Evening star., 1961-07-18

other governments responsible
for the settlement Of tn Ger
man question, since these
rights drive absolutely from the
unconditional surrender Of
Nazi Germany, and were not
granted by, or negotiated with,
the Soviet Union.
This has repeatedly been
acknowledged by the Soviet
Government, as recently as at
the Vienna meetings and in
Chairman Khrushchev's ad-
dress Of June IS. 1861. For
the same reasons, the United
States Government does not
admit that its rights and obliga-
tionS toward Germany as a
whole can be affected by uni
lateral negotiations of peace
settlements with q part Of
Germany.
Obligations Affirmed
The obligation to maintain
the unity Of Germany was af-
firmed by the victorious powers
from the beginning. It was
acknowledged by the Soviet
Union in 1855, at q conference
attended by Chairman Khru-
shchev, in the Geneva direc-
tive of the four heads Of gov
ernment, which says:
"The Heads Of Government
(of France, the United King
dom, the Soviet Union, and the
United States. recognizing their
common responsibility for the
settlement Of the German ques-
ton and the reunification of
Germany, have agreed that
the settlement Of the German
question and the reunification
Of Germany by means Of free
elections shall be carried out
in conformity with the ma
tional interests of the German
people -"
What the Soviet Union pro-
poses, unless the three powers
formally abandon their efforts
to reunify Germany, is to de-
termine by itself the fate Of
Germany through an agree
ment with the authorities Of
the so-called German Demo-
cratic Republic" which is not
freely chosen, but has been
created by the Soviet Union
as an instrument Of Soviet
foreign policy.
Denies FREEDOM Of Choice
BY its signature Of the United
Nations Charter and in numer-
GUS statements, the Soviet gov
ernment is committed to re-
spect for the. principle Of self
determination. But, in contra
diction Of this, by denying
freedom of choice to II mil
lion East Germans, it has not
permitted freedom Of choice
to the German people as a
whole. And it is now proposing
to perpetuate that denial by
concluding q final settlement
with q regime which Is not
representative Of these people,
does not enjoy their confidence,
and is, in fact, no more than
its own creation and an extern
sion Of its own authority.
Under these circumstances,
the part Of Germany subject
to that regime cannot be re-
garded as an independent SOW
ereign state, and q peace
treaty" with the part Of Ger
many's territory termed Ger
man Democratic Republic" by
the Soviet government could
have no validity in inter-
national law, nor could it af-
feet in any way whatsoever the
rights Of the Western powers.
According to the thesis re-
peatedly expounded by the So
vietS. the separate peace
treaty" would, upon its con-
clusion. terminate the rights of
the West in, and with regard
to. Berlin. These assertions are
untenable and fallacious from
a legal point Of view, both be-
cause such q separate treaty
would be legally ineffective,
and because neither the Soviet
Union nor East Germany can,
for the reasons stated above,
unilaterally deprive the three
Western powers Of their origi-
nal rights in, and regarding,
Berlin. Rights of access to Ber.