ARTÍCULOS TRANSITORIOS DE DECRETOS DE REFORMA
ARTÍCULOS TRANSITORIOS DEL DECRETO POR EL QUE SE REFORMAN, ADICIONAN Y DEROGAN DIVERSAS DISPOSICIONES DEL CODIGO FEDERAL DE INSTITUCIONES Y
The four-power occupation of Germany led to distinct forms of administration and policy, which informed the reconstruction of musical life. In this chapter, I will outline the nature of the divisions of the defeated country, the administrative structure of the three Western zones, early planning and policy relating to culture and music, and the basics of denazification policy and implementation.
The Foundations of Occupation Zones and Policies
The organisations shaping military planning for occupation were the Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force (SHAEF), one of the centres of British and American military strategy from late 1943, which also had ultimate control of French and Canadian forces, and European Theatre of Operations United States Army-
Communications Zone (ETOUSA-COMZ). Both were under the command of General Dwight D. Eisenhower. On 1 July 1945, ETOUSA was renamed United States Forces, European Theater (USFET), and on 14 July this took the place of SHAEF.1
The earliest policy directive was CCS (Combined Chiefs of Staff) 551, dated 28 April 1944, essentially allowing for military government to be established in occupied territory.2SHAEF transposed this into practical policy in their Handbook of Military Government in Germany and Public Safety Manual, published in August and September respectively.3Another SHAEF directive, of 9 November 1944,
concentrated on removal of all Nazis from public office and elimination of Nazi organisations, which was the beginning of denazification policy.4In the same month, following early plans to divide Germany into three zones (US, UK, USSR), a
1Bryan T. van Sweringen, ‘Variable Architectures for War and Peace: U.S. Force Structure and Basing in Germany, 1945-1990)’, in Detlef Junker et al (eds.), The United States and German in the Era of the
Cold War, 1945-1946: A Handbook, Volume 1 (Washington, DC and Cambridge: German Historical
Institute and Cambridge University Press, 2004), pp. 217-18. USFET was modified and renamed European Command (EUCOM) on 15 March 1947.
2Earl Ziemke, The U.S. Army in the Occupation of Germany 19446-1946 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1975), p. 59.
3Ian Turner, ‘Denazification in the British Zone’, in Turner (ed.), Reconstruction in Post-War
Germany: British Occupation Policy and the Western Zones, 1945-55 (Oxford: Berg, 1989), p. 245.
4‘SHAEF Directive, eradication of Nazism, November 1944’, in OMGUS, Denazification, cumulative
review: Report of the Military Governor (1 April 1947 – 30 April 1948) No. 34, pp. 17-22, available at
http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1711.dl/History.Denazi (accessed 1 August 2017). This was followed by another directive the following March; see TNA/PRO/WO 205/391, ‘Removal from Office of Nazis and German Militarists’, 24 March 1945.
framework was set down for an Allied Control Council (CC) for Germany, consisting of the Commanders-in-Chief for each zone which would constitute the supreme body of control.5In Autumn 1944, the French had also drawn up plans for a zone of their own, and begun training officials.6Also in November 1944, SHAEF issued Military Government (MG) Law No. 191, prohibiting all printed publications, broadcasting, theatre, film and music, and any activities of the Propaganda Ministry.7
The nature of the division of Germany - though not yet the exact boundaries – was decided at the Yalta Conference of 4-11 February 1945. Four zones, including one for the French, were agreed, and France was admitted to the CC.8This affected late Allied military planning, with French forces instructed to capture major cities in the south-west, including Karlsruhe, Baden-Baden, Freiburg and Stuttgart, all in April. They also narrowly beat the Americans to take Ulm the same month,9carving out in the process a significant region of control, the rest having been overtaken by American, British and Canadian forces after breaching the Rhine in March.10
Demilitarisation, denazification and political re-education were informed most fundamentally by US Joint Chiefs of Staff Directive 1067 (JCS 1067), drafted in the winter of 1944-45 and first issued in April 1945 (but not made public until August).11 This required the unconditional surrender of Germany, and gave full legislative,
5‘Agreement on Control Machinery in Germany’, 14 November 1944, in OMGUS, Denazification,
cumulative review, pp. 5-8.
6See Jürgen Klöckler, Abendland – Alpenland – Alemannien. Frankreich und die
Neugliederungsdiskussion in Südwestdeutschland 1945-1947 (Munich: R. Oldebourg Verlag, 1998),
pp. 33-5, and Marc Hillel, L’Occupation Française en Allemagne 1945-1949 (Paris: Balland, 1983), pp. 69-103 on the early planning for the French Zone.
7Laws and Orders of Military Government: Complete Collection up to June 30th1945/Gesetzte und
Verordnungen der Militärregierung: Vollständige Sammlung bis zum 30. Juni 1945 (Braunschweig:
Control Council, 1945), p. 32. The date for issuing the original Law 191 was given as 24 November 1944 in U.S. Dept of State, Germany 1947-1949: The Story in Documents (Washington DC: US Government Print Office, 1950), p. 594, which can be considered reliable because of its source. 8‘Protocol of the Proceedings of the Crimea (Yalta) Conference, February 11, 1945 [Extracts]’,
Documents on Germany, 1944-1959: Background Documents on Germany, 1944-1959, and a Chronology of Political Developments affecting Berlin, 1945-1956 (Washington, DC: United States
Government Printing Office, 1959), pp. 8-10; see F. Roy Willis, The French in Germany, 1945-1949 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1962), pp. 8-14 on the negotiations leading to acceptance of France's status as a fourth occupying power
9See Willis, The French in Germany, pp. 14-21, on these crucial last months and their role in General de Gaulle's negotiations as to the exact borders of the French Zone.
10See Earl Ziemke, ‘Germany, battle for’, in I.C.B. Dear, The Oxford Companion to World War II (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), pp. 380-82 on the final months of the war on the Western Front.
11Michael Balfour and John Mair, Four-Power Control in Germany and Austria (London: New York and Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1956), pp. 23-4. The full text, ‘Directive to Commander in Chief of United States Forces of Occupation Regarding the Military Government of Germany’, is in
executive and judicial authority to occupying forces, who would issue proclamations, orders and instructions determined by Allied Commanders in their zone. The CC was formally constituted as the ‘supreme organ of control over Germany’, and its
authority was paramount through the whole country. Nonetheless, decentralisation - including autonomous regional, local and municipal German administration - was presented as an administrative objective, though the CC could make central decisions on essential public services, finance, foreign affairs and production and distribution of essential commodities. The Military Government of Occupation (MG) should stress Germany’s responsibility for the situation it had brought upon itself (with German authorities communicating this message), occupy Germany as a defeated enemy nation, without fraternisation, and work to eliminate Nazism and militarism, prosecute war criminals and effect industrial disarmament and demilitarisation, as well as enforcing reparations and restitution. The German economy must be run to meet the needs of the occupying forces and living conditions in Germany must not exceed that of neighbouring countries. Further details were given, including need for coordination of media policy and over German education, to completely eliminate Nazi and
militaristic doctrines and encourage democratic ideas, while allowing schools to re- open as early as possible. The fundamentals were embodied in Eisenhower’s
Proclamation No. 1 of 7 May 1945, instructing officials to remain in posts and take directives from MG,12then in detailed policy in a directive of 7 July, including 136 mandatory categories for removal from office.13JCS 1067 would remain operative until 15 July 1947, when superseded by JCS 1779.14
At the time of the surrender on 8 May 1945, the representatives of the Allied Powers were General Dwight D. Eisenhower for the US, Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery for the UK, Général Jean de Lattre de Tassigny for France, and Marshal Georgy Zhukov for the USSR. On 5 June 1945, following the German surrender on 8 May, a Declaration on German Defeat and Assumption of Supreme Authority was
12The full text is in W. Friedmann, The Allied Military Government of Germany (London: Stevens & Sons, 1947), pp. 277-8.
13The 7 July directive is reproduced in full in Denazification: cumulative review, pp. 23-36. 14In Germany, 1947-1949, pp. 33-41. On the negotiations over JCS 1067 from the issuing of the first draft in April through to the end of the Potsdam Conference, see John Gimbel, The American
Occupation of Germany: Politics and the Military, 1945-1949 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University
Press, 1968), pp. 5-18. JCS 1067 superseded the earlier plan by US Treasury Secretary Henry
Morgenthau for a ‘pastoralisation’ of Germany without higher education or heavy industry, which were for a while Allied policy; see Henry Morgenthau Jr., Germany Is Our Problem (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1945); and Dennis L. Bark and David R. Gress, A History of West Germany: From Shadow to
issued, signed by representatives of the four Allied Powers. Amongst other things, this ordered Allied control of all communications and declared that the four powers would determine the boundaries and status of Germany.15The same day, two further statements were issued, one declaring the sub-division of German into four zones controlled by the respective Commanders-in-Chief (CICs) within the frontiers of 31 December 1937,16and giving Berlin an Inter-Allied Governing Authority consisting of four Commandants appointed by their CICs,17and the other declaring the formal constitution of the CC.18This arrangement came into effect a month later,19and a map indicating the exact boundaries (see Fig. 3.1; Fig. 3.2 gives a more detailed map published the following year) was issued by the US State Department to the press on 15 August.20The populations of the UK, US, French and Soviet zones were
21,936,000, 16,783,000, 3,312,297 and 17,900,000 respectively.21Their headquarters were in Bad Oeynhausen, Frankfurt, Baden-Baden and Berlin.
The division of Berlin is shown in Fig. 3.3. The Western districts had a total population of 2 013 000 in 1946, while the Soviet district had 1 174 000.22German government in the city consisted of an Assembly (Stadtrat) and Executive (Magistrat) under a Lord Mayor (Oberbürgermeister), all of which had to take orders from the
15‘Declaration Regarding the Defeat of Germany and the Assumption of Supreme Authority with Respect to Germany by the Governments of the United Kingdom, the United States, the USSR, and the Provisional Government of the French Republic’, 5 June 1945, in Beate Ruhm von Oppen, Documents
on Germany under Occupation 1945-1954 (London: Oxford University Press, 1995), pp. 29-35, and Documents on Germany, pp. 13-18.
16‘Statement by the Governments of the United Kingdom, The United States, the USSR, and the Provisional Government of the French Republic on Zones of Occupation in Germany’, 5 June 1945, in von Oppen, Documents on Germany, p. 35, and Documents on Germany, 1944-1959, p. 18.
17On the planning of sectoral division of Berlin by a committee headed by Clement Attlee, see Balfour,
Four-Power Control, p. 74. Further agreements of 7 and 26 July gave more detail to the Berlin
arrangement in more detail, adding that solutions to problems common to all zones must be passed unanimously and that each section of local government must include one or two representatives of each Allied Commandatura; for the text of these, see von Oppen, Documents on Germany, p. 39; Documents
on Germany, 1944-1959, p. 21-4.
18‘Statement by the Governments of the United Kingdom, the United States, the USSR and the Provisional Government of the French Republic on Control Machinery in Germany’, 5 June 1945, in von Oppen, Documents on Germany, pp. 36-7.
19Michael Balfour, West Germany: A Contemporary History (London: Biddles, 1982), p. 115. On fruitless French attempts in July to persuade the Americans to give over Karlsruhe, Wiesbaden and perhaps Stuttgart to them, see Willis, The French in Germany, pp. 20-21.
20Reproduced in Documents on Germany, 1944-1959, between pages 19 and 20.
21Balfour, Four-Power Control, pp. 96-7; Paul F. Myers and W. Parker Maudlin, Population of the
Federal Republic of Germany and West Berlin, etc. (Washington: U.S. Department of Commerce,
1952), p. 70; Willis, The French in Germany, p. 107; James L. Scott, Projections of the Population of
the Communist Countries of Eastern Europe, by Age and Sex: 1965-1985 (Washington: Government
Printing Office, 1965), p. 2.
Kommandatura of the city, consisting of the Commanders of the forces occupying the four sectors.23
Fig. 3.1. Map issued on 15 August 1945 indicating zone boundaries.24
23Balfour, Four-Power Control, p. 106.
24Taken from US Department of State, The Axis in Defeat: A Collection of Documents on American
Policy Toward Germany and Japan (Washington DC: Department of State, 1945), p. 70. Available
online at https://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/Dip/AxisInDefeat/Defeat-3.html(accessed 10 August 2017).
Fig. 3.2. Map showing borders of zones and earlier German regions.25
Fig. 3.3. Berlin under quadripartite control.26
25U.S. Army map, at http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/other/us-
army_germany_1944-46_map3.htm(accessed 15 October 2017). In public domain.
26Map taken from http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/map.cfm?map_id=522(accessed 10 August 2017).
The zonal boundaries were thus determined prior to the last major Allied conference, in Potsdam from 17 July to 2 August 1945. A further extended statement was made public on 2 August together with JCS 1067, so that the two should be read together.27 The main section consisted of a reiteration of the earlier decrees on disarmament and demilitarisation, administration, laws and the judicial system, education and the economy. Details were also given of the establishment of a Council of Foreign Ministers made up of the four occupying powers and China, to draw up peace settlements with Germany and other Axis nations. Equally significant was a chapter on reparations, allowing occupying powers to undertake removals from their zone, and appropriate German external assets. The statement also fixed Germany’s new borders, ceding most of East Prussia to the USSR and moving the Western frontier of Poland to a line connecting the Oder and western Neisse rivers, a major loss of German territory. It also permitted the expulsion of ethnic Germans from Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary, which led to an influx of many millions of refugees to Germany.28
Charles De Gaulle, then Chairman of the Provisional French Government, bitterly resented the fact that the French were not invited to Potsdam. A declaration by the Provisional Government made it clear that the French did not recognise the
agreement and would not be bound by it.29De Gaulle and his successors aimed for a permanent presence in Germany and territorial gains, specifically the separation from Germany of the industrial heartland of the Ruhr, as well as the Rhineland and Saar, with a large amount of French control of each.30The other allies would not accept this for the Rhineland, while a series of ongoing negotiations led to the creation of an International Authority for the Ruhr in April 1949, and ultimately the creation of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1953. The French did however manage for a decade to claim the Saar as their own. It was proclaimed independent of Germany in
27The full text is ‘The Berlin (Potsdam) Conference, July 17 – August 2, 1945’, in A Decade of
American Foreign Policy: Basic Documents 1941-1949, revised edition (Washington, DC: Dept. of
State, 1985), pp. 34-40. A shorter version with commentary is in Balfour, Four-Power Control, pp. 80- 90.
28For a detailed recent study of this, see R.M. Douglas, Orderly and Humane: The Expulsion of the
Germans after the Second World War (New Haven, CT and London: Yale University Press, 2012).
29Balfour, Four-Power Control, p. 39. In 1947, William Friedmann already commented that the link between the French and the other Western allies was ‘practically nil’, as with the Soviets; Friedmann,
Allied Military Government, p. 15.
1947 in a special union with France, and only returned to Germany after a plebiscite in 1955.31
The CC was not a lasting success. It first met on 30 July 1945, towards the end of the Potsdam Conference, and thereafter three times per month, with each power occupying the chair for a month at a time, beginning with the Americans. They would issue a short communiqué to the press after each meeting, but it proved difficult from the outset to agree upon this.32From September, French officials obstructed and vetoed various legislation, opposing any central German administration until the Western borders (and thus France’s territorial claims) had been sorted out.33By December 1945, a report in the New York Times suggested that four-power control had already failed, without a single joint policy or coherent vision for the country.34 Certainly plans for a unified but decentralised country controlled by Germans would be blocked by the Soviets.35Furthermore, there were differences of policy, emphasis and implementation in the three Western zones. Negotiations in late 1946 led to the establishment of Bizonia, the economic unification of the British and American zones, effective from 1 January 1947, to the consternation of the Soviets, and with
reservations from the French.36However, as it became clearer that the French only had a chance of succeeding in some, not all, of their territorial aims, they drew closer to the Bizonal powers. Following the last CC meeting in March 1948, the French participated in Currency Reform (introducing the Deutschmark) on 20 June, and the term Trizonia began to be used.37After the Soviet-driven Berlin Blockade, which began four days later and lasted through until May 1949, a formal Trizonal
Agreement was agreed on 8 April 1949 and made public on 26 April.38This cleared the way for the founding of the Federal Republic on 23 May.
31McInnis, ‘The Search for a Settlement’, pp. 38-41; Balfour, Four-Power Control, pp. 38-9. Barbara Marshall, in The Origins of Post-War German Politics (London, New York and Sydney: Croon Helm, 1988), pp. 12-4, considers unsuccessful British plans to introduce ‘socialism’ to the Ruhr at the behest of Ernest Bevin.
32Balfour, Four-Power Control, p. 92. 33Willis, The French in Germany, pp. 27-8.
34Anne O’Hare McCormick, New York Times, 5 December 1945, cited in Edgar McInnis, ‘The Search for a Settlement’, in McInnis, Richard Hiscocks and Robert Spencer, The Shaping of Postwar Germany (London and Toronto: Dent, 1960), p. 17.
35Ibid. pp. 45-56.
36Balfour, Four-Power Control, pp. 137-47.
37Frederic Taylor, Exorcising Hitler: The Occupation and Denazification of Germany (London: Bloomsbury, 2011), pp. 349-50; Fulbrook, The Divided Nation, p. 129.
38‘Trizonal Fusion Agreement’ (Washington, April 26, 1949), in James K. Pollock, James H. Meisel, and Henry L. Bretton (ed.), Germany under Occupation: Illustrative Materials and Documents, revised edition (Ann Arbor, MI: George Wahr Publishing Co, 1949), pp. 291-4.
For the purposes of this study, however, it is logical to consider the three Western Zones separately, as each had distinct administrations, priorities, approaches to denazification, and most crucially in this context music and cultural policies. In general, it was only after the central period for this thesis of 1945-46 that such policies began to coalesce. The Soviet Zone, run by the Sowjetische
Militäradministration in Deutschland (SMAD), and after 1949 the Deutsche Demokratische Republik (DDR), does not play a significant role in this study, other than when Soviet actions and policies influenced or affected developments in the Western Zones and then the Federal Republic, or when the Soviets had sole control of Berlin prior to the division of the city. Nonetheless, it is worth noting at this stage that the promotion of Russian and Soviet culture, and especially music, was as integral to SMAD policy39as it was for the French and Americans (though somewhat less so for the British). From the time of their arrival in Berlin, the Soviets also plundered cultural artefacts, including books, instruments and manuscripts from the
Conservatory, and removed skilled personnel, including some performing artists, to the USSR, not always voluntarily.40Overall, the Zone, including Berlin, was run in a highly centralised manner, allowing the Soviets to override local German decisions.41 The period from 1945 to 1949 (and then the ‘Semi-Sovereign’ period of 1949 to 1955) saw a gradual transfer of powers from the occupiers to German hands. This occurred at differing rates and manifested itself in different ways across the country. The Americans established hand-picked councils at commune, town and state level in July 1945,42leading to elections in January, April and May 1946 respectively. Then the British did the same in September 1945, but did not begin to hold elections until September-October 1946.43The French brought in regulations and elections for local government in June-September 1946, with appointed mayors from local councils, and a traditional system of directly elected state officials.44On 6 September 1946, US