Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T06:45:38.471Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Domestic Constraints on West German Ostpolitik: The Role of the Expellee Organizations in the Adenauer Era

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 December 2008

Extract

TheOstpolitik of the early Federal Republic presents a puzzle: why did West Germany—a country that consistently denounced the brutal Eastern policies of the Third Reich and sought to present itself as a new, peace-loving entity—refuse to normalize its relations with most East European countries until the early 1970s? The existing literature has explained Bonn's behavior primarily with reference to foreign policy calculations, such as the need to isolate the GDR and its satellite allies and to avoid granting unilateral concessions to the Soviet bloc. Although such Staatsräson considerations were very significant for the Federal Republic's policymakers, they do not tell the whole story. Movement on Eastern policy was also significantly hindered by domestic factors, the most important of which was the influence of the Vertriebenenverbände—the pressure organizations purporting to represent the millions of Germans expelled from Eastern Europe in the aftermath of World War II. The role of these organizations has typically received passing reference in general studies of Ostpolitik, but the specialized literature on the topic has remained weak.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Conference Group for Central European History of the American Historical Association 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. See, for example, Griffith, William E., The Ostpolitik of the Federal Republic of Germany (Cambridge, MA, 1978)Google Scholar and Bender, Peter, Neue Ostpolitik: Von Mauerbau bis zum Moskauer Vertrag (Munich, 1986).Google Scholar

2. For passing references, see, for example, Griffith, Ostpolitik, 126–27, 195; Bender, Neue Ostpolitik, 120;Google ScholarAsh, Timothy Garton, In Europe's Name: Germany and the Divided Continent (New York, 1993), 2930, 226–28, 230–35.Google Scholar

3. For polemical attacks against the expellee organizations, see, for example, Herde, Georg, “Die Rolle der Landsmannschaften im politischen Leben der Bundesrepublik Deutschland,” Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik 11, no. 10 (1966): 1136–49;Google Scholar and Herde, Georg and Strolze, Alexa, Die Sudetendeutsche Landsmannschaft: Geschichte, Personen, Hintergründe. Eine Kritische Bestandsaufnahme (Cologne, 1987).Google Scholar Pro-expellee polemics include Kuhn, Ekkehard, Nicht Rache, Nicht Vergeltung: Die deutschen Vertriebenen (Munich, 1987).Google Scholar The best scholarly effort is von zur Mühlen, P., Müller, B., and Schmitz, K., “Vertriebenenverbände und deutsch-polnische Beziehungen nach 1945,” in Das deutsch-polnische Konfliktverhältnis seit dem Zweiten Weltkrieg, ed. Schweitzer, Carl Christoph and Feger, Hubert (Boppard am Rhein, 1975), 96161. Numerous serious studies deal with other—particularly social—aspects of the expellee problem, such as the newcomers' integration into West German Society.Google Scholar

4. In Article XIII of the Potsdam Agreement, the Allies sanctioned the “…transfer to Germany of German populations, or elements thereof, remaining in Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Hungary…” However, the “transfer” was to take place“…in an orderly and humane manner.” See von Münch, Ingo, ed., Dokumente des geteilten Deutschland (Stuttgart, 1976), 42.Google Scholar

5. On the expulsion, see Schieder, Theodor et al. , eds., Dokumentation der Vertreibung der Deutschen aus Ost- und Mitteleuropa, 8 vols. (Bonn, 19531961).Google Scholar For the numbers, see Reichling, Gerhard, Die deutschen Vertriebenen in Zahlen, vol. 2, 40 Jahre Eingliederung in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Bonn, 1989), 34.Google Scholar

6. On the development of the expellee organizations, see Weiss, Hermann, “Die Organisationen der Vertreibenen und ihre Presse,” in Die Vertreibung der Deutschen aus dem Osten: Ursachen, Ereignisse, Folgen, ed. Benz, Wolfgang (Frankfurt am Main, 1985), 193208;Google Scholar and Sonnewald, Bernd, “Die Entstehung und Entwicklung der ostdeutschen Landsmannschaften von 1947 bis 1952” (Ph. D. diss., Freie Universität Berlin, 1975). Upon its founding in 1949, the central organization of the Homeland Societies bore the name United East-German Homeland Societies (Vereinigte Ostdeutsche Landsmannschaften [VOL]). The change to VdL occurred in 1952.Google Scholar

7. The original name of the League upon its founding in 1949 was the Central Association of Expelled Germans (Zentralverband der vertriebenen Deutschen [ZvD]). The change to BvD took place in 1954.Google Scholar

8. On the November 1949 Göttingen Agreement, which provided for a division of duties, see Sonnewald, Entstehung und Entwicklung, 192–94.Google Scholar

9. On the BHE, see Neumann, Franz, Der Block der Heimatvertriebenen und Entrecheten: Ein Beitrag Zur Geschichte und Struktur einer politischen Interessenpartei (Meisenheim, 1968)Google Scholar and Stöss, Richard, “Der Gesamtdeutsche Block/BHE,” in Parteienhandbuch, ed. idem (Opladen, 1984), 1:1424–59.Google Scholar

10. The most significant piece of legislation for the expellees was the so-called Equalization of Burdens Law (Lastenausgleichgesetz) of 1952 which sought to provide compensation for those particularly hard hit by the war, especially the expellees. See Schillinger, Reinhold, Der Entscheidungsprozess beim Lastenausgleich, 1945–1952 (Ostfildern, 1985).Google Scholar

11. The first and last two quotations are from Hans-Christoph Seebohm, “Die politische Aufgabe der Sudetendeutschen,” Sudetendeutsche Zeitung, 23 May 1953, 1–2; for the second quotation, see the “Charta der deutschen Heimatvertriebenen,” proclaimed in Stuttgart, 5 August 1950, reprinted in Dokumentation der deutsch-polnischen Beziehungen nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg, 1945–1959, ed. Maas, Johannes (Bonn, 1960), 4445.Google Scholar

12. “Protokol of the Proceedings of the Berlin (Potsdam) Conference, 1 August 1945,” in Documents on Germany 1944–1985, ed. U.S. State Department (Washington, D.C, 1985), 6263.Google Scholar

13. See, for example, the statement of the three Western allies in connection with the 5 June 1945 four-power Berlin Declaration regarding defeated Germany and the 7 July 1950 statement of the French Foreign Ministry, as quoted in Der wahre Tatbestand: Memorandum des Bundes der Vertriebenen anlässlich der internationalen Konferenz in Paris im Mai 1960, ed. BdV (Bonn, 1960), 16 and 4, respectively.Google Scholar

14. Resolution of the Landsmannschaft Schlesien, attached to Walter Rinke to Konrad Adenauer, 5 September 1949, BA B 136/6791. See also the resolution of the Pommersche Landsmannschaft, 29 June 1952, BA, B 106/27370.Google Scholar

15. See, for example, von Auen, Rudolf Lodgman, “Die Wiedervereinigung und die heimatpolitischen Anliegen der deutschen Ostvertriebenen,” in Rudolf Lodgman von Auen: Reden und Aufsätze, ed. Simon, K.A. (Munich, 1954), 166–70; and the BdV resolution “Beziehungen zu Polen,” 26 January 1958, in Vertriebenen-Korrespondenz, 3 February 1958, 9.Google Scholar

16. VdL, “Vorschläge des Verbandes der Landsmannschaften an die Regierung der Bundesrepublik zur Unterstützung einer aktiven deutschen Ostpolitik,” attached to Rudolf Lodgman von Auen to Konrad Adenauer, 21 October 1953, BA, B 136, 6515.Google Scholar

17. In the case of Upper Silesia, a part of the province remained German territory in the interwar era, while a part was ceded to Poland in 1921 despite vociferous German opposition, including armed resistance.Google Scholar

18. Rat der Südostdeutschen, “Bericht über die Tagung der Delegierten am 23/24. Juli 1955,” SDA: NL Lodgman, XI-93.Google Scholar

19. Walter Rinke, “Schlesien meldet sich zum Wort,” 24 August 1950, an article promulgated through the expellee new service “hvp,” available in SDA, NL Lodgman, V/4.Google Scholar

20. du Buy, F. H. E. W., Das Recht auf die Heimat im historisch-politischen Prozess (Cologne, 1974), 33.Google Scholar

21. For the quotes, see, respectively, the “Charta der deutschen Vertriebenen,” in Dokumentation, ed. Maas, 44 and the resolution of the Pomeranian Homeland Society, 12 May 1951, attached to the society's letter to Thomas Dehler, 24 May 1951, ADL: N1–1094.Google Scholar

22. See, for example, the resolution “Schlesiens Landesversammlung appelliert an die Welt,” 4 09 1957, in 40 Jahre Landsmannschaft Schlesien: Eine Dokumentation 1949–1989, ed. Schlesien, Landsmannschaft (Königswinter, 1989), 21;Google Scholar and the BdV's 2 05 1959 resolution “Grundsätze für einen Friedensvertrag,” in Erklärungen Zur Deutschlandpolitik: Eine Dokumentation von Stellungnahmen, Reden und Entschliessungen des Bdv, ed. Blumenthal, Werner and Fassbender, Bardo (Bonn, 1984), 1:69.Google Scholar

23. See the “Charta der deutschen Heimatvertriebenen,” But note also Rudolf Hilf to Rudolf Lodgman von Auen, 4 January 1954, SDA: NL Lodgman, XXIV/10.35. In this letter, Hilf, a principal policy advisor of Lodgman—who was the ranking leader of the Sudeten-German Homeland Society at the time—labeled war the only real solution to the Sudeten problem.Google Scholar

24. See, for example, the BdV's 1958 declarations “Beziehungen zu Polen” (January 26) and “Diplomatische Beziehungen zur Tschechoslowakei” (July 31), in Erklärungen zur Deutschlandpolitik, ed. Blumenthal, and Fassbender, , 6163.Google Scholar

25. See, for example, the BdV's “Denkschrift, Betr: Kulturelle Beziehungen mit Polen,” 16 January 1959, BA: B 150, 4331 (Heft 1).Google Scholar

26. Baron Georg von Manteuffel-Szoege, “Die Jugoslawische Provokation,” CSU-Korrespondenz, 29 October 1957.Google Scholar

27. See, for example, “Schlesiens Landesversammlung appelliert an die Welt,” 4 September 1957, in 40 Jahre Landsmannschaft Schlesien, 21.Google Scholar

28. “Charta der deutschen Heimatvertriebenen,” in Dokumentation, ed. Maas, , 44.Google Scholar

29. Alfred Gille's address at the GB/BHE's party conference, Bielefeld, 8 May 1954, BA: NL 267/29, pp. 22/7–22/8.Google Scholar

30. Walter Rinke, “Schlesien meldet sich zum Wort,” 24 August 1950, SDA: NL Lodgman, V/4.Google Scholar

31. “Selbstbestimmung und Heimatrecht: Zum Tag der deutschen Heimat 1956,” 11 June 1956, in Erklärungen, ed. Blumenthal, and Fassbender, , 55.Google Scholar

32. Waldemar Kraft to Friedrich von Kessel, 3 August 1953, BA: NL 267/33.Google Scholar

33. Rudolf Lodgman von Auen, “Grundlagen und Arbeitsziele der sudetendeutschen Aussenpolitik,” an address to the Hauptvorstand of the Sudetendeutsche Landsmannschaft, Heiligenhof, 23–25 October 1953, SDA: NL Lodgman: IV/4:13.Google Scholar

34. See the Pomeranian Homeland Society's resolution of 29 June 1952, attached to the society's letter to Hans Lukaschek, BA: B 136/27370.Google Scholar

35. See, for example, the Sudeten German Homeland Society's “Memorandum A, betreffend die Entwicklung der Beziehungen der Bundesrepublik Deutschland zum tschechoslowakischen Staat,” September 1955, SDA: NL Lodgman, XXIV-44.01.Google Scholar

36. VdL, “Vorschläge des Verbandes der Landsmannschaften an die Regierung der Bundesrepublik zur Unterstützung einer aktiven deutschen Ostpolitik,” attached to a letter from Rudolf Lodgman to Adenauer, 21 October 1953, BA: B 136/6516.Google Scholar

37. von Auen, Rudolf Lodgman, “Die Wiedervereinigung und die heimatpolitischen Anliegen der deutschen Ostvertriebenen,” in Rudolf Lodgman, ed. Simon, , 168–69.Google Scholar

38. For population statistics, see Schoenberg, Hans W., Germans from the East (The Hague, 1970), 51;CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Reichling, , Die Deutschen Vertriebenen, 2:31–34.Google Scholar By 1961 the number of expellees in the FRG had risen to almost 9 million (as opposed to roughly 8 million in 1950). Two factors accounted for the increase: continued immigration and the fact that the off spring of expellee parents also received expellee status. The electoral significance of the expellees was further enhanced by the fact that the parties often regarded them and the Soviet zone refugees, who by the beginning of the 1960s numbered roughly 3 million and constituted a further 6 percent of the population, as one electoral bloc with similar interests and characteristics. On the Soviet zone refugees, see Heidemeyer, Helge, Flucht und Zuwanderung aus der SBZ/DDR 1945/1949–1961: Die Flüchtlingspolitik der Bundesrepublik Deutschland bis zum Bau der Berliner Mauer (Düsseldorf, 1994).Google Scholar

39. See, for example, Jahrbuch der SPD 1952/1953 (Bonn, 1953), 368–72; “Die CDU und die Vertriebenen” and “Die Stellung der CSU zum Vertriebenenproblem und zur deutschen Ostfrage,” hvp-Artikeldienst 34/1953, ACDP: VII–004–407/1; and the FDP's resolution on the expellee problem at the Party Congress in Bremen, 12 June 1949, ADL:A1–1, pp. 131–35.Google Scholar

40. The SPD and FDP both called their key national-level organizations Expellee Committees (Bundesvertriebenenausschuss). The CDU/CSU also had its Bundesvertriebenenausschuss as well as several other organs, such as the Landesverband Oder-Neisse, set up in 1950 to represent the lost eastern provinces.Google Scholar

41. Kather left the CDU/CSU for the GB/BHE in the summer of 1954.Google Scholar

42. For clear statements, see Adenauer's, address at the CDU/CSU's 1951 Party Congress, in Zweiter Parteitag der Christlich-Demokratischen Union Deutschlands, Karlsruhe 18.–21. Oktober 1951 (Bonn, 1951), 21;Google Scholar the SPD's September 1952 “Aktionsprogramm,” in Jahrbuch der SPD 1952–1953, 264; and the FDP's “Wahlprogramm 1953,” in Programmatische Entwicklung der FDP 1946 bis 1969, ed. Juling, Peter (Meisenheim, 1977), 129.Google Scholar

43. This Schumacher statement, made in Hamburg-Bergedorf in 1946, appeared repeatedly in SPD declarations and publications. See, for example, the Jahrbuch der SPD 1956/1957 (Bonn, 1958), 464.Google Scholar

44. See Jakob Kaiser's speech at the CDU/CSU's October 1951 Party Conference, in Zweiter Parteitag der Christlich-Demokratischen Union, 161.Google Scholar

45. See the FDP's “Wahlprogramm 1953,” in Programmatische Entwicklung, ed. Juling, 129.Google Scholar

46. For the four quotes, see, respectively, Wiedermann at the FDP's Party Congress in Munich, 23 September 1951, ADL: A1–22, p. 12; the party's “Wahlprogramm 1953,” in Programmatische Entwicklung, ed. Juling, 129; Willy Brandt's 1958 speech at the “Landeskundgebung der Vertriebenenverbände” in Kiel, quoted in “Erklärungen und Beschlüsse des SPD Parteivorstandes, der Parteitage und von Vorstandsmitgliedern der SPD Zur Oder-Neisse-Frage, Zum Selbstbestimmungsrecht und Heimatrecht in den Jahren 1946 bis 1959,” BA: B 234/280, p. 5; and the declaration of the SPD-Kongress für Vetriebene, Flüchtlinge und Kriegsgeschädigte in Wiesbaden, 13–14 April 1957, AdsD: PV-Protokolle 1957, 16.Google Scholar

47. See, respectively, the CSU's “Grundsatzprogramm” of 1 June 1957, in 25 Jahre Christlich-Soziale Union in Bayern (Munich, 1971), 95; and Adenauer to the Bonn group of the Landsmannschaft Schlesien, 16 August 1957, BA: B 136/6791.Google Scholar

48. Adenauer to Fritz Schäffer, 4 December 1950, StBKAH: III/21 (1).Google Scholar

49. See, for example, the cabinet meetings of 8 June and 2 October 1951 in Die Kabinettsprotokolle der Bundesregierung, ed. Booms, Hans (Boppard, 1988), vol. 3: 1951, 427 and 672.Google Scholar

50. Adenauer in the CDU's Bundestagsfraktion, 14 September 1949, ACDP: VIII–001–A–1, 1006/2.Google Scholar

51. See, for example, the report of Adenauer's meeting with the ZvD Presidium, 10 February 1950, in Linus Kather to Hans Lukaschek, 12 February 1950, BA: B 150/1150, Heft 2.Google Scholar

52. The Bundesministerium für Vertriebene, Flüchtlinge und Kriegsgeschädigte to the President of the Bundestag, 30 August 1960, BT/PA: Ausschuss für Heimatvertriebene, 3. WP, Ausschuss-Drucksachen, Vol. 115, pp. 50–51.Google Scholar

53. Foreign Ministry memorandum “Einflussnahme des AA auf die deutschen Heimatvertriebenen,” 29 September 1952, PA/AA: Abt. III, 214.Google Scholar

54. See, for example, the government declaration of 20 September 1949 in Die Verhandlungen des deutschen Bundestages: Stenographische Berichte, (hereafter Verhandlungen), I WP, vol. 1, 28D; Adenauer's telegram to the rally of the Landsmannschaft Schlesien, in Konrad Adenauer to Walter Rinke, 8 July 1954, BA: B 136/6791; and Jakob Kaiser's address to the rally of the West Prussian Homeland Society, 8 July 1956, reprinted in Bulletin des Presse- und Informationsamtes der Bundesregierung, (hereafter Bulletin), 11 July 1956, 1249–50.Google Scholar

55. See Verhandlungen, II WP, vol. 31, 8423A.Google Scholar

56. See, for example, Adenauer's telegram to the June 1957 Sudetendeutscher Tag, reprinted in “Adenauer für Selbstbestimmungsrecht,” Sudetendeutsche Zeitung, 22 June 1957; as well as Herbert Blankenhorn to the Ministerium für gesamtdeutsche Fragen, 26 May 1952, PA/AA: Abt. III, 753.Google Scholar

57. Baring, Arnulf, Sehr verehrter Herr Bundeskanzler! Heinrich von Brentano im Briefwechsel mit Konrad Adenauer, 1949–1964 (Hamburg, 1974), 192.Google Scholar

58. Brentano to G. Pohl, 9 December 1956, BA: NL Brentano, 39.Google Scholar

59. See the notes of Brentano's discussion with Ritchie, the Canadian Ambassador, 7 July 1956, Pa/AA:Ministerbüro, 155.Google Scholar See also Kosthorst, Daniel, Brentano und die deutsche Einheit: Die Deutschland- und Ostpolitik des Aussenministers im Kabinett Adenauer, 1955–1961 (Düsseldorf, 1993), 174.Google Scholar

60. For expellee protests, see Marzian, Herbert, ed., Zeittafel und Dokumente zur Oder-Neisse Linie (Würzburg, 1956), vol. 2, 1953–1956, 4345.Google Scholar On Brentano's backtracking, see his 3 May 1956 press release, in ibid., 43. See also the government declaration of 28 June, read by Brentano, in Verhandlungen, II WP, vol. 31, 8422C–8423B; Brentano's letter to Baron Manteuffel-Szoege, 9 May 1956, SDA: NL Lodgman, XXIV-01; and his address to the Landsmannschaft der Oberschlesier in Bochum, on 1 07, reprinted in Heinrich von Brentano: Deutschland, Europa und die Welt: Reden Zur deutschen Aussenpolitik, ed. Böhm, Franz (Bonn, 1962), 197208.Google Scholar

61. On the 1955 decision for relations with the USSR and the Hallstein Doctrine, see Kosthorst, Brentano, 63–77.Google Scholar See also Booz, Rüdiger Marco, “Hallsteinzeit”: Deutsche Aussenpolitik 1955–1972 (Bonn, 1995). Prior to 1957, Bonn did have diplomatic ties with Yugoslavia, a neutral maverick state, only to break them off when Tito's regime formally recognized the GDR in the fall of 1957.Google Scholar

62. Section “Aussenpolitik” of the SPD's 1952 “Aktionsprogramm,” in Jahrbuch der SPD 1952/1953, 265.Google Scholar

63. See the resolution “Forderungen der Sozialdemokratischen Partei zur deutschen Wiedervereinigungspolitik,” in Protokolle der Verhandlungen des Parteitages der SPD vom 10. bis 14. Juli 1956 in München (Bonn, 1956), 345.Google Scholar

64. On Pfleiderer, see Schlarp, Karl-Heinz, “Alternativen zur deutschen Aussenpolitik 1952–1955: Karl Georg Pfleiderer und die ‘deutsche Frage,’” in Aspekte deutscher Aussenpolitikim 20. Jahrhundert: Aufsätze Hans Rothfels zum Gedächtnis, ed. Benz, Wolfgang and Graml, Hermann (Stuttgart, 1976), 211–48.Google Scholar

65. The quotes are, respectively, from the FDP's Berlin Program of 26 January 1957, ADL: A1–106; and from “Leitsätze der FDP für die Arbeit im 3. Deutschen Bundestag und in den Landstagen,’ 2 March 1958, ADL: AK Aussenpolitik 1957–1959, 1852.Google Scholar

66. See, for example, the SPD Bundestagsfraktion's declaration regarding expellee rights, 11 March 1958, AdsD: SPD PV, Neuer Bestand, 747. On the FDP, see the 1957 Berlin Program, cited in the previous note, and the foreign policy resolution of the Bundesvorstand, 11 November 1958, in FDP-Bundesvorstand: Sitzungsprotokolle. Die Liberalen unter dem Vorsitz von Thomas Dehler und Reinhold Maier, 1954–1960, ed. Wengst, Udo et al. (Düsseldorf, 1991), 377–78.Google Scholar

67. See Glatzeder, Sebastian J., Die Deutschlandpolitik der FDP in derÄra Adenauer (Baden-Baden, 1980),Google Scholar and Klotzbach, Kurt, Der Weg Zur Staatspartei: Programmatik, praktische Politik und Organisation der deutschen Sozialdemokratie 1945 bis 1965 (Berlin, 1982).Google Scholar

68. On Western pressure see, for example, Albrecht von Kessel to the Auswärtiges Amt, 19 September 1957, PA/AA, NL von Kessel, 8. On Bonn's hopes regarding post-October 1956 Poland, see Kosthorst, Brentano, 177–91.Google Scholar

69. See Brentano, at a 30 11 1956 press conference, reprinted in Dokumente Zur Deutschlandpolitik (Bonn, 1961–) (hereafter DzD) III/2/2, 937.Google ScholarOn Adenauer, see his remarks to select journalists on 26 September 1957, in Konrad Adenauer: Teegespräche, 1955–1958, ed. Mensing, Hans-Peter (Berlin, 1986), 233. On Foreign Office planning, see the memorandum “Aufzeichnung betr: Lage in den Satellitenstaaten und Gestaltung unserer Beziehungen zu ihnen,” 10 October 1956, BA: NL Blankenhorn, 68, pp. 143–53.Google Scholar

70. See Albrecht von Kessel to Brentano, 23 January 1957, PA/AA: NL 239, 165, pp. 166–174; and von Kessel's “Aufzeichnung,” 19 June 1957, PA/AA: NL Kessel, 8. See also Arnulf Baring, Sehr Verehrter, 192–94; and Kosthorst, Brentano, 186–89.Google Scholar

71. On the memorandum, see Baring, Sehr Verehrter, 250–52. See also Kosthorst, Brentano, 207.Google Scholar

72. Brentano to Adenauer, 27 September 1957, BA: NL 239/156, pp. 375–79.Google Scholar

73. See, for example, Adenauer in a 16 September 1958 press conference, as quoted in Siebenmorgen, Peter, Gezeitenwechsel: Aufbruch zur Entspannungspolitik (Bonn, 1990), 232.Google Scholar

74. Hans Joachim von Merkatz's notes of the 22 October 1958 cabinet meeting, ACDP: I–148–041/2.Google Scholar

75. Hans Furler's notes of a discussion with Adenauer, 20 August 1959, BA: NL Furler, 98.Google Scholar

76. Schwarz, Hans-Peter, Adenauer: Der Aufstieg: 1876–1952 (Stuttgart, 1986), 655–56; 945–46.Google Scholar

77. Adenauer in the CDU's Bundesvorstand, 26 April 1954, in Adenauer: “Wir haben Wirklich etwas geschaffen”: Protokolle des CDU-Bundesvorstandes 1953–1957, ed. Buchstab, Günter (Düsseldorf, 1990), 195.Google Scholar

78. See Foschepoth, Josef, ed., Adenauer und die deutsche Frage (Göttingen, 1990) for the most persuasive arguments along these lines.Google Scholar

79. See the journalist Fritz Sänger's notes of a conversation between Erich Ollenhauer and Konrad Adenauer, as accounted to Sänger by Ollenhauer, 30 August 1953, AdsD: NL Fritz Sänger, 280. For contrasting evaluations of this source, see Küsters, Hanns-Jürgen, “Konrad Adenauer und Willy Brandt in der Berlin-Krise 1958–1963,” Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte (hereafter VfZ) 40, no. 4 (1992): 507–8;Google Scholar and Frohn, Axel, “Adenauer und die dieutschen Ostgebiete,” VfZ, 44, no. 4 (1996): 522.Google Scholar See also Adenauer's similar remarks to the journalist Korry, Edward M., 17 07 1957, in Konrad Adenauer: Teegespräche 1955–1958, ed. Mensing, , 201–2.Google Scholar

80. For this March 1958 quote, see Stehle, Hans-Jakob, “Adenauer, Polen und die deutsche Frage,” in Adenauer, ed. Foschepoth, , 89.Google Scholar See also Brentano's comments to Couve de Murville on 19 10 1957, as reported in Documents diplomatiques francais 1957/2 (Paris, 1991), 563.Google Scholar

81. See, respectively, the “Kurzprotokoll des aussenpolitischen Ausschusses,” 28 April 1955, AdsD: PV, Neuer Bestand, 2868; and the “Sitzung des Parteivorstandes am 8. u. 9. Februar 1957,” AdsD: PV-Protokolle, 1957, 16.Google Scholar

82. “Sitzung des SPD-Präsidiums am 23. Februar 1959,” AdsD: Präsidium-Protokolle, 23. Juni 58–26. Oktober 59. For Fritz Erler's and Carlo Schmid's expressions of similar sentiments some three years earlier, see Soell, Hartmut, Fritz Erler: Eine politische Biographie (Berlin, 1976), 1:491.Google Scholar

83. Meeting of the FDP's Bundesvorstand 27 February 1954, in FDP-Bundesvorstand 1954–1960, ed. Wengst, et al. , 1395–1410.Google Scholar

84. Erich Mende in the FDP's Bundeshauptausschuss, 21 March 1959, ADL: A12–31, p. 35.Google Scholar

85. On the first point, see Adenauer to Dannie Heineman, 15 11 1950, in Konrad Adenauer: Briefe, 1951–1953, ed. Mensing, Hans-Peter (Berlin, 1987), 307; and on the latter, Adenauer's address to the BvD in Hanover, 17 November 1951, cited in “Bundder vertriebenen Deutschen,” Sudetemdeutche Zeitung 24 November 1951, 1.Google Scholar See also Moeller, Robert G., “War Stories: The Search for a Usable Past in the Federal Republic of Germany,” American Historical Review 101, no. 4 (1996): 1008–48 for an insightful analysis of the expellees' usefulness for broader legitimation and identity-building purposes in West Germany.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

86. See, for example, the following reports of meetings: Anton Wuschek to Rudolf Lodgman, 3 December 1952, SDA: NL Lodgman, XI/9; and Hans Stephan, “Betr: Tagung der Landsmannschaften mit dem Amt Blank und dem MdB Kiesinger,” 17 March 1955, AdsD: SPD-PV, 04335.Google Scholar

87. See, for example, the account of Adenauer's behavior before and during the November 1951 Paris Foreign Minister's Conference, in Foschepoth, Josef, “Potsdam und danach: Die Westmächte, Adenauer und die Vertriebenen,” in Die Vertreibung, ed. Benz, , 105–10.Google Scholar

88. On the widespread interest, see Gotto, Klaus et al. , eds., Im Zentrum der Macht: Das Tagebuch von Staatssekretär Lenz 1951–1953 (Düsseldorf, 1989), 136–38. The Adenauer statement came in a Berlin speech on 6 October. The quote is from Keesing's Archiv der Gegenwart 1951 (Essen, 1951), 3146.Google Scholar

89. See Lemmer's, Ernst comments of 29 10 1951, as reported in Foreign Relations of the United States 1951 (Washington, D.C., 1981), vol. 3/2, 1804.Google Scholar

90. On the tensions within the CDU/CSU and the cabinet, see Gotto et al. eds., Im Zentrum der Macht, 273, 276. On the controversies in general, see, for example, Graml, Hermann, “Nationalstaat oder Westdeutscher Teilstaat: Die sowjetischen Noten vom Jahre 1952 und die öffentliche Meinung in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland,” VfZ 25, no. 4 (1977): 821–64.Google Scholar

91. For excerpts of the speech in Siegen, see Keesings Archiv der Gegenwart 1952 (Essen, 1952), 3388.Google Scholar

92. Wenzel Jaksch's “Antrag an den Parteivorstand, Entwurf Wenzel Jaksch,” December 1957, AdsD: SPD PV, 820.Google Scholar

93. For evidence of the FDP's lasting interest in the expellees, see, for example, the deliberations of the party's Bundesvorstand on 2/3 April and 9 June 1949, in FDP-Bundesvorstand. Sitzungsprotokolle: Die Liberalen unter dem Vorsitz von Theodor Heuss und Franz Blücher 1949–1954, ed. Wengst, Udo et al. (Düsseldorf, 1990), 37 and 50; and on 3 June 1958, in FDP-Bundesvorstand. 1954–1960, ed. idem, 369–70.Google Scholar

94. See Repgen, Konrad, “Finis Germaniae: Untergang Deutschlands durch einen SPD-Wahlsieg 1957?,” in Konrad Adenauer und seine Zeit, ed. Blumenwitz, Dieter (Stuttgart, 1976) Vol. 2, Beiträge der Wissenschaft, 294315.Google Scholar

95. On the SPD's reorientation, see Klotzbach, Weg zur Staatspartei, esp. 356–494. The start of the SPD's concentrated effort to increase its following among the expellees can be seen in the “Protokoll der Sitzung des Arbeitsausschusses für Vertriebene, Flüchtlinge und Kriegsgeschädigte,” 5/6 December 1957, AdsD: SPD, BT-Fraktion, 4. WP, 327.Google Scholar

96. See, respectively, the “Kurzbericht über die Sitzung des Presse- und Propaganda-Ausschusses der CDU/CSU am 19. Mai 1949 in Königswinter” and the “Protokoll der 3. Sitzung des Wahlrecht-Ausschusses und des Prresse- und Propaganda-Aussschusses am 19. Mai 1949 in Königswinter.” Both records are in ACSP: BTW 1949, 3.Google Scholar

97. On the SPD, see Fritz Erler and Carlo Schmid in the Aussenpolitischer Ausschussdes SPD-Vorstandes, 7 March 1956, quoted in Soell, Fritz Erler, 1:491. On the CDU, see Adenauer in the Bundesvorstand, 16 September 1959, in Adenauer: “… um den Frieden zu gewinnen”: Protokolle des CDU-Bundesvorstandes 1957–1961, ed. Buchstab, Günter (Düsseldorf, 1994), 393. On the FDP, see Erich Mende in the party's Bundeshauptausschuss, 21 March 1959, ADL: A12–31, p. 35.Google Scholar

98. On the concept of “chancellor democracy,” see Bracher, Karl Dietrich, “Die zweite Demokratie in Deutschland: Von Weimar nach Bonn,” in Deutschland zwischen Demokratie und Diktatur, ed. idem (Bern, 1964), 109–37.Google Scholar

99. Brentano to Adenauer, 23 September 1958, in Baring, Sehr verehrter, 250.Google Scholar

100. On the failure of the PR efforts, see: the Foreign Office memorandum “Betr: Besprechung mit dem Bundestagsabgeordneten Baron Manteuffel-Szoege,” 26 June 1955, PA/AA: Abt. 7, 292; von Kessel to the Auswärtiges Amt, 20 September 1957, PA/AA: NL Albrecht von Kessel, 89; and von Eckard to Adenauer, 17 August 1959, StBKAH: III/24.Google Scholar

101. See, for example, Körner, Klaus, “Die alliierten Deutschlandkonferenzen,” in Schwarz, Hans-Peter, ed., Handbuch der deutschen Aussenpolitik (Munich, 1975), 584; and Kosthorst, Brentano, 306–7.Google Scholar

102. President Hans Krüger's address to the BdV's Bundesversammlung on 14 February 1960, reprinted in Deutscher Ostdienst, 22 February 1960.Google Scholar

103. See the notes of a discussion between Ministerialdirektor Herbert Dittmann of the Foreign Office and BdV President Krüger, 9 April 1959, PA/AA: Büro Staatsekretär, 299a.Google Scholar

104. Hans Krüger to Hans Globke, 30 September 1959, BA: B 136/6204.Google Scholar

105. See Hans Globke, to Albert Hilger van Scherpenberg, 4 March 1959; and van Scherpenberg to Globke, 12 March 1959, BA: B 136/6204.Google Scholar

106. Brentano to Hans Krüger, 20 April 1959, SDA: NL Lodgman, XXIV-41.02.Google Scholar

107. On the subsidy, see “Aufzeichnung, Betr: Teilnahme des BdV-Vereinigte Landsmannschaften und Landesverbände an der bevorstehenden Genfer Konferenz,” by Dr. Janz of the Chancellor's Office, 2 May 1959, BA: B 136/6204. On Brentano's attitude, see “Oder-Neisse Grenze: Anständige Staatsgesinnung,” Der Spiegel, 13 May 1959, 14.Google Scholar

108. “Oder-Neisse Grenze: Anständige Staatsgesinnung,” Der Spiegel, 13 May 1959, 14.Google Scholar

109. The text is in Die Auswärtige Politik der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Cologne, 1972), 408–10.Google Scholar

110. See Baron Manteuffel-Szoege to Adenauer, 20 July 1957, BA: NL 157/6. Brentano had first expressed guarded interest in nonaggression guarantees between the FRG and Poland in a 30 November 1956 press conference. See DzD III/2/2, 937.Google Scholar

111. On American pressure, see, for example, Albrecht von Kessel's Memorandum “Abschlusseines Nichtangriffspakts mit Polen,” 27 May 1959, PA/AA: Ministerbüro, 128. For de Gaulle's famous comments, see his 25 March 1959 press conference in DzD IV/17/2, 1268.Google Scholar

112. Albecht von Kessel, “Abschluss eines Nichtangriffspakts mit Polen,” PA/AA: Ministerbüro, 128; and Baring, Sehr verehrter, 253.Google Scholar

113. See Brentano to Adenauer, 23 July 1959, in Baring, Sehr verehrter, 271; and Brentano to Ernst Lemmer, 21 August 1959, BA: NL Thedieck, 144.Google Scholar

114. Brentano to Adenauer, 23 July 1959, in Baring, Sehr verehrter, 270.Google Scholar

115. On the attitude of the Allies, see ibid,; and Brentano to Ernst Lemmer, 21 August 1959, BA: NL Thedieck, 144. On the exclusion of the two ministries, see Franz Thedieck to Brentano, 18 August 1959, ACDP: I-148–173/1.

116. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (hereafter FAZ), 1/2 May 1959, 1, 4.Google Scholar

117. See “Bonn Plans No-War Pacts with the Poles and Czechs,” New York Times, 21 May 1959; and Herbert Dittmann's information telegram, 23 May 1959, BA:NL Blankenhorn, 98b, p. 154.Google Scholar

118. “Nichtangriffspakte Bonns bei Konzessionen Moskaus erwogen,” FAZ, 22 May 1959, and “Die Westmächte wollen mit Geheimverhandlungen weiterkommen,” FAZ, 23 May 1959.Google Scholar

119. On the BdV's reactions, see Karl Simon to Rudolf Lodgman von Auen, 3 June 1959 and 12 June 1959, both in SDA: NL Lodgman, XII-30.01.Google Scholar

120. “Taktik des Westens im zweiten Konferenzabschnitt,” a memorandum attached to Brentano's letter to Adenauer, 10 July 1959, in Baring, Sehr verehrter, 264–68.Google Scholar

121. See Brentano in the cabinet meeting of 22 July 1959, as cited in Hans-Joachim von Merkatz's notes, ACDP: I-148–041/2; and Brentano to Ernst Lemmer, 21 August 1959, BA: NL Thedieck, 144.Google Scholar

122. See Brentano to Adenauer, 23 July 1959, in Baring, Sehr verehrter, 270.Google Scholar

123. Brentano to Adenauer, 10 July 1959, in ibid., 265.

124. See “Auszüge aus dem Tagebuch zur Genfer Konferenz,” 17 and 18 July, PA/AA: Ministerbüro, 124; and Brentano to Hans Krüger, 21 September 1959, PA/AA: Ministerbüro, 124.Google Scholar

125. Brentano to Adenauer, 23 July 1959, in Baring, Sehr verehrter, 270–71.Google Scholar

126. See Axel de Vries to von Doetinchem, 18 July 1959, SDA: NL Lodgman, XII-30.01.Google Scholar

127. The quote is from Baron Georg Manteuffel-Szoege to Adenauer, 20 July 1959, ACDP: I-148–173/01. See also Karl Simon to Rudolf Lodgman von Auen, 23 July 1959, SDA: NL Lodgman, XII-30.01; and Manteuffel to W. Rumbaur, 25 November 1959, BA:B 234/282.Google Scholar

128. See Baron Georg Manteuffel-Szoege to Hermann Höcherl, 20 July 1959 and Karl Theoder Freiherr von und zu Guttenberg to Manteuffel-Szoege, 24 July 1959, both in BA: NL Guttenberg, 175, pp. 131 and 130, respectively.Google Scholar

129. “Beschlussprotokoll der Präsidialsitzung des Bundes der Vertriebenen-Vereinigte Landsmannschaften und Landesverbände am 22. Juli 1959,” SDA: NL Lodgman, XII-30.01.Google Scholar

130. Hans Joachim von Merkatz's notes of the 22 July session in ACDP: I-148–041/02.Google Scholar

131. Brentano to Adenauer, 23 July 1959, in Baring, Sehr verehrter, 271.Google Scholar

132. “Nichtangriffspakte?” Bulletin, 31 July 1959, 1395. See also “Bonn zu Nichtangriffspakten grundsätzlich bereit,” FAZ, 1 August 1959.Google Scholar

133. “Brentano holt sich beim Kanzler neue Instruktionen,” FAZ, 23 July 1959.Google Scholar

134. “Genfer Aussichten: Alles selber,” Der Spiegel, 29 July 1959, 16.Google Scholar

135. “Nichtangriffsverträge mit Warschau und Prag,” FAZ, 31 July 1959; “CDU-Stimmen für aktive Ostpolitik,” Süddeutsche Zeitung, 9 October 1959.Google Scholar

136. See von Merkatz's notes of the 22 July meeting, in ACDP: I-148–041/02.Google Scholar

137. See, for example Ernst Lemmer in the cabinet on 22 July, as cited by Merkatz (see the previous note); Lemmer to Axel Springer, 16 August 1959, BA:NL Thedieck, 144; and Franz Thedieck to Hilger van Scherpenberg, 18 August 1959, ACDP: I-148–173/1.Google Scholar

138. The quote is from Brentano to Adenauer, 23 July 1959, in Baring, Sehr verehrter, 270.Google Scholar

139. On the Soviet ultimatum, see Kosthorst, Brentano, 292.Google Scholar

140. The Warsaw Declaration of 22 July, in which Poland and the USSR stressed their willingness to back the GDR's claims against West Berlin, featured prominently in Bonn's subsequent justifications of its stance, although the declaration had not even been released by the time the cabinet decided about the nonaggression measure.Google Scholar

141. Hans-Joachim von Merkatz's notes of the meeting, ACDP: I-148–041/02.Google Scholar

142. Hans Furler's notes of a conversation with Adenauer, 20 August 1959, BA: NL Furler, 98.Google Scholar

143. Adenauer in the CDU's Bundesvorstand, 16 September 1959, in Adenauer: “…um den Frieden zu gewinnen,” ed. Buchstab, 393.Google Scholar

144. On the SPD, see Adenauer in the CDU's Bundestagsfraktion, 16 March 1959, in “Protokoll der Vorstandssitzung der Bundestagsfraktion der CDU,” ACDP: VIII-001-A/I, 1503/2. For the quotes, see Adenauer in the CDU's Bundesvorstand, 16 September 1959, in Adenauer:“…um den Frieden zu gewinnen,” ed. Buchstab, 394.Google Scholar

145. For the quotes, see, respectively, Brentano to Adenauer, 23 July 1959, in Baring, Sehr verehrter, 271; and Kosthorst, Brentano, 304. For other signs of opposition, see Felix von Eckardt to Adenauer, 17 August 1959, StBKAH: III/24.Google Scholar

146. On Brentano's interest in reviving the nonaggression initiative, see Brentano to Adenauer, 23 July 1959, in Baring, Sehr verehrter, 272.Google Scholar