Ext 6116/46(S) 'Secret Weekly Political Intelligence Summaries, nos 356-416, August 1946-November 1947' [‎60v] (120/978)

SED and the Soviet Union and declared
that not only the Soviet Military Adminis
tration but the whole Russian people was
“ following the development, the struggle
and the successes of the SED with the
greatest suspense.” No such outspoken
expression of partiality had hitherto been
made. He also followed up his onslaught
on Western Germany and U.S. capitalism
(see last week’s Summary) with an exhorta
tion to the SED to interfere in Western
Germany and to “ smoke out the German
reactionaries from their positions, from all
the positions which they have seized by
cheating and by exploiting the political
and economic division of Germany.’ Die
Welt commented that it is idle to ask what
Colonel Tulpanov would have said if a
high ranking British Officer were publicly
to invite Herr Adenauer of the CDU to
ct smoke out ” the SED. Both the British
and the United States authorities have
protested against the speech, and Great
Britain has also objected to remarks by
Grotewohl. All that Marshal Sokolovsky
could say in the Control Council on the
30th September was that Colonel
Tulpanov’s attack on American capitalism
might be directed against certain indi
viduals and not against the U.S.
Government.
The most interesting German speech
was made by the Communist-trained
Walter Ulbricht who is probably the real
controller of the party. He was even more
outspoken than the Taeqliche Rundschau
in his attacks on the present state of
industry (see last week’s Summary).
Indeed, his speech ushers in a more chilly
era for the German economy. Ulbricht
announced an all-out hunt for
“saboteurs” in industry—a pursuit
which was once perhaps the most familiar
feature of Soviet economy. “ Expropriated
old fascist and imperialist forces,” he said,
were doing everything to disrupt the
economic system, and sabotage was being
organised from Western Germany. In
certain country districts, moreover, land-
owners had returned to their domiciles and
reactionary elements were being helped by
illegal organisations like the “ Mecklen
burg Land Association.” Ulbricht then
launched a severe attack on bad ‘ c working
morale,” particularly in La/wLowned
industries which, he said, must now prove
their superiority over private capitalist
undertakings. In true Soviet style he cited
hair-raising examples of absenteeism,
sabotage and disorganisation in ‘ £ popu
larly-owned ” factories, particularly the
Maximilian-Huette, “one of the most
important works in the zone. ^ \Yith^ a
good imitation of humourless Soviet dis-
trust he added : “The regrettable thing
is that anti-fascists in this factory An East India Company trading post.
attribute .... acts of sabotage only to the
lack of skilled labour”: the mystery it
seems was cleared up when a senior offici®
was discovered to have been a Nazi party
member!
Other information given by Ulbricht
was that in the public enterprises of the
zone, except Thuringia, only 8-4 per cent,
of the “ managing directors ' ’ and only
7-3 per cent, of the “ Works managers ”
had been such before 1945. By contrast
he deplored the fact that in Halle
University only 8‘7 per cent, of the
students come from the working class—
and even in Leipzig only 27-3 per cent.
If this is correct it marks a sharp decline
in the Leipzig percentage which was
believed to be nearly 50 per cent, in the
last winter term.
The SED congress passed a resolution
demanding fulfilment of the pledge made
at the Moscow Conference to repatriate all
prisoners-of-war by the end of 1948.
Although the party spoke of the need for
caring for these prisoners, a harsh threat
was issued by Paul Merker of Berlin who
accused some of the prisoners who had
returned from the Soviet Union of having
learnt nothing and even having destroyed
their own health in order to be repatriated.
He warned Germans to keep an eye on
these trouble-makers, who were a probable
source of subversive activities. Since
nearly all the prisoners so far released
have been unfit for work, they are a natural
source of anti-Soviet propaganda.
The latest dismantling of about
1,000 km. of railway track in the Soviet
zone will have the effect of restricting com
munications to the East. Previous dis
mantlings however had restricted com
munications towards the West, so that the
latest move is probably an equalisation of
the pattern of destruction and does not
denote a startling change of policy.
Elections for a Saar Assembly, held on
the 5th October, have resulted indirectly in
a firm endorsement of French policy.
Since all parties in the area favour econo
mic union with France except the
Communists and, it is believed, a small
group of Socialists, the only way of regis
tering opposition was to cast an invalid
vote or to support the Communist ticket.
Neither alternative was popular. As many
as 95-7 per cent, of the electorate polled
and of these only 9 • 9 per cent, cast invalid
votes, whereas 82-5 per cent, favoured