BERLIN
Sta,—In claiming that the plan for Berlin published under my name in the Guardian constitutes appease- ment, you are concerned only with appearances. The reality is that West Germany would become larger. stronger, more defensible and more populous whilst East Germany lost a sixth of its territory containing about two million people. You are rightly con- cerned with 'the capital of Germany,' Berlin. as the symbol which it undoubtedly is. But how do you propose to make it the actual capital of a real Ger- many? By war? Or by agreement? And what agree- ment would not merit your epithet appeasement?
The plan has great weaknesses—the greatest being that so bold a movement of population is probably more than free people would ever undertake. That is for Germans to decide. If they reject it, they would no doubt welcome a full exposition of 'the lasting solution' without 'appeasement' which you say that you favour.—Yours faithfully,
[There is no solution to the Berlin problem, as things are. And the important thing is to avoid the appearance of willingness to make a bargain, which, though it might temporarily simplify NATO's de- fence problems, would make the prospects for a lasting settlement in the future more remote. Symbols can be of more importance than Mr. Beaton appears to realise.—Editor, Spectator.)
Previous page
