REACTION TO US FOOD OFFER TO EAST GERMANY AND ITS REJECTION

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP91T01172R000200320020-4
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 5
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: April 9, 2003
• Sequence Number: 20
• Publication Date: July 20, 1953
• Content Type: SUMMARY

Approved For Rase 2003/r-QW-FAM" 1172 RQ20200320020-4
'0 / 25X1
OCI No, 4521 CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
Copy No. 9 OFFICE OF CURRENT INTELLIGENCE
20 July 1953
REACTION TO US FOOD OFFER TO EAST GERMANY AND
ITS REJECTION
President Eisenhower's offer of food to East Germany-
has received generally favorable comment from non-Communist
sources, and the Kremlin's rejection of the offer has been
criticized, But Communist sources have attacked the offer
bitterly, linking it to most of the other lines of attack on
US policy in Germany. While the East German press and radio
have condemned the offer repeatedly, it has been given much
small coverage in other parts of the Orbit.
East Germany
Premier Grotewohl's statement rejecting the US
food offer set the tone for the editorial comment that
has followed Grotewohl described it as a "provocation
serving only propaganda aims." He listed trade agree-
ments with Eastern European countries, particularly the
Soviet Union, which make unnecessary any dependence on
the US for food. He said that real US help to the
German people would include a removal of restrictions
on internal German trade, annulment of the Schumann
plan and EDC, and agreement to a four-power conference
on Germany. The charge was made that the US was
neglecting one and one half million unemployed in West
Germany.
The East German government took several specific
steps to show its intention of providing adequate food
supplies. The Berlin radio described large amounts of
food arriving from the USSR and other "people's
democracies," even including rice from China, The East
German food minister promised larger supplies of meat,
fish and margarine, while the government announced
that farmers could sell surpluses directly in the open
market. Nevertheless, an East German paper called the
reports of food shortages "vicious slander,"
East German writers quoted the American press as
proof that the offer is a psychological expedient de-
signed to help Adenauer in th oases an
o------25X
Approved For Release 2003/05128 -
nntn_ 17 ,JUL978 R.
AtitrL: s2
2FQ00206310020r4 S Q
 Approved For P49ase 20 F1 1I72Rgfi0200320020-4
is a "cynical move to frustrate the policy of peaceful
reunification." It is also alleged to be designed to
create a rift between the people and government of East
Germany. A letter from a meeting of the Democratic
Peasants' Party to Grotewohl described the offer as an
attempt to set up "hostile agents' centers" in East
Germany.
One commentator claimed that American aid always
had strings attached to it, and cited 1948 pre-election
aid to Italy, the Marshall plan and EDC. East-West
trade was suggested as the real solution, with the
comment that "like Britain, France and Italy we too
want trade, not aid." Another commentator pointed out
that the American offer would provide only eighty-five
cents worth of food per person.
25X1
The sale of milk, fruit and potatoes in relief
markets in Berlin was described as an American propa-
ganda trick, and it was claimed by the East Berlin
radio that several hundred West Berlin unemployed had
protested the sale of these products, which they had
long been unable to buy, to East Berliners. Other
sources stressed the theme that it was the unemployed
West Germans who really needed food.
While the popular reaction to the food offer is
not known, some five thousand East Berliners a day did
come into the Western sector of the city to take
advantage of the relief market set up there.
work was halted in numerous
East rman factories tor protest meetings attacking
the government's rejection of the food offer,
West Germany
West German papers hailed the food offer and at-
tacked the Soviet rejection in strong terms. A West
Berlin paper said, "the last few days showed who feels
really responsible for people behind the Iron Curtain."
One paper suggested that this was a measure of revenge
against the East German workers who struck on 17 June.
Another said that the sharpness of the Soviet reaction
showed how much the Communist'rulers had been hurt by
the offer. Most papers suggested that ways must be
found to get food shipments through to the people of
East Germany.
25X1
25X1
Approved For Release 20031Q WF4FfD&k Jk21T01172R000200320020-4
 Approved For Reese 2003/O F M T91172RoQP200320020-4
Some papers which attacked the Soviet rejection,
however, also complained that the US offer was phrased
in terms which damaged the Soviet prestige and made its
rejection very likely. The Socialist Party charged
that the US had bungled its effort to ship food, and
should have explored other ways of getting the Soviet
leaders to accept the offer. Before the offer was made,
some West German sources expressed the fear that it was
designed primarily to embarrass the Soviet Union rather
than to feed the East Germans.
The Austrian Soviet-directed radio, RAVAG, said
that President Eisenhower has discovered that food can
be used not only for nutrition but also as a propaganda
weapon. Following a suggestion of West German
Chancellor Adenauer, he has sent large amounts of food
for use by East Germany. Eisenhower's "generosity" is
revealed by a "united press" report saying that the
food offer is an effective weapon in the campaign for
full utilization of the unrest behind the iron curtain.
Fortunately, no one suffers from famine in East Germany.
The people would be bad off if they had to wait for
American propaganda lard and propaganda beans.
Austria's pro-American commentator, Ostry, said
that Molotov's note contained the usual charges which,
however, will not fill the bellies of the Germans
under Soviet rule, If the Soviet note complains that
the United States offer was made in Moscow and not
in Pankow, this does not sound very convincing. Anyone
knows-that the. East German government, which has been
appointed not by.the.,people but by the occupation power,
must consult Moscow before making any decision. Despite
the refusal, the food offer stands. Moreover, the East
German population will probably receive food allocations
which -- though it will not be admitted -- have been
brought about by the American offer.
Soviet papers on 12 July carried without comment
the full text of the US letter to Molotov offering
food, and Molotov's reply. Molotov said that the offer
was unnecessary because Soviet food aid was being
supplied and described it as a propaganda maneuver.
The failure of the US to consult the East German govern-
ment was considered offensive to it.
25X1
Approved For Release 2003/pffxe1 T01 172R000200320020-4
 Approved For Re1etse 2003 N 1172R0 200320020-4
Soviet papers have since carried dispatches from
East Germany describing how well fed the population is.
It has pointed out that if the US were really concerned
with the interests of the German people, it would end
its cold war activities.
Soviet broadcasts to Germany described the $15,000,000
offer as feeble and claimed that the West German popula-
tion, which "led a semistarvation existence," had to pay
an equivalent amount every two days to US occupation
authorities. Real help which the US could offer Germany
was described in standard terms -- lifting restrictions
on internal trade, ending the Schumann plan and EDC, and
instituting four-power talks on the German question.
EASTERN EUROPE
All of the East European Satellites except Albania
have mentioned the food offer and its rejection, most
of them with comment.
Czechoslovakia
The Czech radio carried Molotov's reply, and re-
peated the Grotewohl demand for free internal trade and
an end to EDC. One commentator was concerned with the
sad lot of the West Germans, burdened by unemployment
and heavy occupation costs, and neglected by the US.
He claimed that masses of West Berlin workers are stream-
ing into East Berlin to buy food.: In fact, he said,
hunger and poverty are reported to be rampant in most
of the areas the US is responsible for, including
Puerto Rico, South Korea and even the US itself.
Rumania
Rumanian papers published the Molotov and Grotewohl
statements. The press suggested that this propaganda
maneuver was designed to offset the bad impression of
the "collapsed fascist adventure in Berlin," that is
the riots. It hailed the rejection of the offer by
the East German people, who rely on the friendship and
support of the Soviet Union.
Polish propaganda described the food offer as an
attempt to make the world forget the millions the US
25X1
Approved For Release 20034 W16MRT91T01172R000200320020-4
 Approved For ReUdse 2003
1172R0200320020-4
had spent to' stir up trouble in Eastern Europe, and
the American role in the Berlin provocations. It also
raised the question of how much the State Department
was spending to spread the Colorado beetle throughout
Eastern Germany,
Bulgaria and Hungary
Hungarian papers carried the Molotov and Grotewohl
statements, while the official Communist paper in
Bulgaria carried the Molotov statement,
OTHER COMMENT
Reports of reaction have not been received from
other areas of the world,
25X1
Approved For Release 2003 ffii? --C iI r91 T01 172R000200320020-4
IDEN