, The New Republic, 10-3-56)
time?or place ..."
On January 3, 1956, the Prime Minister of Israel before
the Knesset said:
"We believe the maintenance of peace is preferable even
to victory in war. We know that any war, even war in which
we gain the upper hand, involves ruin and destruction for
both parties and intensified hatred between nations."
CONCLUSION
The United Nations must succeed in bringing together
both sides to the conference table where they can in dignity
agree to a peace based on mutual respect and good neigh-
borly relations. Such a peace must do away with the past
relations in the Middle East which were attuned to the
exigencies and strategy of incessant warfare.
Peace in the Middle East must establish normal political,
economic and cultural relations among all the states and be
in complete harmony with the Charter of the United Nations.
The intolerable conditions which have preyed upon the
populations of the Middle East should be completely elimi-
nated. The United Nations' efforts must be based on this
premise if a just and lasting solution is to be found.
The United Nations cannot afford reversion to the condi-
tions which have obtained up to the present and have
blocked the establishment of peace.
If the United Nations fails on this crucial issue, then its
effectiveness as a leading institution for world peace and
security will have been gravely impaired. The establishment
of peace in the Middle East would radiate its beneficent
effects upon a tense and troubled world, and greatly con-
tribute to the prevention of World War III.
THEIR
7 r"5 SHALL 9 PLOWSHARES,
SW02D5 INTO ' INTO
AND -THEIR SPEARS NAT(O -
PIZU.NtNG HOOKS;
SHALL N0T LIFT UP
sw0R) AGAINST NATION,
NEITHER SHALL THEY
LEARN WAR ANYMORE.
-15AIAH
THE HOPE FOR THE WORLD
(Courtesy Gazette and Daily, York, Pa.)
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
etc., etc. This is the way the 1953 election
was conducted and there is no evidence
that the political parties will not repeat
this performance.
Facts About the FDP
There is, however, a special factor in
the present election picture which ought
to command the careful attention of the
Western Democracies. We refer to the
strategic political position of the Free
Democratic Party (FDP) and its future
role in the development of German pol-
icy. The FDP is supposed to represent
the ideas of liberalism in politics and
laissez faire in economics. It is, neverthe-
less, a fact that the FDP is not a homoge-
neous body. On the contrary, it is plagued
by factionalism involving bitter struggles
between powerful extreme rightist groups
and less influential liberal elements. In-
deed, while the FDP poses as a party of
liberal tradition, it is in reality controlled
by groups that have little in common with
democratic principles.
In the spring of 19.17, the so-called
liberal parties of all the four zones of
Germany were loosely organized into a
sort of "Working Committee" similar
to that of the Christian Democratic Union
and the Christian Socialist Union. The
two co-chairmen of this "Working Com-
mittee" were Theodor Heuss, now Presi-
dent of West Germany, and the late Dr.
Wilhelm Kuelz for the East. The liaison
broke down toward the beginning of
1948 and by December of that year the
members of the Western zones formed
the Free Democratic Party.
Following the setting up of the West
German Government, the Free Demo-
crats were brought into Chancellor Ade-
nauer's coalition. The appeal that the
Free Democratic Party had among Ger-
mans in those early postwar years, was
described in an analysis prepared by the
U. S. Military Government: "There is no
doubt that many Germans now vote for
the FDP (and for the CDU, loo, for that
matter), simply because there are no par-
ties further to the Right, for whom they
would actually prefer to vole. Conse-
quently, there is a natural tendency for
the FDP to yield to the pressure from
nationalist elements in order to win
rotes."
The fortunes of the Free Democratic
Party began to fade as Adenauer's popu-
larity grew and his successes mounted
both in international as well as in domes-
tic affairs. The Chancellor's triumph in
reestablishing Germany's prestige and
power reduced the popularity of the
FDP and in no small way contributed to
the rising resentment and jealousy among
FDP politicians.
Times have changed. The Adenauer
policy seems to be reaching the point of
diminishing returns, Important voices in
West Germany are beginning to regard
the Adenauer policy as a liability both
politically and economically in terms of
Germany's long-range requirements. In
short, developments in Germany are
ripening for change. It is more than just
a question of substituting one political
party for another to take over the affairs
of government. The whole problem of
the direction and orientation of German
policy is involved and it is precisely here
where the FDP may be coming into its
own.
Though the West German federal
elections are many months away, the con-
tending political parties are losing no
time in the race to gain the favor of the
electorate. Even at this early date it is.
clear that the parties intend to employ
the same stratagems and tactics which
characterized their behavior during the
1953 election campaign. Depending upon
the specific circumstances, the German
political parties will be found flirting with
each other or sharpening their knives for
a sudden thrust at their political rivals.
Needless to say, these flirtations some-
times make for strange bedfellows. Thus,
the Christian Democratic Party and the
Social Democratic Party, which are ideo-
logically poles apart, have been speculat-
ing on the feasibility of a so-called "black
and red" coalition. Yet, neither party
will allow itself to be committed fully
to such a deal. Therefore, we find the
leader of the Christian Democratic Party,
Chancellor Adenauer, toying with the idea
of making a bargain with the Free Demo-
cratic Party, the largest of West Ger-
many's constellation of minority political
groups.
In this connection the-Christian Science
Monitor reported that on September 14,
1956, a meeting took place between Dr.
Adenauer and Dr. Dehler (leader of the
Free Democratic Party) at the house of
the former's banker friend, Robert Pfcrd-
menges, to reopen "discussions for the
purpose of finding a common platform
before the elections." When the public
got wind of this secret confab, the faces
of the participants turned red with em-
barrassment and they tried to deflate the
significance of this meeting.
Meanwhile the Free Democratic Party
and the Social Democrats have also been
exchanging "love notes." The jockeying
for advantageous positions continues and
at this moment it is not altogether cer-
tain how the final political lines will
shape up. Though there are many im-
ponderables, we can predict with a reason-
able degree of certainty that all of the
parties will do their best to attract all
kinds of elements, irrespective of ideo-
logical or economic considerations. This
means, of course, that each of the parties
will be wooing Democrats, nationalists,
Pan-Germans, neo-Nazis, Communists,
The FDP Leadership
To understand the FDP's future role
it would be helpful, we believe, to fa-
miliarize ourselves with the key leaders
of the FDP. Perhaps the most articulate
of them all is Dr. Thomas Dehler who
was Minister of justice during the first
Adenaucr Coalition Government. Herr
Dehler is a lawyer by profession. He
does not appear to have played any sig-
nificant role one way or the other during
the Hitler regime. However, in 1946 he
came into prominence when he founded
the FDP Branch in Bavaria. Subsequently,
he was a member of the Parliamentary
Council in Bonn from 1948-1949. Herr
Dehler, according to available informa-
tion, was not a member of the Nazi party.
On the other hand, his ideological affini-
ties and views predate Nazi doctrine,
that is to say, he is a German nationalist
and has not hesitated to sound off on
the glories of the old Reich whenever
the opportunity presented itself. It was
probably his "bull-in-the-china-shop" ap-
proach which finally alienated him from
the more subtle Chancellor Adenauer.
On November 22, 1952, the New
York Times reported Herr Dehler as
denouncing what he called "the decen-
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
tralized state" of Germany. "The time
must come again," he warned, "when
Prussia is a reconstituted German Reich,
once again fulfilling its duty of maintain-
ing German culture in Central Europe."
Dr. Dehler's apologies for Germany's
military excesses and war guilt was ex-
pressed in a speech in Hamburg in 1950.
"Hitler," he cried, "is to a great extent
the consequence of the Versailles Treaty,"
and "Germany is no more guilty than
France for World War I." This state-
ment caused a furor among Allied offi-
cials and Herr Adenauer was visibly em-
barrassed although he was careful not to
call his Minister of justice to account.
In view of Herr Dehler's fervent na-
tionalism, it is not surprising that he
showed a marked sympathy for German
war criminals. Utilizing his strategic post
as Minister of justice, he boasted pub-
licly that the Bonn Government had
spent at least $12,000 in the defense
of seven Nazi war criminals (JTA,
5-31-52). As a leading spokesman for
the Free Democratic Party, Dehier made
the cause of absolving Germany's war
criminals a special duty of his party. The
FDP has publicly asserted trat Germany's
"so-called war criminals" committed no
Not even West Germany's unparalleled pros-
perity is a sure brake against a slide into
disaster. The ambition to get ahead financially
and socially is the most compelling single force
today. But the West German has become so
engrossed in his material well-being that he
ignores his political and moral responsibilities.
So democracy remains fragile and untested. A
new demagogue might strangle it. Repeated
polls show that a majority of West Germans
do not even condemn Hitler.
(E. M. Korry, Look, 10-2-56)
Impetus for the present movement toward
European unity has come principally from Chan-
cellor Adenauer of West Germany....
What we are evidently seeing is. a revival of
the talk, widely current at the end of World
War II, that Europe should be reconstituted so
as to exist as a "third force" between the
United States and communism. The threat to
America implicit in any such arrangement is
that a revivified Europe would adopt the atti-
tude of "a plague on both your houses," and,
whether Mr. Dulles is pleased or not, would
stand clear of attachment to the United States
as well as to communism.
(Chicago Tribune, 10-6-56)
power in their hands (ONA, 9-14-50).
Four years later he denounced the sov-
ereignty status granted to West Germany.
"Every German," he once stated, "must
be pained at the thought that changes
in our constitution still depend upon the
will of the Allies" (Christian Science
Monitor, 4-26-54).
More recently he accused Chancellor
Adenauer of "bearing the historic guilt
for the bad outcome of the German uni-
fication problem" (Reuters, 6-23-56).
This is a significant charge in view of
the fact that the FDP under Dehler's per-
sonal guidance has reestablished political
liaison with the so-called Liberal Party
in the East German satellite state.
"Lesser Lights"
Another influential member of the
FDP is the German diplomat Georg
Pfleiderer. Herr Pfleiderer was one of
the earliest advocates of rapprochement
between West Germany and the Soviet
Union. His activities in this respect have
been analyzed in detail in the No. 48
issue of PREVENT WORLD WAR III
(see page 7, "Scapegoat Tactics"). Ac-
cording to the columnist Marquis Childs,
Pfleiderer is reported to have had close
more serious misdeeds than American
soldiers in Korea (New York Times,
6-5-52). The Times reported that U. S.
authorities were convinced that the state-
ments emanating from the FDP press,
were part of a deliberate campaign and
"a sly attempt to justify the actions of
the Germans who were condemned as
war criminals." The FDP made it a
special point to whitewash all of Ger-
many's war criminals in the effort to
obtain their freedom. Dehler's Ministry
of justice told the press that 90 percent
of the so-called war criminals were "sim-
ple soldiers who happened to be caught
while guarding; concentration camps."
Herr Dehlcr has never been an en-
thusiastic supporter of a pro-Western
policy. On one occasion he asserted that
West Germany must begin to dicker with
the Kremlin because it was there and
not in Washington where important de-
cisions are made. His attitude toward
the Allied occupation has been one of
contempt. The Western Allies, he once
said, were totally ignorant of the prob-
lems facing Germany today. There could
be no democracy in West Germany, he
warned, so long as the High Commis-
sioners-the `Three Holy Kings"--grasp
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R0Q0400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
connections "with powerful Rhineland
industrialists who want to expand their
sales in both Russia and China." Ile is
regarded as the chief expert on foreign
affairs for the Free Democratic Party
and has taken on many a secret mission
in connection with Russo-German rela-
tions, with the blessings of Adcnauer
himself. In his present post as Ambassa-
dor to Yugoslavia, Pfleiderer continues
to work for his goal, i.e., an under-
standing with Moscow. Herr Pfleiderer
is a leading exponent of the so-called
Third Force idea which envisages a Ger-
man dominated Europe cooperating with
the Soviet Union. According to one of
Chancellor Adenauer's trusted associates,
Dr. Eugen Gerstenmaier, Pfleiderer's plan
is in harmony with the long range objec-
tives of Chancellor Adenauer (Stutt-
garter Nachrichten, 10-27-52),
Dr. Erich Mende is also a leading
figure in the FDP. Herr Mende has been
"the most persistent petitioner in the
Bundestag for the release of war crimi-
nals , . ." (New York Times, 3-21-53).
He seldom neglected an occasion to
whitewash these criminals and to dis-
credit the justice of the verdicts handed
down at the Nuremberg \Y/ar Crimes
Trials. In 1952 he wrote a letter to Ade-
nauer (which was more of an ultima-
tum) declaring that the German war
criminals must be freed before the rati-
fication of the EDC Treaty by the Bonn
Government. Indeed, it was Mende who
was instrumental in stalling West Ger-
many's final ratification until satisfaction
was given to his demands.
As a former officer in Hitler's Wehr-
macht, Mende told the New York Times
(8-25-52) that he would never agree to
the ratification of the EDC agreement
until the war criminals Field Marshals
von Manstein and von Kessclring were
freed. They were among the 146 crimi-
nals whose freedom Mende demanded.
Von Manstein and von Kcsselring had
been found guilty of inhuman crimes
during World War 11, but Mende boasted
that they were his "favorites." Like all
of the FDP literature on whitewashing
the war criminals, Mende too parroted
the slander that many German war crimi-
nals had been imprisoned for acts which
he alleged were not different from those
committed by UN forces in Korea. It
is interesting to note that in more recent
times Mende has tried to belittle the
military challenge of the Soviet Union.
We shall have more to say about this
angle.
Another influential personality in the
FDP is Hermann Schwann. From 1934
until 1945 he was a member of the Nazi
party. Since then he has worked dili-
gently on behalf of close ties with the
Soviet bloc, In June 1956 Schwann de-
clared that he would undertake "an un-
accompanied trip" to Red China at his
own expense "to break the ice." Ile
stated that after his sojourn in China
he would visit Moscow (California S`aats-
Zeitung, 6-18-56). Herr Schwann lived
up to his promise with the blessings of
the FDP. Parenthetically, he must have
had the tacit blessings of Chancellor
Adenauer's Government too, because Ger-
man travellers must obtain the necessary
foreign exchange via the government.
The Peiping radio announced Schwann's
arrival.in the Chinese capital in August
1956 where he was duly received by the
Deputy Prime Minister of the Peoples
Republic of China, Chen Yi, and the
Deputy Chairman of the Permanent Peo-
ples Parliament Committee Huang Yen
Pei. During his stay there Schwann dis-
cussed "existing possibilities for trade
between the Federal Republic and China"
(Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 8-28-
56).
As Schwann indicated in his earlier
announcement he visited Moscow after
leaving China. When Schwann returned
to the Fatherland, he was far from silent
concerning the future. Germany, he de-
clared, must sut up proper economic rela-
tions with Communist China. He ex-
pressed his determination to create a
"German-Chinese Association" and said
that he intended to return to China in
the spring of 1957. Though Schwann
originally said that he would go alone
to China, he actually had a companion
traveller, Wolfgang Schenke. PREVENT
WORLD WAR III has already exposed
Schenke as a former intelligence agent
for the Nazi High Command in China,
working in the guise of a German jour-
nalist (see No. 48, page 10, Dr. Wilhelm
Haas-Ambassador Extraordinary). Herr
Schenke was described in flattering terms
by the Soviet publication "International
Affairs" (February 1956) as "the promi-
nent West German orientalist." His
views on neutralism were quoted approv-
ingly by the Soviet publication.
Professor Noack
Recently the FDP welcomed into its
ranks Professor Ulrich Noack. Prof.
Noack is unfamiliar to most Americans
but he is an important personality in
West Germany. If Prof. Noack intends
to pursue the same line which he so ar-
ticulately supported following the end
of World War It, then his membership
in the FDP will undoubtedly add new
significance to the future role of that
party. He was an -active German propa-
gandist when he lived in Norway in 1938.
At that time (the year of Munich) he
published a book. "The Ethics of Euro-
pean Diplomacy" in which he glorified
Hitler's diplomacy and belabored the
theme of a "Greater German Lebens-
raum." When war broke out, he re-
turned to Norway to continue his ac-
tivities on behalf of the Fatherland. At
the trial of Vidkun Quisling, the Nor-
wegian traitor, it was revealed that Noack
had participated in organizing Quisling's
trip to Germany. Indeed, Norwegian offi-
cials charged that it was Noack who in-
troduced Quisling to Hitler in 1939 at
which time the invasion of Norway was
discussed. These officials have further
stated that Noack was chiefly responsible
for the course of events in Norway in
1940. As professor of German at the
University of Oslo he misused his office
to spy for the German Embassy. Reliable
sources report that Noack had been a
member of the Nazi party since 1939
(Neuc Zeitung, 11-7-49).
Following the defeat of Germany in
1945, Prof. Noack became a celebrated
public figure when he announced his pro-
gram for the "salvation" of Germany.
The essence of his plan amounted to im-
mediate ending of the Allied occupa-
tion of Germany and the establishment
of a strong centralized German govern-
ment. The tone and aim of the program
was decidedly anti-Western and sought
to salvage Germany's economic and po-
litical power by playing up to the Rus-
sians. He talked about a so-called neutral
Germany, but behind the word neutralism
Noack strove to save Germany from the
consequences of her crimes and aggres-
sions. There was nothing in his program
which showed a sense of contrition. It
was purely a device to enable Germany
to take a commanding position in Europe
which, after all, had been the aim of
Hitler himself.
Prof. Noack developed many of his
ideas following frequent visits to the
Russian military headquarters in Berlin.
It was in 1947 that he organized the
Nauheim Circle, named after the resort
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
where he had preached his gospel. The
Circle was composed of elements repre-
senting all colors of the political spec-
trum. The following year Noack's move-
ment attracted more influential groups
throughout West Germany. His slogan
"Out With the Occupation Troops" ap-
pealed to "Communists, Nazis, pacifists,
professors, students and industrials from
both East and West" (AP, 11-26-48).
In November 1949 Noack convened a
congress of his supporters. German poli-
ticians from the satellite East zone indi-
cated their enthusiasm for the meeting.
Important personalities from the Western
zones also supported the movement. In
this connection Noack had the ear of
many prominent Ruhr industrialists whose
mouths watered at the idea of profitable
trading with the East.
Generally speaking, Noack attracted
politicians, diplomats, intellectuals and
industrialists on both sides of the Iron
Curtain who maintained their loyalty to
the Bismarckian tradition of close under-
standing with Russia vis-a-vis the West.
While his activities were glorified by the
Communist controlled press in the East
zone, he was described in the West as
"the most dangerous man in Germany."
One American high official noted that
Noack's program "is more effective than
the Communists's because it is not clearly
identifiable with the Communists." He
freely admitted that his movement at-
tracted the extreme right and extreme
left. "How do I explain that Communists
from the East zone and rightists from
the West are all in my camp? It is sim-
ple. They all believe in Germany unity
and the withdrawal of the troops" (New
York Herald Tribune, 11-27-48).
Noack's Mentor
The pro-Russian orientation of Noack's
Nauheim Circle was not an isolated case.
His movement was part of the overall
line pursued by a former German Am-
bassador to Moscow, Rudolf Nadolny.
Count Nadolny was also a disciple of
Bismarck and a faithful student of Ger-
many's master geo-politician, Dr. Karl
Haushofer. Nadolny pioneered in re-
establishing friendly relations with the
Kremlin after 1945. In that year Marshal
Zukhov appointed him to the post of
Special Advisor on German Questions. In
this strategic position and with the com-
plete backing of the Russians, Nadolny
began to organize small groups of in-
fluential personalities to develop long-
term plans for a Russo-German under-
standing.
Unlike the Noack circle, Nadolny's
following was smaller in numbers and
less noisy but where it lacked quantity
it had the power to reach into the highest
circles of German society. Among his
admirers one could find persons who
today are associated on the most intimate
political terms with Chancellor Adenauer
and his government, including Hermann
Abs (Hitler's chief paymaster and finan-
cial advisor to Adenauer), Ludwig Er-
hard, Adenauer's Minister of Economics,
Andreas Hermes, one of the founders of
the Chritsian Democratic Union, There
was a firm relationship between Na-
dolny's small group and the Nauheim
Circle. Ruth Fischer, an.expert on Ger-
man Communist affairs, wrote that the
Noack movement was "Nadolny's direct
offspring" (This Week, 11-6-49). The
French journal Franc Tireur (11-5-49)
reported that Nadolny was "in liaison
with Noack." Indeed, the New York
Times (3-13-49) noted that Nadolny was
a member of the Nauheim Circle in
Hesse. Thus, the evidence shows that
the "circles" created by Nadolny and
Noack had close ties with each other and
had a common purpose, i.e., the reestab-
lishing of a Greater Germany through an
understanding with the Soviet Union at
the expense of Western security. That
Noack should now regard the FDP as his
political home helps to clarify the hopes
and ambitions of the FDP leadership.
Nazi Connections
It is true that the FDP is a minority
party but where it lacks mass support,
it attracts individuals whose voices carry
weight in German affairs. In this con-
nection, the FDP is receiving the sup-
port of many of Germany's leading
publicists. For example, Paul Sethe, a
leading journalist and writer for the
German newspaper Die Welt, has ex-
pressed sympathy for the FDP cause.
Gieselher Wirsing, another prominent
writer for Die Welt, has also gone over
to the FDP. Wirsing was the author of
many anti-Semitic books during the Hitler
regime. Today he attacks Israel while he
lauds the Nasser dictatorship in Egypt.
FDP politicians have been preparing
for the coming elections for some time.
They are out to round up a big vote even
if it takes a good Nazi propagandist to
help them. Thus, they have employed
Gunther Kaufman, former editor of the
Hitlerite periodical "Whlle and Macht"
(Will and Power), to do a smear job
on their political opponents.
Playing ball with former Nazis does
not deter the FDP from flirting with the
Social Democratic Party. In the State of
North Rhine Westphalia the FDP joined
hands with the Social Democratic Party to
overturn the government of Karl Arnold.
In an informative article on the growing
influence of the former Hitler Youth in
the FDP,.Terence Prittie, noted English
journalist, reports that they are not even
satisfied with Dr. Dehler who may be a
bit too cautious to suit them. Mr. Prittie
reports that these ex-Nazis "want a direct
German approach to Moscow in order
to win German reunification, East-West
all-German talks and the re-emergence
of a 'German role' as arbiter of Europe's
fate" (New Republic, 6-2-56). These
young Hitlerites, Mr. Prittie writes, have
a profound contempt for democratic prin-
ciples. They are anti-Western and regard
Germany's association with the Western
powers as a long term liability although
they recognize that Western financial and
political support helped Germany to re-
gain a position of power. Like their Nazi
forebears they hope to exploit the dis-
content of the various social groupings of
Germany and dream of the day when
their voice will determine Germany's fate.
Accommodating the Russians
Recognizing that the Social Democrats
have gained considerable political advan-
tage due to the declining vigor of Ade-
neuer's following, the FDP is desperately
trying to overtake their rivals. Dr. Mende
has publicly declared his support for a
military detente along the lines which
the Russians have been pushing.
In May 1956 the FDP congress sup-
ported Mende's plan which called for a
united Germany, a breaking up of NATO
and the establishment of an independent
German army, Mr. Prittie observes that
Mende's plan has provided the Free
Democrats with a new line of thought.
"Small professional armies on both.sides
of the iron-curtain frontier which runs
through the middle of Germany could
be amalgamated after reunification; they
could even encourage reunification by the
threat implicit in their existence. Behind
these professional armies-which will re-
vive the glorious memories of German
arms-will be `national militias' to be
used for local defense only. Their role
should suggest that no German any longer
considers armed aggression as a quick
way of settling arguments." As Mr.
Prittie points out, the Mende plan is
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-013158000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
almost an exact counterpart of the ideas
put forth more than a year ago by
Colonel von Bonin who was a leading
military advisor in Adenauer's Defense
Ministry. Von Bonin was dismissed be-
cause on the surface at least, the Bonn
Government disapproved of his ideas
which were regarded as playing into
the hands of Russian strategy. Now the
FDP which has close connections with
former members of the German General
Staff, has taken over the von Bonin plan
as its own. (Ironically, it appears that
Adenauer's Government is now working
toward the same end.)
Planning for "The Day"
Thus, the FDP today is not merely
running an election campaign. From all
of its deeds and the statements of its
leaders, the evidence points to the fact
that the FDP regards itsef as THE party
which is destined to deal with the Soviet
Union and to bring about the Fourth
German Reich.
On more than one occasion the Society
has emphasized that the Kremlin was
not so much interested in communizing
all of Germany, for the present time at
least, as it was in helping to create a
Germany which would dissociate itself
from the West and deal with the Rus-
sians "realistically" on all levels.
The Russians find it more profitable
to deal with the Krupps than they do in
supporting isolated and discredited Ger-
man Communists in West Germany. The
EDP seems to understand this too, The
top leaders of the FDP including Dehler,
have reestablished their liaison with the
so-called Liberal Democratic Party of
East Germany. The New York Times
( 10-9-56) reported that West Germans
placed little significance on this get-
together because there "was little com-
munity of principle" between the two.
From other accounts of the meeting it
would seem that the West Germans as
quoted by the Times are wide of the
mark. While the participants in the
meeting admitted that there were diver-
gencies of opinion, " a common approach
was secured over practical matters for
achieving German unity." What these
practical matters are has not been spelled
out although they agreed in principle to
exchange speakers!
Commenting on the results of the
meeting the Manchester Guardian (10-
11-56) declared that the FDP's action
in seeking common ground with the
Eastern parry must not be regarded as
an isolated affair. "It would turn out,"
the Guardian writes, "to be a turning
point in postwar Germany. The guiding
thought behind it is the belief that a
concerted effort must be made to secure
reunification and that all other questions,
including close association with the West
and a place in a united Europe, are
subordinate."
The meeting between the FDP and its
Eastern counterpart recalls to mind the
views expressed by Herr Dehler two
years ago when he advocated Russo-
German talks and indicated the willing-
ness to go himself to Moscow. He told
the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung
(10-5-54) that for years the project of a
journey to Moscow had stirred him more
than a trip to Washington "because what
is going on, what is planned and worked
out in Moscow is more important than
that what goes on in the Western world."
He declared his opposition to what he
called anti-Soviet politics and said, "Rus-
sia is a realistic power, it is necesasry
that we dicuss and come together in a
peaceful way." A couple of weeks later
Herr Dehler returned to this same theme
and predicted that it was "simply a
matter of course that we Germans will
some day enter into conversatons with the
Russians on unification" (New York Her-
ald Tribune, 10-19-54). The FDP today
is still planning with all its energy for
that day.
The problems of the past already have given
way to new problems. The shift of Poland from
satellite status to independent Titoism, and of
Hungary probably much further, raises a very
serious question about how Central and Eastern
Europe are to be reorganized, There may soon
be a power vacuum in Eastern Europe, If the
Sovjet Union is expelled totally from it, the
historical course would be for Germany, in
competition with France, to attempt to occupy
it. Yet this would rebuild the substance of the
old German Empire.
[Joseph C. Harsch, Christian Science Mcnifer, 10-30-561
A Western Germany fully capable of de-
fending itself with modern weapons and armies
would again offset the balance of power in
Europe. That has been the fear of the French in
particular. The rest of Europe concurs....
Germany's tremendous economic upsurge
come while the rest of Europe fulfilled its
NATO commitments. The British are certain that
Germany would not have moved so spectacu-
larly if Bonn had the some obligations as the
United Kingdom. France joins in with this ar-
gument.
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-013158000400480012-6
 ,Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
,*mn~ &aA~2oMk in IhR Mwb 4~~d
The fishing season in the Middle East is on with a ven-
geance. "Soviet and Nazi technicians (in Egypt) are once
more cooperating with all of the intimacy inspired by their
dead leaders' 1939 pact" (Barron's, 12-3-56), Though Soviet
and German "fishermen" eye each other with suspicion, they
find it mutually advantageous for the present to exchange
hooks and bait. Reports concerning the "catches" of the Rus-
sian anglers have been widely publicized, both here and
abroad, but, strangely, comparatively little has been told
about the big "hauls" of the German fishing enthusiasts. This
seems to be all the more inexplicable in view of the fact that
the German "fishing" tradition in the Middle East covers
two world wars and has produced such "expert anglers" as
Kaiser Wilhelm II, the Mannesmann Brothers, Dr. Hjalma.r
Schacht, Field Marshal Erwin Rommel and his Commander-
in-Chief, Adolf Hitler,
We do not mean to imply that the Middle East Crisis with
its threat to world peace can be readily explained solely in
terms of the Russian and German "fishing" expeditions. Yet,
if we minimize the importance of their exploits, we shall be
ill equipped to deal with this crisis in a realistic way.
German Agents At Work
In the Nos. 41 and 48 issues of PREVENT WORLD
WAR III we provided pertinent details regarding the postwar
activities of the Germans in the Middle East and their impact
on Arab policy toward the West. For example, we brought':
out the fact that hundreds of neo-Nazis, Pan-Germans, and
war criminals found a haven in Egypt shortly after World
War II. They were able to infiltrate important positions in
Egypt's economy and military setup. They served as key ad-,
visors to Nasser's predecessors and, of course, they continue
this role under the present Egyptian dictatorship.
It is not without significance, we believe, that key German.
agents in Egypt are reported to be in close touch with Bonn
Government officials including Adenauer's chief diplomatic:
aids, Dr. Blankenhorn and Prof. Hallstein. Even Der Spiegel,
a widely read German magazine, had to take cognizance of
these facts (10-26-55) : "Adenauer's leading diplomats have
laid themselves open to the charge that they must share to a
considerable extent in the tactical victory gained by the Bol-
sheviks in the Near and Middle East."
To this very day the Adenauer Government has remained
silent on the nefarious role played by the former partisans of
Hitler in Egypt and in other Middle East countries. We have
yet to hear Adenauer condemn Nasser's employment in key
posts of such faithful servants of Hitler and Goebbels as
Wilhelm Voss, Johannes von Leers, etc.
According to the latest count that we have seen, there are
approximately four thousand Germans in Egypt alone (New
York Times, 10-31-56). We have no doubt that these "vis-
itors" and "tourists" have other interests than just gazing
upon the ancient pyramids and the Sphinx. - Descriptions of
their doings show that they feel very much at home in Egypt.
They enjoy the best hotels and have easy access to the elite
in Egyptian society including Nasser himself.
The Egyptian dictator has done much, it seems, to bolster
up the "morale" of these Germans since their expulsion from
Egypt by the British during World War II. Their arrogance
has reached such proportions that, according to one reporter,
they are "lording it as if they had won the battle of Alamein"
(London Daily Express, 8-31-56).
Parenthetically, it should be borne in mind that Nasser
has written boastfully about how he contacted Hitler's agents
during World War II for sabotage operations against our
British Ally. -
"Neutrality"
The delicate situation in the Middle East has demanded the
utmost prudence on the part of the Germans to prevent the
growth of distrust among the Western Allies with regard to
their activities. On the surface West Germany is a sympathetic
friend and ally of Britain and France. However, Germany's
gestures of sympathy should not blind us as to their real aims.
Even before hostilities broke out in the Middle East, the
German press and other channels of information were con-
ditioning public opinion to take a pro-Arab stand. Editorials
in leading German newspapers including the "Frankfurter
Allgemeine Zeitung" attacked the British and French position
on the Suez as "irresponsible." The Bonn Government
adopted an equivocal line when Nasser seized the Canal. This
was in the name of "neutrality." (It is interesting to note
that Adenauer has opposed the idea of German military
neutrality in negotiations between the West and Moscow.)
The $64,000: Challenge
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
Yet, this so-called neutrality did not prevent Bonn from
seriously considering the acceptance of Nasser's invitation to
a conference that would have created a regime for the Suez
Canal in violation of the international agreements covering
this major waterway. The New York Times (9-16-15) re-
ported that Bonn was determined "it, do all possible to avoid
taking sides in a showdown by force between its European
treaty partners and the cnrn try's Arab-Asian partners in a
flourishing commerce." The following day the Times reported
that, while West Germany would join discussions on the
establishing of the Suez Canal User's Association "Foreign
Minister Heinrich von Brentano has told British and French
officials that Bonn would make no commitment on joining."
The careful diplomacy and the tricky editorials in the
German press were discarded when hostilities broke out in
the Middle East. It seems as though the West German press
had been "itching" for that moment, so it could blast away
at the British and French. "Die Welt," an influential German
newspaper, which employs journalists who worked for Ilitler,
condemned the British move in Egypt as an "imperialistic"
aggression. "The victory at Port Said will be a Pyrrhic vic-
tory," this newspaper ominously declared.
"Public Opinion" and Politicians
The unanimity of the German press assaults condemning
the British and French as "war criminals" made it appear as
though instructions had been received from a central source.
The German press outburst was the spark to enflame West
German public opinion (London Economist, 11.10-56). A
reporter of the Christian Science Monitor (11-16-56) de-
scribed West German reactions toward the British and French
as "almost as violent as they are toward events in Hungary."
The same reporter noted that the German mood was a kind
of "Schadenfreude," i.e., a malicious joy which recalled the
Allied condemnation of Germany's crimes under Nazism. The
British and French action was compared to Hitler's aggres-
sions. Demonstrators in Berlin manhandled British soldiers,
and students in Hamburg carried banners which proclaimed
"Send Eden to Nuremberg," obviously to stand his trial as a
war criminal.
While the Germans heaped abuse on Prime Minister Eden,
they began to tell themselves that Iitler's barbarous actions
were not so terrible after all. Indeed, people began to say
that "all the fuss about Nuremberg and the branding of
Germany as guilty can now be forgotten" (Christian Science
Monitor, 11-16-56). Even the Arab Ambassadors to Bonn
were given the opportunity to launch slanderous attack'
against France, Britain and Israel at a specially prepared
press conference.
The whipping up of public opinion trade it safer for the
Bonn politicians to speak more candidly. Foreign Minister
von Brentano stated on December 1, that the Bonn Govern-
ment's attitude with regard to the Suez conflict has been at
all times determined by consideration for the "close and
friendly relations" with the Arab States. Chancellor Adenauer
himself condemned Britain, France and Israel in a speech
before the Bundestag. Posing as a paragon of peace, the
Chancellor tried to convey to world public opinion that the
Germans were a disinterested party in the struggle and
would exercise their "moral" influence to curb the -rash" use
of force. While speaking on this high plane, Adenauer's
Government was busily at work pressuring Israel through the
threat to cut off restitution deliveries which the Germans had
solemnly obligated themselves to discharge. Adenauer's saintly
pose in this crisis was deliberately built up by German prop-
aganda, Indeed, his spokesmen ,vent so far as to claim that
it was the Chancellor who played "an influential role in the
discussions that preceded acceptance by Britain and France
of a cease fire in Egypt" (New York Times, 11-8-56).
The Germans had played their hand well. The coordination
between the newspapers and the government and the shaping
of public opinion seemed to work with military precision. So
careful were the German bigwigs that nothing must be said
that could destroy Germany's posture as a disinterested party
in the conflict that they agreed in advance to prohibit de-
bate on the Middle East Crisis in the German parliament.
Instead, the Chancellor read his prepared and ambiguous
speech and the "opposition" leaders reciprocated in kind. It
was a cut and dried affair. The actors played their parts to
perfection all under the categorical imperative "Don't rock
the boat!"
It is not difficult, by any means, to define the underlying
motives which have induced German politicians to avoid any
statement or action that would displease Nasser and other
Arab leaders. They were succinctly described by the foreign
correspondent Seymour Freidin:
"prang Nach Osten"
"In the general uproar over the future status of the canal,
everyone seems to have forgotten that West Germany has
moved into the Middle East, economically, on a scale the
country never approached before and during two world wars.
"It's a Drang-nach-Osten, present-day Bonn-to-Baghdad
road, paved with billions of hard Deutschemarks, contracts
and credits for the smoking factories of West Germany.
Where a vacuum existed by the liquidation of French or
British interests, West Germany promptly moved in, se. up
shop and thrived briskly.
"Because of their ever-expanding industrial power, the
House of Krupp and associated West German competitors
foresaw the day that they would install themselves in en-
trenched, cash-and-carry positions. These are lush prospects,
not easily disgorged. They happen also to be compatible with
some absorbing, West German national political interests"
(New York Post, 9-6-56).
Mr. Freidin's observations have received concurrence from
other reliable sources. Thus, the Manchester Guardian (8-9-
56) wrote: "With the collapse of old relationships in the
Middle East, and with their own growing industrial power,
many Germans hope that their country can fill the vacuum if
not politically at least economically." The Christian Science
Monitor's Bonn correspondent, J. Emlyn Williams, also notes,
"The greatest concern of the West Germans now, apart from
peace, is the safeguarding of industrial investments in Arab
lands and expanding their trade there" (11-16-56).
There is no question but that the Germans believe that the
Middle East Crisis has created vast opportunities for the
realization of Germany's ambitions. It has given new hope to
Adenauer's dream of a United Europe where the political
and economic policies of the separate states would be "co-
ordinated." The New York Times (11-19-56) notes that
Adenauer's domestic authority and "consequently his capacity
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
to move forcefully on the European stage also has been en-
hanced by the turn of events in Hungary and Egypt." Now
that the British and French are beset with grave problems,
Herr Adenauer feels that he can show them how "logical" it
would be for the Western European nations to unite in order
to protect their "common interests."
The idea of unity like the world peace can have different
meanings. For the Germans the unity of Western Europe is
synonymous with their domination of that area. To them it
means that they would do all of the "coordinating" and act:
as the agent of Western Europe in dealings with the Arab
countries. Aside from their conceit, the Germans believe that
they are best suited for the -task because their hands are
"clean." It goes without saying, of course, that the role of
"honest broker" promises enormous windfalls, both politically
and economically.
Seeking U. S. Support
Yet, the Germans, under present circumstances, know that
their game cannot be won without the sympathetic support
of the USA. It is for this reason that German propaganda
has all of a sudden placed the United States on a special
pedestal. President Eisenhower is now being hailed as the
great peace maker. The United States is depicted as the only
power that can retrieve the "moral' authority" of the West
which was so brutally and brazenly undermined by the British
and French. Thus, the Germans fawn upon the USA while
they engage in scurrilous attacks against our Western Allies.
Needless to say, the intent of this tactic is to create further
disunity between the British and French on the one hand and
the USA on the other. At the same time, Adenauer's For-
eign Minister von Brentano offers Germany's "good offices"
to restore mutual trust between Washington, London and
Paris and "to revive the solidarity of the West" (New York
Herald Tribune, 12-2-56).
It is interesting to note that besides their efforts to act as
"honest broker" between the USA and its Western Allies
and between the Middle East and the West, the Germans
seek to act as spokesmen for the West vis-a-vis Moscow.
Thus, Adenauer, while opposing a Big Four meeting to dis-
cgss outstanding East-West problems, told a press conference
that he was willing to open bilateral talks with the Kre:nlin
at any time" (New York Times, 12-8-56).
As mentioned above, the opportunities in the Middle East
are vast and the Germans are losing no time to bring the
United States over to its corner. Thus, when the Middle East
Crisis was at its height, Adenauer told the press that he was
determined to make a major effort "to tighten German-
American cooperation." Toward this end he planned to send
von Brentano to Washington, "to sound out administration
leaders and press for coordination of German and American
policy in Europe and the Middle East" (New York World
Telegram, 11-16-56).
In economic terms this so-called coordination revolves
around Germany's objective of becoming the most influential
power in the Middle East and in North Africa. Indicative of
German thinking in this respect was Dr. Adenauer's sugges-
tion, made during the crisis, that "the West" help Egypt
build the Assuan Dam. Speaking at a meeting of German
newspaper editors he said, the best way to bring peace to the
Middle East was "to support reconstruction of the crippled
Egyptian economy" (New York Times, 11-18-56). Obviously,
Adenauer's words could only warm the heart of the Egyptian
dictator while they implicitly. slapped the British and French.
Adenauer's high sounding phrases turned out to be trial
balloon for more practical considerations. Thus, several weeks
after he spoke, reports circulated in Egypt that Krupp had
offered to build the Assuan Dam (AP, 12-5-56). When rep-
resentatives of Krupp were asked to confirm these reports,
they told the press that they were "premature." For almost a
year the Krupp interests have been working on their so-called
Point 41/2 Program for the underdeveloped countries. If we
tear away all of the fancy trimmings around this project, we
find that it is based on two assumptions: (a) that the scheme
will be financed by Uncle Sam, and (b) that the major share
of profits will go to Krupp. To put it another way: the
Point 41/2 Program is part and parcel of the German aim to
bring to fruition the Berlin-Baghdad axis. Germany tried to
realize this dream in two world wars. Having failed by force,
they hope they will succeed via the US Treasury. IL- would
be well for our statesmen to bear this in mind before they
pick up the check for Germany's honest brokers, the Herren
Adenauer and Krupp. Much is at stake in the German gambit
in the Middle East. Above all, there is the grand alliance
between the United States and France and Great Britain-
the foundation stone of their mutual security and prosperity.
HOLDING UP THE WORKSI
(N. Y. Daily Mirror)
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
"German Kultur Association of European Spirit"
Nationalist youth organizations have stepped up their ac-
tivities though they lack as yet a strong over-all leadership,
it is stated in an article in the Bayerirche Siaatszeitlatg, 23-6-
56, which distinguishes three categories: (a) groups with an
undisguised Fascist tendency, e.g., "Viking Youth" and,
closely associated with the German Block. "Eagle" Youth
Union; (b) groups with a more old-fashioned sort of nation-
alism, e.g., the German Party's "Union of Young Germans"
and an organization of the refugees, "German Youth of the
East"; (c) the youth groups attached to the soldiers' associa-
tions whose aim is to foster the "soldierly virtues." The Ba-
varian paper believes that in the event of a deterioration of
the political situation, the third category was likely to con-
stitute a much more serious danger than any of the other
groups which were numerically inferior and also disunited.
A warning against the "revival of Nazi and nationalist
tendencies" in certain youth organizations was issued by the
Hesse Government Youth Department (according to the
Offenbach Post, 31-7-56). Attention was drawn particularly
to the danger of any cooperation with the "German Kultur
Association of European Spirit." This Association is stated
by the trade union paper lVelt der Arbeit. 15-6-56, to be run
by "unteachable Nazi diehards" engaged in "subversive ac-
tivities under the cloak of Kultur" of which three instances
were named: the "Termer" publishing firm, publication of a
periodical called Klriter B/after, and two busy book societies.
President of the Kultur Association is Herbert Buhme, a
former SA writer- He has gathered around him a number of
Nazi and philo-Nazi authors, e.g., Will Vesper, Wilhelm
Pleyer, Theodor Seidcnfaden, Mans Grimm, Heinz Steguweit,
who meet regularly to read from their works.
In his effort to win influence among German youth (says
a report in the Socialist Voriviiris. 29-6-56), Bohme recently
founded the "Schiller League of German Youth" which is
said to have affiliated to the Hitler Youth successor organiza-
tion called "Viking Youth." A youth rally was held at Castle
Ludwigstein, the Kultur Association's permanent home, where
one of Whine's friends, Joscfa Behrens-Totenohl. read from
her "Blood and Soil" lyrics.
Hitler-l'aust and His Gretchen
A typical example of Bihme's Kultur propaganda is an
article of his in K//iter Batter, July 1956, where he compares
Hitler (without naming him) to Faust who had brought
about the "creative awakening" of the German people
("Gretchen"). "We were awakened (Bohme writes), we
could not do anything about it, such was the power he
wielded over us, and by knowledge and ability he increasingly
poured enthusiasm into our unspoilt souls," etc.
This article was denounced in the FraukJurter A//gemehie,
2-8-56, as an attempt to minimize "guilt" by representing it
as "fate." That sort of "poetry," it was said, is "infested
with ulterior motives," and "the intoxication of feeling is
corrupted by the perversions of malice."
According to the Welt der Arbeit, 15-6-56, Governmental
subsidies already promised to the Kultur Association were
withdrawn by the Bavarian Ministries of Finance and Edu-
cation after strong protests had been lodged in the Munich
press. The loss is said to have been made up, however, by
substantial grants from industrialists,
"Threat from the Right" was the motto of the 14th con-
gress held by the Federation of West German Youth Asso-
ciations at Oberursel (according to the Vorwart.r, 29-6-56).
The principal speaker, Professor Eugen Kogon, stressed the
characteristics by which the incorrigible elements today could
be recognized: defamation of the Weimar Republic; impugn-
ing the integrity of the anti-Nazi resistance, and direct or
indirect glorification of the Hitler regime. A plea for legisla-
tion to stop the new Nazi literature, was made by the chair-
man of the Association of Catholic Youth, Dr. Schreeb.
Increasing encroachments of nationalism were also de-
ECHOES OF THE SS
Police have been looking around Bavaria for
recordings of Hitler's voice. They don't have to
go that far.
In the last month, there has been more done
by official sanction and calculated indifference
to make respectable men of Nazis than through
the entire combined post-war period.
Because of difficulty in recruiting for the new
army, the Federal Republic changed its policy
about Waffen SS officers....
As-the SS demands, and becomes, more equal
with the passage of time, an operative ques-
tion much be asked. To whom will the officers
be loyal? Many of them swore oaths of alle-
giance to another German Republic in the past
and then proceeded to destroy the state.
Can a glib expression of loyalty from such
men mean more to them than the oath they took
to their Fuehrer? In logical sequence, their
hearts belong to Doenitz, Hitlers' appointed
successor.
The SS is getting promoted all the time. Only
a short while ago, they were permitted to volun-
teer for the new army only as privates. Today,
it's up to lieutenant colonel. The pressure, as
Kurt Meyer's rally clearly implied, will be for
the generals next.
It doesn't mean that these unfortunate activi-
ties are symptomatic of rampant Nazism on the
militant march again. It shows that utter indif-
ference, compounded of political expediency
and studied carelessness, is providing a power-
ful voice to the worst elements in Germany.
(Seymour Freidin, The N. Y. Post, 10-13-56)
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
nounced in a statement by the German Federal Youth Fed-
eration, the roof organization of all democratic youth asso-
ciations, according. to a report in the Siiddeutscbe Zeitung,
15-6-56. The danger is seen in "the arrogant deportment of
former Nazi officials, the infiltration of nationalists into high
administrative and Government posts, the launching of youth
groups devoted to obsolete ideologies, and the open defama-
tion of the anti-Nazi resistance." A demand was made on
all politicians to banish nationalist arguments from their utter-
ances, and on Parliament to outlaw the glorification of
Nazism.
Nazi Authors Reinstated
Hans Baumann, author of Nazi youth and soldiers' songs,
was awarded the Friedrich Gerstacker Prize by the city of
Brunswick. In a report, the Zeit, 26-7-56, recalls that Bau-
mann had composed the song containing the lines "Today
ours is Germany, tomorrow all the world." The paper pro-
tests against a distinction being conferred on a man "whose
fraudulent pathos helped induce German youth to run off to
the battle fields and into the graves of a nonsensical war."
Hans Grimm was among a number of Nazi and philo-Nazi
authors invited by the. Cuxhaven Spa Council to read from
their works at Council-organized "Authors' Nights by the
Sea," says a report. in the West Berlin Telegraf, 18-7-56.
Hermann Wanderscheck, member of the Nazi "Reich Gov
ernment's Press Department," was appointed editor-in-chief
of the new journal of the Copyright Society, Der Author. He
had held the same office under the Nazis. In a comment, the
trade union paper Welt Der Arbeit, 22-6-56, lists Wander-
scheck's propagandist Nazi output and reflects on the "tragedy
that people like him, champions of the Nordic-racialist per-
version of literature, today claim and actually obtain leadin
positions among German authors."
Denying the Crimes
The "Organ of the Outlawed Victims of Post-War Dis-
crimination," Die Anklage, which specializes in denigration
of the German anti-Nazi resistance (see last Bulletin, p. 7),
also concentrates on systematically denying the Nazi crimes,
especially the extermination of the Jews. "This is the Truth.
Stop the Atrocities Propaganda," runs the headline of a full
page article (No. 13-14, July 1-15, 1956) asserting, on the
strength of a Jewish source of 1935, that in the whole of
what was later German-occupied Europe, there had been no
more than 6,190,182 Jews-"all of whom the lying Allied
propaganda says were murdered." The Nazi paper leaves out
from its account (and quotation) the relevant figures for
Russia and the Baltic States (ca. 2,200,000), and adorns its
"truth" by adding that the 1935 figures 'does not include the
"scores of thousands" who emigrated to "Israel, oversea,
Switzerland, Portugal, Algiers and South Africa."
The "atrocity fairy tale" about the six million murdered
Jews had been invented, says Die Anklage, "in order to fan
among the Allies hatred of everything German during the
war, and after the war to use that figure for dirty business,
deriving from it a certain moral claim to the highest possible
indemnification."
"Widar" Publishing Company
On instructions from the Bonn Ministry of the Interior,
investigations are being made by the Federal Criminal In-
vestigations Bureau into the affairs of the antisemitic "Widar"
publishing firm of Guido Roeder, at Oberammergau. This
"unusual procedure" is applied, according to the Kolner
Stadtanzeiger, 18-7-56, only when the Minister of the Interior
has "serious reasons" for doing so.
Among the firm's publications is a book by an American
Jew-baiter, Eustace Mullins, entitled "Federal Reserve Con-
spiracy," which is described, in the Echo der Zeit, 15-7-56,
as "insane ravings about a Jewish-Communist domination of
the United States, with direct incitement to Jew massacres."
Another "Widar" book, "Soviet Agents Everywhere," was
confiscated by the Public Prosecutor. So were, according to
the S/iddeutsche Zeitung, 4-8-56, 9,000 copies of Eustace
Mullins's brochure "Die Bankierverschworung von Jekyl Is-
land" (apparently the German version of the above-mentioned
title).
The fact that books like these are published in Germany in
the year 1956 is described by Die Zeit, 26-7-56, as "fantastic
and humiliating."
Guido Roeder, owner of "Widar," is himself the author
of an "anti-Communist" brochure entitled "SOS Rufe aus
U.S.A.-Die Kommende Rote Diktatur." Denouncing it, a
Frankfurter Allgemeine editorial, 10-7-56, explains that un-
der the camouflage of anti-Communism, the author was "dish-
ing up the very hoariest tales from the arsenal of Messrs.
Julius Streicher, Alfred Rosenberg and Adolf Hitler." The
editorial concludes: "Products of diseased brains-true
enough. But since we have lived to see what catastrophes and
crimes can be caused by such a compound of folly, insolence
and hate, it is not sufficient to expose it to ridicule . . .
People like Roder-and there are several others of his ilk
amongst us-must be stopped from carrying on their in-
salubrious trade. Where incitement to crime begins, tolerance
and freedom ends." (Courtesy, Wiener Library Bulletin)
NEW CUSTOMER
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 BULL-BOY
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
MEMO TO FUTURE HISTORIANS
The new German army is restoring the jackboot and
a uniform similar to that of the old Wehrmacht.
Present uniforms, double-breasted with wide lapels,
were widely criticized as "un-German" and "Latin-
American." The army is introducing a single-breasted
blouse with only two breast pockets.
The army's American-style boots, similar to those
worn by paratroopers, will be replaced by black jack-
boots last seen in Adolf Hitler's time.
(N. Y. World Telegram and Sun, 12-17-56)
ECHOES OF THE PAST
Siegfried Einstein, a Jewish poet, is currently appeal-
ing a fine of 300 marks levied against him because of
his alleged slander of the officials of his town, Lampert-
heim. Einstein called them "Nazi bosses" and "Nazi
louts," but claims he spoke only after severe provoca-
tion over a two-year period ...
The original court ruling said that Einstein was suf-
fering from a "Jew vs. Nazi" complex, and he was
therefore fined instead of imprisoned for his offense ...
According to the Manchester Guardian, Lampertheim
has become notorious for its anti-Semitism. Einstein has
charged that a large majority of the town council are
ex-Nazis. He also publicly protested when honors and
6.000 marks were conferred on returned prisoner of war
Wilhelm Rau, former Nazi legal inspector ...
The fires of nationalism flared with uncomfortable
heat in Bonn ... when Heinrich Schneider, West Ger-
many's newest and most accomplished demagogue,
arrived in the capital to stoke the reunification furnace
before a crowd of 70,000 refugees from the East who
booed the name of Adenauer and howled for the re-
turn of lost territory. Their eyes are on the Oder-Neisse
line beyond which is the land taken by Russia and
Poland after the war.
Schneider is the bully-boy from the French-occupied
Saarland whose Nazi tactics helped win the Saar's
vote last year for return to Germany . . , He called the
Bonn rally for a joint council of the East and West
German governments to prepare a National Assembly
for a united, neutral Germany that would join a "peace
zone" of states stretching from Finland to the Mediter-
ranean.
(Theodore f aghan, N. Y. Post, 10-6-56)
"LOVE NOTES"
Hesse's interior ministry is pressing an investigation
of the "Fighting Organization for an Independent Ger-
many," which does its fighting with poison-pen hand-
bills reminiscent of the Hitler era.
The anti-American, anti-Negro and anti-Semitic
handbills, carrying the organization's signature, have
been sent to many high-ranking U. S. Army officers.
practically all the foreign consulates in Germany and
even to officers of the new German Army.
The handbills promise that Germany "will throw off
the foreign chains of American high finance. English
lords, Adenauer and his Marxist friends."
.. .
(John Dornberg, Overseas Weekly. 1I-18-56)
ROLLING ALONG
The recent polit;cal unrest in Europe did not slow
down the steady progress of West Germany's automo-
bile industry. Accord;ng to the latest statistics, West
Germany's automobile production during the first nine
months of 1956 has reached 797,429 units, compared to
539,000 during the like period of 1955.. .
For expansion and modernization of its present plans,
the West German automobile industry contemplates
investing $300,000.000 in 1957, against $250,000,000 in
1956.
(Maurice Feldman. N. Y. Herald Tribune, 11-25-56)
WELCOME HOME #
Wehrmacht veterans make up almost 80 per cent of
the men volunteering for service in West Germany's
slowly growing armed forces,
The Defense Ministry announced in a year-end re-
port today 250,000 such veterans have registered,
against 66,000 with no military experience.
* (AP, 12-18-56)
ACHTUNG1
(The Churchman, 10-1-56)
Meanwhile, former SS Maj. Gen. Kurt Meyer ad-
dressed 6,000 veterans of the Waffen SS, elite units of
the Nazi army, at a rally in Minden, Westphalia. SS
veterans below the rank of colonel are being admitted
into the army by a decree of the Bonn government.
Gen. Meyer said SS men never of their own free
will would shoot at their "German brothers" in the
Communist-run East German Army. He said he is con-
vinced that East German troops, in turn, would nit
shoot at West Germans.
"German soldiers listen to German orders," he said,
"not to the orders of foreigners."
The rally was attended by several hundred wartime
SS veterans from Austria, Dermark, Holland, Belgium,
the South Tyrol and other parts of Europe.
(Gaston Coblentz, N. Y. Herald Tribune, 9-17-56)
A FAMILY QUARREL
Former members of the Waffen SS, Hitler's elite
troops called each other "criminal" and "scoundrel"
during a political forum that ended in confusion.
The meeting was designed to show that one-time SS
soldiers were ready to back military conscription in the
present democratic state ...
When a former SS general said the organization
should never have been condemned at the Nuremberg
trials a German reporter shouted at him: "No doubt
the SS will soon claim to be a victim of Nazism."
(Reuters, 9-12-56)
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
A DEVOTED SISTER
Adolf Hitler's sister said today she is writing her
memoirs to set the record about her family straight.
"And the readers will forgive me if I abstain from
depicting my brother at all costs as a wicked character,
just for the sake of profit" she told a reporter.
"I must complete these memoirs. I owe it to the
memory of -my parents to tell the truth. So many ? dis-
torted stories have been written in the postwar years
that I have to set some facts straight."
(N. Y. Post, 10-10-56)
.*
DOWN FROM "FIFTY PLUS"
From the Rhine to the Elbe, the bosses of Germany
are retreating from a "leisure krieg."
From German boardrooms come five words of hope
for British exporters-"fuenf-und-vierzig Stundenwoche"
-the 45-hour week.
The German worker is demanding more leisure .. ?
The bustling, booming German economy, built up
by the sweat of the 50-hour-plus working week, has
lost the first round in the "leisure krieg." .. .
(Frederick Ellis, London Daily Express, 10-15-56)
LOADED
Gold and dollar holdings of the Bank Deutscher
Lander are now in excess of $3,100 million (#1,100 mil.?
lion), nearly 40 per cent more than the sterling area's
central gold and dollar reserves ($2,244 million), it is
learned ... Germany's E. P. U. surplus last month was
of the order of $100 million.
Foreign exchange reserves of the Bank rose by
DM.470 million during the four-week period ending.
October 29. This brought the total to DM.17,140 million,
that is $4,080 million ...
(London Financial Times, 11-6-56;1
FORGETTING
Addressing a meeting held here by the local group
of the Bavarian Council for Freedom and Justice to
commemorate the victims of Nazi oppression, Senator
Dr. Erich Muhler, a South German leader who spent
three years in a Nazi concentration camp, stated that
the German people were gradually forgetting the hor?.
rible events of the Nazi past. There was a tendency, he
said, to belittle the crimes. This proved that people
were not prepared to learn a lesson from past events.
(JCNS, 9-14-56)
CASHING IN ON BOOM
West Germany is cashing in on the ship-building
boom.
Its shipyards expect to deliver this year about a
million tons of shipping ...
Order books of the big West German yards are filled
until 1960, and some yards have begun turning away
prospective customers. Even smaller ones. have enough
orders to last 18 to 24 months .. .
Some of these vessels were delivered to Russia.
(Chicago Tribune, '10-4-56)
TOOLS FOR SALE
Exports of German machine tools may reach 45-50
million English pounds this year, accounting for about
40 per cent of total output, the German Machine Tool
Association estimates.
The export ratio of Germany's machine tool industry
was about 25 per cent before the war' and reached a
peak figure of 50 per cent during the Korea boom ...
(London Financial Times, 9-28-56)
LENDING A HELPING HAND
A representative of the state-controlled Soviet Trans-
port Agency is presently in Hamburg to negotiate with
ship owners and charter firms the chartering of German
tonnage for transport of Russian exports . . . In the past
West German ships have already been used under
Russian charter for many purposes ... Definite figures
as to . . the amount of tonnage involved are not
available.
(California Staatszeitung, 10-5-56)
BLOOD AND GOLD
Sepp Dietrich, SS general and one of Hitler's favorite
cutthroats, is about to be tried for murder. As a con-
victed war criminal, Dietrich was paroled last year. He
isn't going to be prosecuted for the massacre of 142
American PWs during the Battle of the Bulge.
For his part in Der Fuehrer's murder of Ernst Roehm,
the blood bath of 1934, Dietrich will face charges con-
tained in an 88-page indictment .. .
It's a curious quirk of present-day life and living that
a convicted criminal like Dietrich can be sprung for
past mass murders but that he faces the possibility of
another jail: term-for getting the jump on fellow mur-
derers.
Behind him this time, there probably also will be
all the money the Nazis extorted and managed to
hoard. Nobody will be able to confiscate the millions,
hidden by Dietrich's faithful. It will reappear in the
form of crisp, sound banknotes .. .
(Seymour Freidin, N. Y. Post, 9-16-56)
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
RECOMMENDED READING:
S5: UC S 'a 91a&H
By GERALD REITLINGER
Reviewed by TERENCE PRITTIE
Three years ago Mr. Reitlinger performed a valuable serv-
ice to future generations by writing "The Final Solution,"
which set out for the first time the full history and true
nature of the Nazi plan to exterminate the Jews. "SS: Alibi
of a Nation" is not exactly a companion volume to "The
Final Solution," yet it is in a sense complementary to it.
Here-also for the first time in print-is the story of the
state within the State, the mixed military-police-murder squad
which came to be accepted by the great mass of the German
people as a normal part of the community. It is literally im-
possible to tell the whole story of the S.S. in 500 pages, for
the organisation was a monstrous labyrinth with fresh horrors
at every twist and corner of it. Mr. Reitlinger has yet man-
aged to give a graphic and terrifying picture of its intricate
organisation, brutal plans and performances, and of the half-
mummified presiding figure of Heinrich Ilimmlcr. . .
The outstanding impression which emerges from this book
is that the huge majority of the German people tolerated the
S.S. and may have even regarded it as indispensable. German
civil servants shrugged off what seemed hardly to concern
them and their offices. German generals full of righteous anger
-generally, indeed, because they felt that their authority had
been flouted-prepared powerful protests which died frozen
on their lips. The older German nationalists expressed them-
selves on the iniquities of the S.S. with great force-to their
personal friends and in the privacy of their own apartments.
A few Germans tried, too late, to resist Hitler and the S.S.
State. But the current German version of that resistance-
that it failed only because Germany was at war and the Allies
had demanded unconditional surrender-is pitifully uncon-
vincing. The S.S. built up its essential power in peace-time,
when any surrenders taking place were made by Mr. Neville
Chamberlain, M. Daladier, and President Beres of Czecho-
slovakia. It was in peace-time that the S.S. set up Dachau and
other concentration camps. It was in peace-time that they
murdered Austria's Chancellor Dollfuss, and kicked small
Jewish girls and pregnant Jewish mothers down the streets.
This book is a chronicle of horror, and it is hard to select
from it in order to produce an impression in cameo. Not
so long ago a German weekly paper declared that the con-
centration camps were an invention of the victorious Allies
and that the gas ovens of Dachau were installed by American
pioneers. The map at the end of his book is therefore all the
more valuable. It marks only the most important concentra-
tion camps, and there are 23 of there. Each single name-
Belsen, Buchenwald, Flossenburg, Mauthausen--conjures up
its own particular pictures of unbelievable cruelty, which is
relived in the nightmares of survivors who are still waiting
for some poor material compensation for their sufferings. Of
course, many Germans will assure you, practically no one in
Germany knew about the concentration camps. Is this quite
credible? The mayor of Bergen-Belsen saw the long columns
of half-starved Jews being marched to the infamous camp on
the heath, and he never saw them being marched back again...
Mr. Reitlinger gives one a choice of horrors-the sadistic
tortures and beatings-up, the medical experiments on innocent
people, the mass murders in ditches and dungeons, the grisly
business of disposing of millions of corpses. He gives one,
too, a picture of the mystical lunacy and hero-worship which
warped the brains of the perpetrators. Himmler believed in
"S.S. runes" and "racial purity," but the small man of the
S.S. was often no better. I-lere, for instance, is the testimony
of S.S. Sergeant jerk when he confronted S.S. Obergnippen-
fuchrer Steiner: "As he approached me his stern features
brightened into a smile. He had recognised me. And yet it
was almost a year since I had taken part in the deputation
which greeted him at Narva on his birthday. Since then he
had seen innumerable faces and yet he recognised mine. I
stood no longer on the ground but swam in a rosy cloud of
happiness." This type of inspired imbecility enabled Germans
to do things which might otherwise have seemed incredible,
such as shooting down droves of small children in ditches,
driving gipsics in hundreds into the frozen waters of the
Dnieper to drown, and knocking skeletonic prisoners into
open cess-pits in order to watch them struggle to death in
liquid manure.
To-day the new German Army is ready to begin recruiting
former members of the Waffen S.S. This is hardly wise, for
however efficient a screening system is devised, a percentage
of people who either connived or participated in crime will
infiltrate into armed forces which are intended to be genuinely
democratic. It is not wise to forget too soon. But the Germans
are adept at forgetting, as a few examples from Mr. Reit-
finger's book will show, Otto Brauetigam, who decided that
Jews should be killed in the Eastern territories regardless of
"economic consequences," is now a trusted member of the
Federal Foreign Office. General Lothar Rendulic, who was
stringing up alleged deserters during the final weeks of Ger-
many's collapse, is a regular contributor on "military matters"
to a Rhineland weekly paper. General Kurt Meyer, who had
Canadian prisoners butchered in the Ardennes, was feted
when he was released from gaol and given a new car by a
Dusseldorf firm. Wilhelm Schepmann, Chief of Staff of the
S.A., was made a priority candidate for Parliament in Lower
Saxony by the B.H.E. Refugee party.
It is these and many other incidents which make Mr. Reit-
linger's book invaluable. He himself summed up the real
reasons for writing it in his very last paragraph. "The ma-
chinery of the S.S. as a state within a state will be forgotten
because it never achieved its end. The successes of the S.S. in
the field will be forgotten because the S.S. never fought as
an army and its leaders never achieved more than tactical
control. The idealism of the S.S. will be forgotten because it
meant nothing beyond loyalty to one man. But the racial
transplantations, the concentration camps, the interrogation
cells of the Gestapo, the medical experiments on the living,
the mass reprisals, the manhunts for slave labour, and the
racial exterminations will be remembered for ever." Substitute
"must" for "will" in special consideration that it could all
happen again-if not in Germany, then somewhere where the
lesson of the S.S. has not been learned or even thought about.
(Crurtesy, Manchester Guardian)
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
MAY
One of the first tasks of Dr. Abdelatif Ben Jelloun, who
has just been appointed (Moroccan) Ambassador to Bonn,
will be the negotiation of a trade agreement with Germany.
The Government of the Federal Republic is anxious for
an agreement to push sales of German products in Morocco,
the purchase of German equipment for agriculture and in-
dustries, and the use of German technicians, engineers and
civil servants in Morocco.
The-Moroccan Government is considering the substitution
of its French civil servants, technicians, engineers and air
pilots, by people of other nationalities. Germany has offered
to fill some of the vacancies.
(London Financial Times, 11-12-56)
* * *
In Moscow a group of West German industrial experts
were received by the Soviet Minister for heavy industry. The
experts represent AEG, DEMAG, Krupp, Mannesmann, Sie-
mens and Gutehoffnungshiitte. The purpose of their trip to
the Soviet Union is to visit factories and mines in the Ukraine
and the Ural region. In Moscow they saw the Industrial and
Agricultural Exhibition and, as reported by the German Em-
bassy, were impressed by displays in the field of atomic energy
utilization for peaceful purposes.
(The Bulletin [Bonn], 11-22-56)
* * *
The French Government will return the Voelklingen steel-
works in the Saar to the heirs of the former owner, Herr
Herman Roechling, by December 1. The works have been
under French sequestration since the war . . .
The plants produce 1 million tons of raw steel a year, a
third of the Saar output.
The agreement between the French Government and the
Roechling heirs followed the refusal by French banks and
steel companies to take over a share in a Franco-German com-
pany which was to have paid Swiss Frs.200 million (16.3
million English pounds) to the heirs under the Pinay-Ade-
nauer agreement of May, 1955.
(London Financial Times, 11-16-56)
* * *
West German pipe and tube companies were on the march
in Canada this week.
Mannesmann, AG, of Dusseldorf, has announced it will
establish its Western Hemisphere headquarters in Toronto.
The new Canadian GHQ will be capitalized at $30-million.
The Toronto office will oversee the new Mannesman Tube
Co. at Sault Ste. Marie, Ont., and the company's Brazilian
.manufacturing operation.
Meanwhile, farther west in Alberta, the new $6.5-million
plant of the Alberta Phoenix Tube & Pipe, Ltd., began pro-
duction this week. This Edmonton operation is owned by
Alberta oil millionaires Frank McMahon, San Francisco oil-
man William Gilmore, and West Germany's Phoenix-Rhein-
rohr, AG.
(Business Week, 12-8-56)
* * *
Talks on an extension of trade relations between Rumania
and West Germany are now being conducted in Bucharest,
Radio Bucharest reported . . .
The German delegation is headed by Herr Max Rade-
macher, a leading Free Democrat from Hamburg and a mem-
ber of the Bundestag (West German Lower House).
The radio quoted Herr Rademacher as saying that the
present figure of $60-million a year for German-Rumanian
trade could easily be increased. He also suggested that more
Rumanian overseas exports and imports should be shipped
through Hamburg . . .
PEACE
TLS
* *
Twelve West German oil technicians have begun inten-
sive exploration of a 5,800-square-mile petroleum develop-
ment concession in Northeast Syria.
The concession was obtained recently from the Syrian
Government by Deutsche Erdoel AG of Hamburg, a leading
producing company. It is the first West German toehold in
Middle Eastern oil exploitation.
The company agreed to invest up to $5,000,000 in explora-
tion work during the next three years. In return Deutsche
Erdoel received "the most favorable profit-sharing arrange-
ment in the Middle East," according to company officials .. .
Company spokesman said that "the best possible guaran-
tees" against nationalization of the concession had also been
obtained. He attributed the terms of what he said was the
PROPAGANDA
CAPSULES n..;
SOVIET PHARMACY
(Reuters, 11-10-56)
"WE SELL THE NEW TRANQUILIZERS"
(Thiele in The Los Angeles Mirror-News)
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-013158000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
relative popularity of German businessmen in the Arab
world . . .
(Arthur J. Olsen, N. Y. Times, I2-14-56)
Trade missions in Hungary and Poland may soon be
established as the first step towards resumption of full diplo-
matic relations .. .
German-Polish trade has been rapidly .expanding during
this year, German exports from January to August amounting
to over DM.209 million, or treble the DM.67.3 million total
during the corresponding period of 1955, and German im-
ports to DM.147 million, against DM.60 million from Janu-
ary to August last year.
Trade talks with Hungary, recently concluded, provide for
a 20 per cent increase in trade volume to DM.14.1 million
per year both ways.
(London Financial Times, 11-1-56)
"Egyptianization" is the new watchword of President Nas-
cer's regime . . .
Organizations regularly appeal for a boycott of all British
and French products .. .
The newspaper Al Ahram charged the British and French
with monopolizing this profession "because firms feared their
secrets would become known to the Egyptians." .. .
Reinsurance operations by Egyptian companies, formerly
handled through London, are being shifted to other markets,
especially Switzerland and West Germany . . .
(Edwin Shanke in the AP, 11-30-56)
* * *
The foreign trade boom extended to West German com-
mercial relations with the Communist countries.
In the first ten months of 1956 goods in the amount of
1,786,000,000 marks ($425,000,000) were exchanged with
the Soviet Union, its satellites and Communist China. This
exceeded the former peak volume of trade with those coun-
tries that was established in 1937. . .
The Federal Republic's commerce with the East has in-
creased by 250 per cent since 1950 desrite careful adherence
to Western strategic controls. (N. Y. Times, 1-3-57)
ve 9ntvuet I
HELPING NASSER
Egypt's High Aswan Dam project was discussed
yesterday by Chancellor Konrad Adenauer and Eu-
gene Black, president of the International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development.
Dr. Adenauer has proposed that the West help Egypt
build the dam. Mr. Black is on a week's visit to West
Germany to study the possibility of enlisting that na-
tion's resources in the development of economically
retarded countries .. .
(N. Y. Times., 11-22-56)
*
OPERATION "CANADA"
About 180,000 Germans have emigrated to Canada
since 1945 and today some 700,000 Canadians of Ger-
man origin rank third in the population, after the Eng-
lish and French speaking groups.
The German Federal Republic has become Canada's
most important trade partner on the European conti-
nent ...
RIGHT INTO THEIR HANDS
The knowledge that coming months will see at best
an uneasy peace in the Suez area is drawing the Afro-
Asian bloc closer commercially to Japan. Already, since
the canal has been blocked to traffic, Japanese export-
ers have received orders for goods normally supplied
by European makers from a number of nations east
of Suez.
Japanese businessmen make little secret of their hope
that the Southeast Asian market will not drop into their
hands...
(Igor Oganesoff, Christian Science Monitor, 11-13-56)
*
THE PRICE FOR RECOGNITION
West Germany announced today that it will refuse
to establish diplomatic relations with Guatemala be-
cause the government there of Col. Carlos Castillo
Armas has permanently expropriated the German
property which was seized in World War II.
(Gaston Coblentz, N. Y. Herald Tribune, 12-4-56)
*
DRANG NACH WESTENI
... But by July 1 Adenauer promises to provide Gen-
eral Norstad, the Allied commander, with three motor-
ized and two mechanized divisions plus one mountain
and one airborne regiment.
Furthermore, as a sign of faith, the Allies have
agreed to give Bonn important posts. In the spring a
German general-probably Hans Speidel-will take
control of all NATO land armies on the central front
running from Switzerland to the Baltic.
The committee of Allied staff chiefs is considering
naming a German as liaison between itself and the
Big Three standing group. If this is done the nominee
may be General Heusinger ...
(C. L. Sulzberger, N. Y. Times, 12-15-56)
The British government has evidence that the
Soviet Union is subsidizing leading members of
the military junta that is now the real power in
Syria. It also has information concerning a Soviet
plan for an increased shipment of arms to Syria
and for the later export of these arms from
Syria to Egypt.
Secretary Dulles was told of this plan by
British officials at the recent meeting of NATO
in Paris. His comment, according to an authori-
tative source, was that the reports were "in-
teresting."
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
Israel captured high Egyptian officers in the
Sinai Peninsula carrying copies of Hitler's "Mein
Kampf" in their knapsacks. Although the ma-
jority of Nasser's army is illiterate, its officers
are not.
To inspire them against Israel, Nasser had
reprinted in Arabic huge quantities of "Mein
Kampf." The high officers of Nasser's army
were urged by him to exhort his army to wipe
out Jews according to the gospel as preached
by Adolf Hitler.
(Barry Gray, The N. Y. Post, 11-21-56)
KRUPP IN BRAZIL
In Rio de Janeiro Allred Krupp told newspapermen
that his concern is building a factory for production of
locomotives and automobile trucks in Campo Limpo
in the state of Sao Paulo ... Both the Brazil Federal
Government and the State Governor of Sao Paulo have
given assistance to the project, said Krupp, who called
attention to the fact that his firm has entertained rela-
tions to Brazil since 1836..
(N. Y. Staats-Zeitung, 12-18-56)
*
AN FBI STORY
President Eisenhower was marked for assassination
by Nazi Germany in the closing months of World War
IL it was revealed today.
Mr. Eisenhower, then supreme allied commander in
Europe, was to be the target of German parachutists
dropped behind allied lines, on London and Paris,
during the death throes of Adolf Hitler's Reich in 1944.
In addition, the Nazis hoped to set the stage for an
attempt on the life of the late President Franklin D.
Roosevelt by a mass-breakout of some 400,000 Axis
prisoners-of-war interned in this country. Both plots
failed, chiefly through the efforts of the Federal Bureau
of Investigation.
The thwarting of these and other Axis intrigues, as
well as a 50-year war against the underworld, are
described in a new book called "The FBI Story" by
Pulitzer prize-winning reporter Don Whitehead ...
(Cleveland Plain Dealer, 11-28-56).
PUBLIC RELATIONS
Maj. Gen. Julius Klein, who commanded a regiment
against the Axis powers in World War II, has been
hired as a "foreign agent" by a society of German
business men.
General Klein registered Sept. 5 with the Department
of Justice under the Foreign Agents Registration Act ...
The president of the society is Dr. Hermann J. Abs,
a German banker ...
*
RECRUITING FOR THE WEHRMACHT
At Minden . . . the former members of the military
branch of the Nazi SS held their biggest rally to date.
Ostensibly summoned to discuss welfare questions, the
gathering, 10,000 strong, was an open demonstration
of unrepentant arrogance. The Waffen SS men assured
each other that the new German army would be of no
use without them. They were encouraged in this con-
fidence not only by the Bonn government's deplorable
offer to reinstate them in their previous ranks, but also
by the appearance at Minden of Dr. Mende, the oppo-
sition Free Democrat party's defence expert. Dr.
Mende's party seems confident that after the elections
it will either come to power in alliance with the Social
Democrats, or be able to name its own terms for re-
aligning itself with the Christian Democrats. This pros-
pect lent weight to Dr. Mende's words when he tried
to whitewash the record of the Waffen SS and assured
its-former members that any who wish to join the new
army will be accepted before long ...
(London Economist, 9-22-56)
*
The Suez Canal, one of the most important water-
ways of the world, has been turned into an internal
stream. Orderly procedures have disappeared in the
Middle East and will not be readily restored.
For instance we in the United States have concen-
trated on the quarrel between Egypt and Israel, but we
have paid little heed to the violence of the attack upon
the Government of Iraq, the most stable of the Arab
countries and the closest friend of the West among
them. The Egyptian radio issued this statement to the
Arab world and it is here quoted as characteristic of
the bitterness toward Iraq of the Sovietized Arab
countries:
"The Iraqi Government . . . tried to utilize the Iraqi
Army as a tool for terrorizing the Iraqi people. It then
dared to mass troops on the Syrian border, participated
in a conspiracy against Syria's safety, assisted Britain,
France and Israel to attack Egypt and bombard its
citizens and to invade it in order to violate its freedom
and independence.
"The present Government in Iraq is no longer a law-
ful Government entitled to demand obedience from the
Iraqi people. The actions undertaken by this Govern-
ment have made it a trespasser and usurper Govern-
ment. No one should obey this Government. Indeed,
every Arab and every Iraqi must resist it......
This is one Government issuing propaganda among
the people of another. Egypt and Syria now believe
that, with Russian aid, they can get away with anything.
(From Editorial N. Y. Daily Mirror, 1-3-57)
*
ATTENTION AMERICAN BUSINESSMEN!
The only car making a sizable gain in U. S. sales this
year is foreign.
The German Volkswagen showed a year-to-year
sales increase of 250 per cent in the first half, as nearly
26,000 of the little cars moved out of showrooms.
No American make in the lower or medium price
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-013158000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
range chalked up a sales gain in the same period. Most
of them lost a good deal of ground.
Detroit is startled, also, to find that more Volks-
wagens were sold than either Hudsons or Packards.
This is the first time since the war that a foreign car
has outsold an established American brand on the
home grounds ...
The Germans have taken the lead in another inva-
sion of the U. S. market ...
British bikes relinquished their sales lead to the
German bikes, which accounted for nearly half of all
foreign sales in the U. S. in the first half of 1956.
You can expect to hear more squawks from domestic
manufacturers of bikes . .
(U. S. News & World Report, 9-14-56)
PRIVILEGE RESTORED
The Commerce Department has restored U. S. export
privileges to Hans Wolff Export-Import Co. of West
Berlin.
Mr. Wolff and his principal, Richard Fleschner Im-
port-Export, also of West Berlin, were temporarily de-
nied the privileges on June 26, 1956, for alleged at-
tempted transshipment of U. S.-origin vehicles and
parts from West Germany to Soviet Russia .. ,
LILI SINGS AGAIN
(AP, 11-5-56)
and General Speidel. once Rommel's Chief of Staff,
now the brains of the Adenauer army .. .
Among those accepting invitations are the British
Rhine Army's Chief of Staff, Major-General J. D'Arcy
Anderson, and Major-General J. W. Hackett, com-
mander of the Seventh Armoured Division-the original
"Desert Rats." .. .
(London Daily Express, 9-29-56)
MISSION TO SOUTH AFRICA
Great interest has been shown here in to-day's ar-
rival in the Union on a 10 days' visit of West Germany's
Minister of Economic Affairs, Dr. Ludwig Erhard ...
Closer economic and financial ties with Germany are
... anticipated ... In the circumstances, there is con-
siderable speculation whether Germany, which has
moved so rapidly to the status of a creditor country,
may not become very closely identified with the
Union's economic expansion in future.
(London Financial Times, 11-2-56)
BUSINESS WITH A BANG
An explosion in an office building in midtown Ham-
burg appears to have uncovered a large-scale arms
export business to the Middle East and North Africa.
The blast reduced the building, a four-story reinforced
concrete structure, to rubble ...
(Arthur J. Olsen, N. Y. Times. 10-5-56)
Lili Marlene in person-the blonde who first sang
"Underneath the Lamplight by the Barrack Gate" over
the Wehrmacht radio-will open a rally of 20,000 men
Rommel's Afrika Korps in Dusseldorf, "the Paris of the
Rhine,"
.. .
In the audience Liii expects to have the widow of
Rommel, Field-Marshal ("Smiling Albert") Sesseiring
-"Old Soldiers Never Die"-as they call h'm in Ger-
many-General von Lettow-Vorbeck, brilliant first-war
commander in what was then German East Africa.-
We misinterpreted the phenomenon of the
Egyptian dictatorship. We thought it could be
beguiled from its course and thought of it
merely as a form of new nationalism, while
Nasser had avowed his imperialistic ambitions
as clearly as Hitler did and proved the efficacy
of those ambitions by his propaganda campaign
in all Arab, even all Islamic, nations. We in-
sisted on treating him as the innocent victim
and Britain, France and Israel as the "aggres-
sors," thus ignoring the years of provocation
and Nasser's explicit ambition to wipe out the
little State of Israel. Our miscalculation about
the dynamism of Nasser's movement have been
exceeded only by the British Labor party, the
intelligent leader of which expressed the hope
that Eisenhower was now in a position to
"arbitrate" between Israel and Egypt. One is
reminded of Chamberlain's pathetic efforts to
arbitrate at Munich... .
(Dr. Reinhold Niebuhr, Now Leader, 12-24-561
WHO'S GOT A SECRET?
Former German aircraft firms getting back to busi-
ness are negotiating with British jet-engine makers for
the right to make some of Britain's secret jets and
rocket motors. They are needed for 2,000 mile-an-hour
fighters.
(London Daily Express. 10-1-56)
As the London Observer has suggested .
the challenge to the Western nations is to make
a withdrawal from Eastern Europe strategically
tolerable to Russia....
Yet Russia has a bear by the tail in East
Germany, and there have been a number of
indications that she would like to be rid of it
if this could be accomplished without endanger-
ing her own security. From the Western stand-
point, moreover, so long as the 22 divisions
remain in East Germany they will have an in-
hibiting effect on Polish independence and the
pull for more freedom in the satellites. How,
then, can a withdrawal be made tolerable?
Obviously the West will have to give up
something. What it might well give up is Ger-
man membership in NATO. That is, in effect,
offer to establish German neutrality in return
for Soviet concessions in East Germany, the
satellite empire - and perhaps in a Middle
Eastern settlement... .
(Washington Post, 11-25-56)
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
/!Iuff" .and' J.hR ~3 Addl,?
by T. H. TETENS
We print below a thought-provoking and original article by T. H. Tetens, together with his covering letter. Mr. Tetens is a writer on international
affairs and the author of the book "Germany Plots With The Kremlin." His article speaks for itself and does not necessarily represent the views
of the Society.
To the Society for the
Prevention of World War III.
Gentlemen:
_ January 2, 1957
When the dramatic events in Hungary and Suez
occurred, I was in the midst of preparations for a new
book about the Adenauer plan to integrate Europe.
Since then I have scanned many reports and articles
published here and abroad. The necessity to set the po-
litical facts straight is especially urgent at a time when
there is a maximum of political confusion and a perver-
sion of moral principles.
I have compiled a wealth of material which proves
that the master planners in Bonn, above all, will profit
from recent events.
I know that there is little room for extensive docu-
mentation. That has to remain for the book. What I
have in mind at this time is to provide your readers
with a brief survey which indicates that the Suez
catastrophe was not primarily the result of "blunders."
Cordially,
T. H. TETENS
The Crushing Blow
The ill-fated British-French Suez action of November 1956
will be recorded by scholars as one of the great turning
points in modern history.
When London and Paris acceded-under heavy pressure--
to the demand of a cease fire and withdrawal from the Si.iez
Canal, a great chapter of European leadership ended in what
the Economist called "a total and unmitigated defeat."
Few people know what really happened behind the diplo-
matic scenes during those eventful days of November 19:56.
Yet, the results of the hectic struggle between Washington
and London became glaringly visible before the eyes of the
whole world. Great Britain and France had been dealt a
heavy blow and the position of both countries as great world
powers was seriously damaged. This fact was bluntly stated by
a leading political magazine, the U. S. News & World Re-
port (12-14-56), which called Britain's retreat from Suez ap-
propriately "the end of an era."
The U. S. News & World Report sized up the situation
in these words: "This time the British withdrawal from Suez
is for keeps . . . Britain can no longer protect its own interest
in the Arab world . . . Britain and France, by their failure
in Egypt, have exposed themselves as second-class powers in
the world."
Now did this catastrophe happen? Why was it necessary
to stab the British, French and Israelis in the back? Was not
Great Britain America's closest and most dependable ally, if
not by treaty, then by tradition? Why did Washington admin-
ister this humiliating blow which played into the hands of
Dictator Nasser and his Arab allies, and won the eager sup-
port of the Soviet bloc?
Britain and France had intervened at Suez with the objec-
tive of restoring order and security at this vital international
waterway. They saw realistically the necessity to put an end
to Nasser's dictatorship. London and Paris decided to act
after it had been proven that efforts towards a peaceful set-
tlement through the UN or by concerted action with Wash-
ington were of no avail. The record shows that all steps in
that direction had been stymied by the U. S. State Department.
Unexplained Mysteries
The millions of words which have been written about the
Suez crisis have up to now not answered the one overriding
question: Why did Secretary Dulles, over a, period of many
months, remain passive in spite of all urgent British, French
and Israeli appeals to support a move, either by the big pow-
ers or through the UN, for a lasting settlement in the strife-
ridden region of the Near and Middle East?
There are many other questions. For instance, why did Mr.
Dulles initiate, in midsummer, 1956, a pointed campaign
against "colonialism" at the moment when the British had
just voluntarily withdrawn their last troops from the Suez
Canal and had all hands full to find a solution for other
difficult situations, such as Cyprus, Jordan and the Arab-
Israeli conflict, not to speak of other burning problems in the
Far East?
During the last two years London had pointed with increas-
ing alarm to the rapid deterioration of the situation in the
Middle East. But all its urgent pleas did not faze Mr. Dulles.
Why? Can it be that the Secretary of State had become cap-
tivated by a diplomatic scheme which made it necessary to
undermine British and French power? A significant statement
which appeared in the fall of 1956 in the editorial page of
the Hearst newspaper journal-American, may shed light on
Mr. Dulles' intentions. On October 5, the journal-American
published an article pointing out that Secretary Dulles was set
to play a "new role" in world affairs. Friends of the Secre-
tary, it was stated, had hinted of a "foxy design" by which
Mr. Dulles hoped to defeat the "neutralized-minded nations"
which aspire to "act as umpire in the cold war struggle be-
tween the major forces of the world-the United States and
Russia." Mr. Dulles, the article continued, "aimed at fighting
colonialism." He had just declared, on October 2, that the
U. S. would take "an independent position on the colonial
issue." Having thus described the purpose of Mr. Dulles'
"foxy design," the Hearst paper proceeded to state the Sec-
retary's basic objectives: "Dulles may still go down in history
as the man who sparked the realization of that old American
dream-the coming of Western Europe into a United States
of its own. He may ,have done this by kicking the British
and French in the teeth on the colonial issue .. ."
This truly amazing statement was made four weeks before
the catastrophic events descended upon our two closest friends
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : ,CIA-RDP88-01.31 5R000400480012-0
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
and allies. In the light of the above testimony, coming from
a paper which is known as a staunch supporter of the Sec-
retary's foreign policy, it seems justified, even imperative, to
take a close look with regard to the essence of Dulles'
diplomacy.
In spite of thousands of articles, editorials and comments
by which the press tried to explain the news behind the
Suez Crisis, there is very little knowledge of the forces which
first precipitated this crisis and finally determined the cata-
strophic outcome of the British-French expedition. James
Reston, the New York Times diplomatic correspondent in
Washington, wrote on December 30, 1956, that the "whole
story of the attempts of this government to block the Anglo-
French invasion of Egypt, has not yet been told. There are
indeed many facts which have not yet been told, facts which
are of utmost importance in order to grasp the enormity of
the "foxy design" that turned the tables against our friends
and allies.
There is also a word to say about the new role of Mr.
Dulles as the "only prophet" who, in the early summer of
1956, climbed out on the limb and boldly forecast events
which would allow us "to look hopefully forward to a trans-
formation of the international scene." Mr. Dulles was then
known in the journalistic and diplomatic fraternities in Wash-
ington as the man who, throughout his life, had constantly
made wrong guesses. Now, suddenly, the Secretary of State
basked in the glory of a great politic.tl forecaster. Recalling
Mr. Dulles' prophetic statements, the Christian Science Moni-
tor (12-12-56) remarked that Mr. Dulles' earlier "undiplo-
matic predictions were made to the amazement and shock of
quite a few Washington pundits" and it was generally felt
at that time that Mr. Dulles "was being over-optimistic and
possibly naive."
Could it be that the "prophet" John Foster Dulles had
exact knowledge of pending schemes which allowed him "to
look hopefully forward to a transformation of the interna-
tional scene"? It is noteworthy that he is not the only
"prophet" and "forecaster" who dabbles in the business of
"foxy designs." On the other side of the Atlantic is his close
friend and colleague, Dr. Konrad Adenauer, known by friend
and foe as the "Old Fox." The Chancellor looks proudly
back over a lifelong career in the manufacturing of "foxy
designs." The record shows that both men, Dulles and Ade-
nauer, had reached the end of their respective "diplomatic
ropes" in the spring of 1956. Yet both dared to turn "proph-
et" and to predict events which would bring about "a trans-
formation of the international scene."
The Rift Between London and Washington
In order to understand the underlying forces which have
caused the catastrophic turn in world affairs in the fall of
1956, we must take a brief glance at the developments in
Anglo-American relations during the first postwar decade.
The cold war alliance between Washington and London
came officially to life with Churchill's famous "Iron Curtain"
speech at Fulton, Mo., in March 1946. The common bond
was fear of the Russian bear who had advanced deep into
Central Europe and threatened British and American inter-
ests in other parts of the world. With the rapid change dur-
ing the postwar period, especially with the comeback of a
revitalized Germany, the strength of the Anglo-American
alliance was bound to weaken. Our relations with France
were strained from the beginning of the postwar period.
The first differences with Great Britain appeared under
the Truman-Achcson Administration in regard to such issues
as German re-industrialization, the Berlin blockade, and U. S.
direction of the Korean war. Our relations to the British ally
became strained even more under the Eisenhower-Dulles ad-
ministration. There was serious irritation during the Korean
truce negotiations, during the formation of the Baghdad Pact,
the Indochona crisis, on the Formosa question, on the issue
of German remilitarization and European security, and on the
burning Near and Middle East problems. The basic differ-
ences between London's and Washington's diplomatic con-
duct centered around the general policy of war, peace, and
co-existence.
The British recognized early that under changed conditions
in the postwar period they had to pursue world problems
with a different diplomatic approach. Under a rapidly ad-
vancing arms technique toward absolute weapons, Britain
was confronted with the paramount problem of survival. Rus-
sia had set off her first A-bomb; in 1949, China was lost to
the Communist orbit; in 1952, Moscow came forward with
luring offers for a German settlement, for a European secur-
ity system and for large scale disarmament; in 1953, Rus-
sia surprised the West with an H-bomb test; in 1954, with
modem intercontinental jet bombers of the Bison type, and
with advanced experiments in guided missiles. The result of
this development is a nuclear stalemate between the two
super powers. The British reacted quietly and fast. They
visualized the necessity of an overall world settlement and a
speedy ending of the cold war. The logical answer for Brit-
ish statesmen was moderation and co-existence. London rec-
ognized that Russia and Red China were realities with whom
they had to live--and to trade. At he same time, while the
United States clung rigidly to the old policy concept of con-
tainment and non-recognition, the British accepted Russia,
China and India as new world powers.
No similar policy revision was made by the United States.
On the contrary: When the Eisenhower-Dulles Administra-
tion took over in Washington in 1953, the Secretary of State
proclaimed an accelerated cold war policy of dynamic "libera-
tion" and "rollback," a "massive retaliation" for the Soviets
and an "agonizing reappraisal" of policy towards our allies.
"Brink of War" or Co-Existence?
Up to 1953 Russia's "peace offensive" to end the cold war
had been unsuccessful. It needed the diplomatic art of John
Foster Dulles to bring Moscow over the hurdle. After Eisen-
hower's election victory in 1952, Churchill came to Wash-
ington to hammer out a common Anglo-American policy
adequate to meet the realities in a rapidly changing world.
Churchill soon discovered the unbridgable gap between the
British and American concept of diplomacy. The British
found it difficult to follow the erratic "brink of war" policies
proposed by Secretary Dulles. Churchill first suggested pub-
licly on May it, 1953, to have a meeting of the governments
of the U. S., Great Britain and the USSR "at the highest
possible level." This idea was sharply opposed by Secretary
Dulles. Soon after the fruitless Bermuda Conference in the
fall of 1953, the British Premier decided to try a new diplo-
matic approach in order to reach a direct understanding with
Russia. After preliminary secret soundings in Moscow,
Churchill opened an exchange of letters with Foreign Minister
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release'2006/12/01: CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
Molotov on July 4, 1954, which was marked by an unusual
cordiality. Recalling `bur friendly relations in time of war,"
Churchill expressed the wish to meet Mr. Malenkov (then
Soviet Premier) and other Soviet leaders. Churchill sug-
gested a "simple and unofficial meeting in a friendly fashion
without agendas, with the sole purpose of trying to find a
sensible way of living side by side in an atmosphere of
growing trust, ease and happiness."
The next day, July 5, Molotov responded with no less cor-
diality saying that the Soviet leaders had "completely under-
stood the meaning of your important message." Referring to
`bur comradely relations during the war, and the outstanding
part you played in it," Molotov posed this significant question:
"Why, if during the war years relations between our coun-
tries were of such importance not only for our peoples but
also for the fate of the world, can these relations not, develop
similarly now? As far as we are concerned, we are striving
in this direction and we view your letter exactly in this light."
The proposed meeting failed to take place. Churchill, un-
der a pretext, decided four weeks later to "wait ... and then
let us look into my project again." It is no secret that Church-
ill's proposal had come under pressure from Dulles.
The fact is that there was no meeting of mind between
Churchill and the U. S. Secretary of State. When Dulles
pressed for "united action" in order to intervene in Indochina
(April 1954), he was coldly turned down in London and
Paris. At that time Secretary Dulles insisted strongly on his
"brink of war" diplomacy and was even willing to risk all-out
atomic war with the Soviets. The British Premier, however,
recommended a policy of moderation and negotiation in order
to live with the existing problems without- risking war.
Geneva and "The Big Thaw"
Under Churchill's constant prodding, Eisenhower finally
agreed to meet with the Russians at Geneva in 1955. Accord-
ing to the Alsop brothers, Secretary Dulles was "bitterly op-
posed" to the summit meeting. Geneva and its result, the
"Geneva spirit," was called the turning point in the cold war.
Yet, long before Geneva, Moscow had initiated the policy
of "The Big Thaw"-the liberalization of domestic policies
and a more flexible diplomatic offensive in all parts of the
world. 1955 saw the signing of the Austrian Treaty, Mos-
cow's apology to Tito, Russia's withdrawal from Finland, the
beginning of de-Stalinization in the satellites, a reduction of
640,000 men in Russia's armed forces, and the triumphal
Bulganin-Khruschev visit to India and Burma. All these
events were interpreted by Secretary Dulles as the result of
Russia's "internal weaknesses," signalizing the pending "dis-
integration of the Soviet empire." Accordingly Dulles took
a "tough" attitude at the Second Geneva Conference in. Oc-
tober 1955, demanding Moscow's acceptance of American
policy on German re-unification and the liberation of the satel-
lite countries.
By the spring of 1956, it had become clear that London
and Paris prepared to negotiate directly with Moscow. Bul-
ganin's and Khruschev's visit to London April 1956 was
hailed by the British press as a diplomatic event of first rnag-
nitude. In ten days of secret talks, the British and Russian
statesmen came to an understanding on such vital points as
European security, disarmament, close cooperation in the UN
in order to pacify the Middle East, expansion of trade and
strengthening of cultural relations. Eden was full of praise
and called the meeting "the beginning of the beginning" to
end the cold war. The British reported that the Russian lead-
ers had given assurance that before the year would end, the
satellites would receive more independence and that other
significant reforms were in the making.
There is little wonder that Mr. Dulles felt uneasy about
the Anglo-Soviet talks. He and Adenauer were'highly irri-
tated by the fact that the problem of Germany had been
by-passed. On this question London and Moscow had "agreed
to disagree' and thus decided to keep Germany divided.
Soon, other sensational events followed. In May 1956,
French Premier Mollet and Foreign Minister Pineau had inti-
mate talks in Moscow which convinced them that peaceful
co-existence was the only alternative to suicide. On May 14,
1956, the Russians announced a new voluntary cut of 1,200,-
000 men in the armed forces, the' closing of military installa-
tions, the mothballing of ships and an immediate withdrawal
of 30,000 troops from East Germany. There was a general
trend to end the cold war. The West German press reported
that secret negotiations between Moscow and the Vatican
were going on and that Moscow was willing to grant free-
dom to the Roman-Catholic Church.
There was considerable irritation in certain quarters here
and in Bonn about these developments. Dulles had come
under a barrage of criticism at home and abroad. The Ger-
man press criticized Adenauer for having missed the bus and
expressed concern lest Moscow, London and Paris establish
a new "entente cordiale."
The Countermove
In the early summer of 1956 the blue sky of peaceful co-
existence was suddenly darkened by two ominous events. Late
in June riots broke out in Poznan which were quickly sup-
pressed by Polish police with the help of Russian tanks. Three
weeks later, on July 19, there was another event of far greater
consequence: Secretary Dulles' cancellation of the plan for
financial assistance for Egypt's Aswan Dam project was used
as a pretext by dictator Nasser to seize the Suez Canal.
The Adenaur-Dulles strategy to foil a Paris-London-Mos-
cow agreement on key problems was powerfully reinforced
by the bloody events in Hungary and the arrogant stand of,
the Egyptian Dictator. In this connection, it has been rep
ported that Bonn's intelligence chief, Reinhard Gehlen, played
his part through his secret agents. During the war Gehlerl,
employed his talents for Hitler. After the end of hostilities,/
he and his vast apparatus worked for U. S. officials and sub
quently were hired by Adenauer.
There is unanimous agreement among all political observ-
ers that John Foster Dulles' action of July 19 precipitated
the chain of fatal events in the Middle East. Here is one of
the great unsolved riddles in Mr. Dulles' diplomacy. The
Secretary certainly did not blunder. Can it be that he played
a carefully calculated game to precipitate events under which
eventually Great Britain and France would lose their prestige
as great world powers? This is exactly what happened in con-
sequence of Dulles' action.
There is mystery upon mystery in the Secretary's handling
of the Middle East situation. In London the Soviet leaders
had agreed to settle the Middle East problem through the
cooperation of all big powers in the UN. Dulles gave no
support to this plan, but he continued to maintain his do-
nothing position. Dulles, said the US News (-25-56) "has
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
not been willing to go all the way with the British Foreign
Office on many issues of policy related to the Middle East."
Was that all part and parcel of his "foxy design"?
There is a wealth of material, diplomatic reports from
Cairo, London and Washington, which, together with the
comments of such foreign policy experts as Walter Lippmann,
James Reston, the Alsop brothers, Joseph Harsch, and others,
constitute a devastating indictment of Secretary Dulles' han-
dling of the Suez Crisis. This is not the place to enumerate
the details of how Mr. Dulles first goaded and bamboozled
the British and French. Having forced them into virtual un-
conditional surrender and "kicked them in the teeth," Mr.
Dulles brought joy to Nasser and his Nazi adviser and to the
Soviet bloc.
One has only to read the excellent report from Cairo "Flow
the United States Saved Nasser," in The Reporter of Decem-
ber, 13, 1956, in order to fathom the magnitude of the crime
by which Western interests were deliberately harmed. Three
clays after the swift moving Israeli forces had overrun Egypt's
military might in the Sinai peninsula, dictator Nasser was on
the verge of toppling. Then came the Dulles ultimatum of
October 30, the mysterious five-day delay of the Canal occu-
pation, the oil sanctions, the organized run on the pound, and
finally the humiliating surrender. By the middle of November,
Nasser had regained his prestige as the strong man of the
Middle East. The man who had organized and directed the
international rescue operation for the would-be Hitler on the
Nile was U. S. Secretary of State John Foster Dulles. The
American government, said the Alsops, "is bending every
effort to restore Nasser-Me irredeemable Soviet stooge-to
the position of commanding leadership in the Arab world."
Mulling over "the strange process of trans forming Egypt's
smashing military defeat into a smashing political victory,"
the Alsops wondered where Washington's "new course" may
lead.
The New York Times observed (12-23-56) that "no set-
tlement of either Suez or Palestine is now conceivable except
on Colonel Nasser's terms." William Henry Chamberlin,
usually a staunch supporter of Mr. Dulles' foreign policy,
made the following sarcastic remark (New Leader, 12-17-56):
"An observer from Mari might have wondered what great
services Dictator Nasser had rendered to the free world to
warrant the tremendous U. S. effort to restore his power and
prestige."
Bonii'y Grand Strafe;y
There is no doubt that Mr. Dulles- diplomacy which
trapped the British at Suez helped Dr. Adenauer in his scheme
to pull the rug from under the "Entente Cordiale" in the
making.
On October 30, Dulles acted in a hurry to stop the British
and French at Port Said. Even his antagonists have to admit
that this t'as truly a shrewd move to change the world situa-
tion. The British and French, weakened and under economic
strangulation, can hardly resist any longer the Adenauer-
Dulles pressure for an integrated Europe, Thus, the century-
old Pan-German dream, for which the Kaiser and Hitler
started both world wars, has drawn closer to its realization.
What would have happened had Dulles remained inactive
only four more days in addition to his four years of "non-
commitment" in the Middle East? In that case the British
and French would have occupied the whole length of the Suez
Canal. The Egyptian army in the Sinai peninsula would have
been trapped, Nasser would have been swept out of power
and Adenauer and his industrialists would have lost their
tricky scheme in the Middle East. By siding wtih Egypt's
dictator in those critical days, Dulles, as the London papers
say, stabbed the British and French in the back and helped
Nasser and his German friends into a powerful position in
one of the world's most vital areas. From here, it will not be
too difficult to set up and consolidate a German dominated
Third Power Bloc stretching over the whole area of Europe
and the vast African continent.
Who Will Fill the Vacuum?
The debate is on as to who will fill the vacuum in the
Middle East. There is nothing to worry about in that respect
because the Germans have already entrenched themselves firmly
in all Arab countries. With the British and French licked
and shoved out, and with their influence reduced in Europe
proper, the Germans have regained full freedom of diplo-
matic action. Everywhere the German chancellor appears in
the role of the "honest broker." He can help Moscow to end
the cold war; for Washington he is the strong ally; and to
London and Paris he offers "help" by creating a united
Europe. But everyone has to pay a price. The British and
French would lose their markets. Moscow would have to pay
with reunification and a German sphere of influence in East-
ern Europe. Only on this basis are Adenauer and Dulles will-
ing to settle the cold war. Germany will be the only winner.
In addition there will be billions of dollars and new mar-
kets available in the Middle East. Here Dulles is willing to
invest in a generous way. A large part of the dollars Wash-
ington is ready to spend in the Arab region, will go into the
coffers of German industrialists. In Egypt, where British,
French and Jews are driven out, the German firms are taking
over. Newsweek (12-24-56) reports that the U. S. contem-
plates to go into the Middle East "with an investment in
useful projects of between $6 and $10 billions." In Egypt
alone, according to the Wail Street Journal (12-31-56), the
"Administration is planning to help pay up to $1 billion
for improvement of the Suez Canal . . . and may renew its
offer to help pay for Egypt's huge $1.3 billion Aswan Dam."
This is the price Dulles is willing to pay for the realiza-
tion of his scheme. He rebuked Nasser on a loan of a mere
$50 million, now he is willing to spend billions. The over-
riding question is: In whose interest is Dulles conducting
U. S. foreign policy? The next question: When will the U. S.
Senate discharge its responsibility and demand a thorough
accounting of Dulles' "foxy" and costly designs?
The other Dulles-Adenauer policy-that of
"negotiating from strength"-with Russia-has
proved an equally abysmal failure. The reuni-
fication of Germany which was expected to
follow from it now looks less likely than ever.
And so the West Germans are beginning to
take the matter out of the hands of Dulles and
Adenauer and to act independently. Social
Democrats and the Free Dmocrats, the party of
big business which left Adenauer's sinking ship
some time ago, press for relations with East
Germany and the satellite countries.
("Carotus," The Nation, 10-17-56)
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
an 64mi&e" R"V
a.A tid M
by
FRANK GERVASI
Some nights ago, in the town of Tel Mond, up where
Israel narrows to a 10-mile strip between the Jordanian
armistice line and the Mediterranean, Mrs. Malka Wig was
awakened by strange noises. She shook her husband, Shimon,
who grabbed his Sten gun and rushed to investigate.
Shimon Wig, 33-year-old tractor driver, never reached the
front door. The 40 pounds or so of TNT which Arab feday-
een had planted under the foundations of the sturdy little
two-story house exploded just as he reached the foot of the
stairs. The house caved in.
Shimon was dead when rescuers reached him. His wife
and their six-year-old daughter, Tamara, who was asleep in
another upstairs room, were badly hurt. But they will recover.
They were lucky.
Moshe Yoshpe and his wife were lucky, too. The night
raiders, on their way back to the Jordanian frontier after
dynamiting the house in Tel Mond, stopped at Moshe's house
in Kfar Hess long enough to toss two hand grenades into it.
The bomblets exploded harmlessly in the empty room next
to the one in which Moshe and his wife slept.
* * *
The first incident was one of the 19 which Premier Ben-
Gurion had in mind the other day when he sent a note to
the State Dept. soliciting the good offices of the United States
to persuade Egypt's Col. Nasser to stop sending fedaycen
killer-saboteurs into Israeli soil.
Ben-Gurion listed only the "serious" incidents that have
occurred between Nov. 2, when the UN ordered a cease-fire,
and Christmas Eve. He did not include numerous other acts
of terror and destruction.
Ben-Gurion's diplomatic language to the State Dept. (lid
not tell the whole story. I have seen the day-by-day record.
It is a chronology of bloody, systematic violation of the
November 2 cease-fire, the Charter of the United Nations
and of every written or unwritten law of the international
behavior in war, peace or truce.
In the six or seven weeks since the fighting stopped, the
incidents-I copied them one by one from the police records
-have actually totalled 67. The dead numbered 9 and the
wounded 20.
And before that? The other day the Knesset passed a
Pension Law for Border Victims. It provided for compensa-
tion to residents of border settlements "wounded by infil-
trators or the armed forces of neighboring countries." The
law was made retroactive to Feb. 24, 1949. That was when
the first Armistice Agreement was signed between Israel and
the Arab nations which invaded the country in May, 1948,
after the UN had created the State.
The law covered 1,376 wounded and 434 killed. Each case
had to be authenticated before the victims or their survivors
could be eligible for compensation. The figures may be taken
as absolute minimums.
The Nov. 2 cease-fire was presumed to cover ALL beliger-
ent activities, those of the fedayeen as well as of the regular
forces. Documents captured by the Israeli Army in Gaza
prove conclusively the responsibility of the Egyptian General
Staff for the fedaycen activities whether based on Egyptian
soil or not. Of the 67 recent attacks, 51 originated on Jor-
danian soil.
Nasser cannot disavow the fedaycen, no matter where they
operate from, not unless his officers left behind them mag-
nificent forgeries of orders, staff memorandums, sabotage and
murder plans, detailed maps and payrolls.
And to back up the case loads of documents, there is the
testimony of captured fedayeen and their commanders. Col.
Nasser would be amazed to know how voluble his boys
become when they do not have a Browning gun or Karl
Gustav automatic in their hands.
The responsibility for the resumption of fedayeen activities
is clearly Nasser's, just as the responsibility for his survival
as Egypt's dictator . . . is plainly shared by the U. S., the
Soviet Union and the United Nations.
Ben-Gurion's note to Washington was both an appeal and
a warning. It was an appeal to the State Dept. to use what-
ever powers of persuasion it might have over Nasser to end
a campaign of terror and death at once provocative and cruel.
It was a warning that unless the fedayeenu attacks were
stopped, Israel may be obliged to defend itself with the same
vigor it demonstrated in Sinai.
Retaliatory raids are deplorable. Right is not a compound
of wrongs. But in a country without a hinterland, a full
quarter of it so narrow in places that a good walker can cross
it in a matter of hours and only 67 or 70 miles wide at its
widest point, attack often becomes the only means of defense.
Besides, Mr. Ben-Gurion might have reminded Washing-
ton, in his note, that ... "The first duty of any Government
. . . is . . . the protection of life and property. This is the
paramount obligation for which governments are instituted,
and governments neglecting or failing to perform it are not
worthy of the name ..."
Ben-Gurion might have written those words, but he didn't.
Robert Lansing, Secretary of State, wrote them on June 20,
191.6, in a note to the Secretary of Foreign Relations of
Mexico explaining why the Government of the United States
had found it necessary to send American military forces across
the Rio Grande.
True, times have changed since the days of Pancho Villa.
But not, apparently, for the Arabs or their Soviet masters.
(courtesy, The N. Y. Post)
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
 Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6
Israel's "Aggression"
Approved For Release 2006/12/01 : CIA-RDP88-01315R000400480012-6