FOREIGN NATIONALITY GROUPS IN THE UNITED STATES
see FNfpril ISM. SECRET
It may have comeurprise to the Socialists and those on their right in the Council's organizing committee that so many who signed the Council's declaration of principles are Communist sympathizers. In the six months or more that the Council has been forming, the Socialist members of thecommittee have urged upon their more suspicious majority comrades of the Oennan Labor Delegation the view that the new organization wouldfew Communists and that these could be easily controlledtrong Social Democratic representation. As yet the relation between the organizing committee of nineteen and the sixty-five signers of the declaration is not clear, but under any democratic procedure control of the Council is likely to be In
Despite the inclusion and even the dominance in the Council of the German extreme Left, the Council has had only an equivocal reception fromnists outside Its ranks. This coolness appears toardening Soviet attitude toward Germany. The Communists praise the Council for itsof unity, but they challenge the very points in its program whichit to the Social Democrats. For their part, the Social Democratic members of the Council appear to have mis] udged the effectreak with the Labor Delegation policy of reliance on Anglo-American magnanimity toandin supposing that once they were in the Soviet-inspired camp they couldsoftening" Influence on Communist opinion.
The introduction of the Council to the public was madespokesman (or its fifty-seven American sponsors. Pro-
lessor Reinhola^rWiebuhr of Union Theological Seminary,
chairman of the^tmerican Friends of German Freedom, who at the same time made public the Council's declaration of principles and its sponsors' statement of endorsement. The Council was described by itaas "composed of former Germans, opponents of Nazism now inepresentative of the major anti-Hitler political trends. Their unity in defining common objectivesemocratic Germanyignificant and encouragingheftfSaily Worker described the Council asubstantial unity of German anti-fascists from the Catholic center to the far left."*
omplete list of Council sponsors tnd members see Appendix.
Both descriptions appear to be wishful overstatements; noor Centrist political leaders arefound in the committee, while the major Social Democratic organization, thsverman Labor Delegation, also holds aloof The Council itself in its declaration of principles claims vaguely tonumber of persons, belonging to various professions, groups, andnited to make known their stand on the question of the future of Germany within the frameworkolution of the Europeann view of theearnest efforts during the last six months to obtain the adherence of really representative recruits from all camps, this description seems evasive. It is reported that the opinion was held in the Council that the venture must be launched at the present moment, even in imperfect form, because theof European invasion made it likely that the climate of opinion would later be less cordial to such an effort of intercession.
The Council's organizing committee of nineteen in-DramatU Personae eligious socialist (Professor PaunTillich of
Union Theological Seminary, the provisional. three Catholics (Baerwald, Nehring. andne Protestant parsonour Social Democrats (Aufhaeuser, Grzesinski. Glaser. and Baerensprung. the last-named recently accused of flirting with thethree-reputed Communists (Boenheim, Brecht, andhree alleged fellow-travelers (Budzislawski. Kaskel. andhree memberseu Beginnen (Hagen, Hertz, andnd the leader of SAPhe three Catholics. Frederick^Baerwald, Alfons AJtflchring. bothanda lawyer, are obscure personalities as is the Protestant pastor of Jewish origin, the Reverendorell. Theof recognized Catholic leaders is not likely to be made good while Tillich. whose anti-Catholic views arc well known, heads the organization.
Of the sixty-five signers of the declaration, fewer than ten can be classified as bourgeois-liberal; nearly thirty stand closer to the Communists than to the Socialists; four are members of Neu Beginnen; and the rest are principally from the Social Democratic rank and file. The professional distribution of the signers of the declaration is also of interest. Nearly half are writers andpeople, and these are almostan Communist followers. The res', are lawyers, teachers, and physicians, while Dr.whose political-color is reported to be reddening, wasonsular officer. This literry
OF strategic services
weighting of the Council may indicate that its chief utility from theof view is to hold opinion in line behind Soviet policy,
sponsors are liberalrcumstance that induces the
Worker to complain of "monopoly" by tho^ppipn fpr^Deinocratic Action
House and to dub three of the sponsors, unhappily involved in
thejfcftmerican Labor Party feud "dubiousleven of theassociated with the American Friends of German Freedom, of which one
of the principal figures in the Council Pauj&agen, is research director.
The sponsorship of Dorothy^tTJiorapson, who has for many months been actively urging views very close to those that inform the Council's declaration of principles, was obtained by Dr. Herman^Cpudzislawski. whoear or more has been in Miss Thompson's employiterary researcher. Dr. Budzis-lawski. who was editor of the^cf tbuehne in its Communist period, is said never to haveember of the Party but is knownaithful and activeof its line.
The Council's declaration of principles was prepared than three months ago and has been circulating privatelyPrinciples German emigre circles in the interval. It Is knownDemocratic provenance (with some editing by In effect, itlea of intercession for Germany based onof das andere Deutschland and motivatedationalistwhich Social Democrats are as little exempt as their allies fartherany formal mandate from the German people butas typical of the forces and tendencies vitally needed forew Germany within the frameworkree world, the signers ofavow their duty to speak out on the future of Germany at athe German people cannot speak for themselves. They hold thatof Europe can be achieved only through the cooperation of West and Russia, and they offer the declarationontribution to thethe German question within the framework of such cooperation. Theof the European and the German problems are mutually dependent,enduring settlement of the former, it is said, is possible without a solution of the latter. The following are the principal points of the program, in the order in which they appear in the _
' 1ofCNATIONALITIES bhan.ii
First is the elimination of evil within Germany; that is to say. The Two the defeat and liquidation of Nazism, the large landholders, the Germanys big industrialists, the military caste, and the bureaucracyon them. In these tasks the German people must not be hindered from without.
A disarmed Germany like the other nations of Europe must be fittedystem of international security. Conquered territory must be returned and all damage made good to the limit of Germany's ability.
The first Nazi victims, the Council declares, were Germans who daredHitler. Most Germans did not want war. The enslavement andof the German people would be unwise and unjust. Abandonment of the Atlantic Charter in one case is abandonment in all-German economic and political dismemberment would be disastrous for Europe and would sow the dragon's teeth of Pan-Germanism.
The conservation of German productive power is essential to the world's conomic well-being. Its destruction would depress the European economy nd reduce world trade. Germans would be thrown permanently out of work and the heart of Europeeat of unrest
Thee^man productive strength in an internationalof production and consumption would lessen the significance of political boundaries, make possible German fulfillment of reparation obligations, and insure against economic chaos, German hegemony and rearmanent.
Leeway must be given the forces of German democracy in preparing the inauguration of an independent German government Civil liberties must be re-established at once, no obstacles placed In the way ofabor movement, and the institutions abolished by the Nazis recreated.
No impediments must be placed in the wayerman mass movement to stamp out Nazism root and branch. Only such an act of the German will can make the Germans spiritually free. For this reason, too, the Gcrmr must beeace with hope, however burdensome its terms.
German reeducation must be self-education by German democrats. Ed< cation by foreigners is psychologically impossible. This means, too,ew society into which the Germans are to be educated shall be one of soci. security and purposefulecure German democracy will be the principal contribution of Germany to European and World peace.
Or strategic 3lrvicvs
The Communist reaction to the principal "soft peace" The Council, in points of the declaration, as evidenced in JoscjihJvStaro-Communist Eyes bjn'scolumn in the Daily Workeras been
reserved. Starobin's comment affords some insight into the possible emergenceonflict between German nationalism andpolicy in the settlement of the German problem, unless indeed (as some anti-Stalinist quarters declare) that problem is finally to be resolved by giving national bolshevism its innings in Germany. There is little comfort for the Social Democrats in the latter solution. Starobin remarks that the program "tends to straddle many vitale writes that "the United Nationsafford to gamble on whether or not the German people arise against Hitler. They must be prepared to liquidateny case and by the strongestimilar reply was made by PauftMerker jo^preies Deutschland to Paul Hagen's declaration of confidence in the coming of the German revolution and his declaration that the Germans must be allowed to carry out their own purge. Secondly, Starobin remarks that while "we can all opposein principle, the fact remains that territorial changes at Germany'smay be the only way for the United Nations to achieve security, and enforce the peace in the immediate post-wareast acceptable to the Social Democrats is likely to be Starobin's suggestion that to facilitateby the German people themselves to stamp out Nazis "the new Council ought obviously [to] establish fraternal relations with theAfcVee.Germany Committee in Moscow, ther^reies Deutschland groups in Mexico androm London comes word (New York Heraldhat the Free German Movement there is breaking up on the rock ofard peace, and that two of the principal social democratic and one of the liberal leaders have resigned.
ay the Daily Worker published an article by Hans^Berger, anGerman Communist known to haveeading agent of thein this hemisphere. The article was entitled "Anti-Fascist GermanButhis piece may well have been intended tothe impression created by Starobin's chilly comment. Whereas Starobin's analysis was couched in critical terms because it dealt chiefly with theof principles, Berger's comment is more cordial because he dwellson the importance ofs the title of his piece indicates, however, Bergerelancholy sigh that this union comes so late. He rebuke
office of stoatiioicnationauthw branch
those who criticize the Council's composition out of dislike for this oi thatand points out that the essence of the united front is precisely the varied nature of its members, pledged to fightommon goal. Hence he welcomes the indorsement of the Council even by "friends of DavidljDubinsky" and observes that "this is not the moment to worry about sucheord of praise for Re^Stout, chairman of the violently anti Ger-man^Jffriters War Board and president of the^ocigty-Ior the Prevention of Worldor his work "on behalf ofurning to theitself, Berger stresses its demand for the destruction of National Socialism, its admission that the Germans must make reparation, its call for punishment of the war criminals and for the disarmament of Germany. Finally, hethe "unambiguous" statement that the precondition of lasting peace is "cooperation of the Western Powers and the Sovietn this hehe.difference between the Council andrman Social Democrats around Freidricl^Stampfer, who want Germany again to become, Berger writes, "the gendarme of Anglo-American reaction against thell else Berger leaves for thee concludes that the Allies neither can nor will "rely on the words of German anti-fascists or theirut he bespeaks help and encouragement for them in winning "moral and material power inand calls for constructive criticism of the new Council.
The evident failure of those on the extreme Left of theUneasy to deliver the support of non-German Communist opinionlikely to strengthen the uneasy alliance of Socialists and
Communists. Aufhaeuser himselfeeting ofwas stung by reproaches for his deviation from the majority Social Democratic line, to reply angrily that if Russia should prove to be an enemyree European labor movement there were vital forces in European labor that would triumph even in spite of Russia.
Aufhaeuser had been active in suggesting to the^lnternational.LabQr_Or-ganjzation plans for the restoration of free trade unions in Germanyat the close of hostilities. When these were taken up at the ELO conference in Philadelphia, they encountered overwhelming opposition. Jan ^Masaryk denounced the "nauseating thought" containedproclamation by some committee [the Council) that the poor German nation was led into this war byommunist delegates were among those who applauded Masaryk, and the Daily Worker was at pains the next day to make clear ^at
orncE or strategicnationalities bran ;h
the German worker would have to make atonement along with other Germans for Hitlerite crimes Communist reluctance toorking class variation on the "other Germany" theme may afford Aufhaeuser's Labor Delegation colleagues occasion to remind him of his earlier avowal.
Paul Hagen's participation in the new Council can be ex-Hagen's Role plained only partly in political terms He has, of course, no
such tradition as the Social Democratic to overcome into an alliance with Communists. But the chief impulse moving him may well be his own restless need to be playing an active role on the political stage, particularlyime when fateful decisions are being made. Finally, there is what in the elliptical language of the exiles is called "the question of thethat is, the hope of being officially recognized as "representative" and obtaining facilities for return to the old country. Hagen's contribution to the Council has been to procure publicity for it and bring it the support ofAmerican liberals.
The Council was launched in waters rendered hazardous by
Sniping from two perils to political navigation. One was the anti-Pan Left and Right German Society for the Prevention of World War III, whose best known figures are Friedrich WiVoerster, Emi^Ludwig, and Rex Stout. The "other was the implacable Rutb^FLscher, former leader of thcyjerman Communist Party andindictive anti -Stalinist.
' Plans to bring the Council forthortnight earlier had been frustrated by the Society for the Prevention of World War IIIuarter page advertisement in the New York Times, captioned "It is high time tohe advertisement attacked the Council asevice for Germany'sn the nervousness induced by this assault, it is said, many of those invited stayed away from the meeting at which the Council was to have made its bow.olitical sermon was read by Paul TUlich who drew on the declaration of principles for his text. Allies of Ruth Fischer who had managed to obtain admission to' the meeting uttered anti-Communist denunciations which in turn evoked bitler expressions of feeling from Council adherents.
The emergence of the Council was only delayed. However, the samereports that carried the announcement of the new Councilay also reported the charges of the Society for the Prevention of World War III that thisew nationalist campaign to salvage Germany. Ruth Fischer
aggard in coming to the assault. In her mimeographed house organ. Thpytettoork, which has found more and more readers (even in the Council) and some financial support from anti-Communist circles, she had beenwith much substantial detail drawnong memory and wideof the Communist milieu that the new enterprise is Communist.ew Leader articleay, "Stalinermanherontal assault on the Council. Both enemies arc elaborating plans to wreck the new vessel of German exile hope.
As was reported earlier.by. this Branch, thesix months in the completion of the new organiza-
Frieo^chXStampfer, the well-known former editor ol; theBerlmer
the Social Democrats tion has been due chiefly to difficulty inSocial Democrats to act with Communists.has been overcome by inducing certain Social Democrats to defyand the views of their colleagues. The most noteworthy defectionof Siegfried Aufhaeuser, the co-chairman of the German Labora former chairman, broke with the Labor Delegationjoin the new group, while Hans Staudinger. whohile belonged tohas now resigned from both on the ground of hisemployment. In addition to these leaders, some lesserhave been in the habit of taking their cues from the German Laborhave adhered to the new Council. The German Labor Delegation,the alternatives of backing down from its opposition and condoningparticipation in the Council or of seeing him leave Its own ranks,toesolution condemning the Councilommunist front.reported that adoption ofesolution was strongly urged uponby David Dubinsky's powerfulXJewish Labor Committee, toDelegation looks for funds. It is unlikely that the Delegation willAufhaeuser. Rudolf Katz and HedwigYWachenheim argue against
Waerts. also seeks toreak with Aufhaeuser. _Indeed, it is_by no means
FOHX1GK NATIONALITIES BRANCH
CmmcU with him, by stressing the soft peace character of theec-SXn of principJand arguingtrong Social Democratic bloc in the Council can more easily control the Communists
Manfred^eorge, editor-in-chief of thefot/fbau. who had been
OFFICE OF STRATEGIC SERVICES
friendly to the TUlich venture, suddenly found himself embarrassedlood of protests from his readers over the membership of Siegfried Aufhaeuser and Kur^Olaser, both assistant editors of the Aufbau, in the new Council. Aufbau is dependentewish refugee audience, and the objectors are said to feel that the latest activity of the political exiles will react unfavorably on the situation of German Jewish refugees, especially in view of currentagainst letting down the bars to further immigration. Manfred George is said to be considering the dismissal of Aufhaeuser and Glaser. While George has sailed close to the Communist line, he had always kept in reserve theof altering his course by insisting that his paper is American and "has viewed and will view the German question solely from the point of view of American war aims and an enduring new organization of the world to securee has now attacked the Councilerman Communist trap and deplores the presence of Jewsommittee of intercession for Germany.
Not all public reaction to the Council has beenoost from PM friendly. The most controversial figure in the new Council, Raul Hagcn, has received considerablepublicity of reccntVeeks imPflf, whichwo-page story about him by JameaWVechsler, orje hi the sponsors of the Council, under the caption, "An Early Anb-NazL"JUmtiL interest to note that Wechsler stresses Hagen's tn-dep^rlenw-Oi^reTCommunists. Consistently with this, PM in its account of the formation of the Council makes the egregious assertion that it includes no Communists. In the same journal MaxvfLcrner in effect gave his blessing to the new effort in two editorials about the quarrel between his friends, Paul Hagen and Rex Stout, the conclusion of which was that both were right.
Even before the Council's public appearance, some of its Communist members were at work seeking to influence American opinion along the lines of the Council's perspective. At the end of April the Oxford University Press issued an anthology of German writings entitleddited byrippen with the aid of several literary personalities from the Communist side such as Wieland&fcrzfelde,and Max ^Schroeder. The volumeetrospect of German historyo bring about undestanding of the Third Reich "as the manifestation of the profound maladjustments in Germannd to permitlear line of distinction between the German people and theirheappear as heroes, the Socialists as cowards. The volume Is so Com-
munist-anglcd that even those who praise it have protested its one-sidedness in this regard.
Inamphlet on Germany by one of the sponsors ofong associated with the American Friends of German Freedom, issued from the Western Reserve University Press. The point of the pamphlet is that "settlements must be4 the American Friends of German Freedomeport on the growth of underground forces in Germany. The underground hasritical importance to soft-peace proponents in view of current Communist warnings that time is running out for the forces of resistance in Germany to help in the overthrow of Hitler.
The Council is reported to beplanning to establish ties with the German-American community. Dr. Felix/Boenheim, one of the Communist members of the organizing committee, is likely, as head of tneVGerrnan-AmericanConference, to be charged with this task, with Vicior/Ridder, whose favor the Communists have been courting, Boenheim has in recent monthseries of war-bond rallies and anti-racial discrimination meetings attended principally by members of the^Vorkmen's Benefit Funds (the so-callea^SraTifcenfcassen) and the singing'societies. Ridder's organization, the tUnlted Americans of German Descent, wouldajor capture. Ridder,has recently been under attack by Emil Ludwig and for the moment appears to be content to keep his own counsel concerning the new organization. Theigtaats-Zeitung gave the announcement of thehree-column spread on the first page and printed the declaration of principlesin full.ay, however, it reprinted in full Rudolf Katz's attack from itieVteue VoVcSr. Zeitung. Onay it published Professor Baerwald's reply to Katz's attack.
What the practical consequences will be of theRiddlethe Council of many close to Communism, though in
Communist Policy some ways the most interesting question, remains en-Toward Germany tirely uncertain. While strivingnited front may be said to account for Communist support of the Council as it accounts for Communist support of equivalent organizations in other foreign nationality groups, this answer is not entirely satisfactory in view of the critical importance of Germany from the Communist point of view. There is also the all-important distinction that the territories now occupied by Germany are awaiting liberation while Germany itself is to be conquered and occupied. This distinction is implicitly acknowledged in the Council's dis-
OF STRATEGIC SERVICES
avowal of any aim toovernment-in-exile. Tbe Social Democrats, however, have sought from the beginning, to make it appear that the wartruggle for the liberation of "the otherhe Communists in the Western Hemisphere have played on the same theme. In marked contrast is the line of the Moscow Free Germany Committee, which does not rely so much for the appeal of its propaganda on the "good" Germany, but rather has offered those of Hitler's followers who would forsakeocus penitentiae.
Anti-Stalinists, of whom Ruth Fischer is the most notable, with longand intimate knowledge of the careers of the Communists and theirin the Council, cryew national bolshevism is in the making. Into that ominous construction of Soviet policy they fit every official andhint of Russia's plans for the German future. The indoctrination of German prisoners-of-war in Russia becomes the beginning oforps of janizaries of Russian-German imperialism. The suggestion that German labor might be employed in the reconstruction of devastated Russian territorycheme of Stalinist re-education to set against Western proposals of democratic re-education. The attempt toedge between the National Socialists and the German Army is said to be in theof alliance between Russian Communism and German militarism.
Both in the Social Democratic refusal of cooperation with the Communists, and in the-anti-Stalinist line of former Communists may be seen thein German exile politics of the issues which unhappily dividedGermany during the period of its struggle for and failure in democracy. The ghosts of European feuds take on American flesh as Social Democrats and anU-Stahnist Communists succeed in winning the support of powerful anti-Communist American labor groups.
office op strategic services
of Sponsors and Members of the Councilemocratic Germany
Rabbi Jonah BWise
Professor Henry PntnFalrchlld
Louispears Aeod or the Associated Press Bureau
fn Berlin Sldnej^Hollander
Professor RobertCnlversftp Dr. William AHan^Kellson
Frank PUniversity of north Carolina Dr.wooley
DeanUniversity Justice FeroUnand^ecora
Workers Union olAir InHreci or, New School lor SocialHenryWUllamtBcarlell orThe^'cwRelnholdN^fialdwlnJohn
"Dr. Walter BSCannono'unU
Professor CHenry PUnejd^VanYDusenHarry'
UwlirOanneit rofessor Walter PhelpaVHaU Mortimerys Robert-Heckert. -Dr. HaaflcesbrtDk Ben Wflwuebach RufusProfessor Horace MTkallenUow lfred p. Baker Lewis JimesjQJoeb, Jr. Hiram MotherweU
office of strategic services foreign natton alitiels branch
BUhop Edward lA*ParaODS
Dean ngward CBartdlefTKobblni
Cf ia rXlie re
WILLIAM jJrSchlf Ofltn
J. RavmoDd^Walahwechalerro feasorUeoxUUami
II. MEMBERS A. Organizing Committee
prttidenl of (a* German FtOfation of White Collarents and member of the Rriehitae
Dr. HorstChief of Police. Magde-burg
ProfessorIn (Ae Mlntitty a/
labor, how forewarn aalncrrttj Dr.director o/ (A* Hufcland Hoi pUaT.iu Berlin
o/-DretoroJcAen Opera" (Seo-gar's Opera. Oermart vertlon)
Dr.paNUAc o/ HM Welt-buehne (dramatic renew)
Pastoratfteran pastor innote potior of (Ae Second Pr*>by!rrlan Church. Hem
Dt.state Councillor In CAemnifi AlbertPrussian Interior
ana Police Presidentof Berlin Dr.trig member ol the Beichstag and sec-retarp of the Socialm (AcI _
HaasCAle/e Prturian Ministerial Department
of th*l magazine Deutsche
BSaeuer I* CAfle, Professor Juliusformerly protestor of anthropology In the Untvt'tits of Cologne, and director of the Jtdnfen-KroacA Jotit-Museumorn isor o/ pMIoIopp Infverrlfp
mechanic, leader ojfcozlaUstlsche ArbetUr Parlel
Paul Hagof the Research Department ofFriends of German Freedom, leader
Maximof the Philosophise hellzabe UrUcOerhaitit HenryHarvard Universitydirector
member of the Reichstag Herm Feer
formerly member of the Prvs-sianjegitlature and the Berlin City Councildirector of the Welfare De-artmept, Berlin; now University of Californiaactor
rofessor at Heidelberg, now
New-School for Social Research editor of lhe VoIkszeltur.fr.,
Dr. io; law)cartel lawyerschool for SocialHan*professor of law at Bonn,ofNotre Dame University
general director, Prussian state Theater
chairman. Workers Welfare Organ-
and member of the Reichstag
Robertsecretary of the Sodaltn-
professor al the University of Kiel, now Union Theological Seminary
professor, Berlin University, nowof North Carolina
manager PeHeMannI ter
Dr. pro'eiSO' 0/ fn
aow THCA College. ChicagoHenry
endort -eiJ:,'nrealer hi beKnaaif er
K.editor o/ tie monthly magazine Die BotlalUUache Nation
director, now at the New School lor Social Research
at Cm College, New Tor*
director of the Educationat the Prussian Government -
Hana'Germ an-American n for
Democracy, Detroit, Michigan secretary, German Labor Youth
Movement,German consular officer. Newgeneral secretary. Society olArchitects and Chemists. Berlin; new ehatr-
Oerman-American Const est for Democracy. Chicago
Dr. Lodarlcdirector.Clinic In Berlin
Dr. Veilprofessor of history, Freiburg, now atFletcher School ol Law and Diplomacy
OerUwld>er HelnrtchEluaettle r
State BsiMIng Commurtoner.now professor ol regional planning, HarvardAJntverrUy director, Prejs Department.Prussian GovernmentHarvard University Otto &opFrledertke