800.00B/3–2549: Telegram

[Extracts]

The Ambassador in France ( Caffery ) to the Secretary of State

secret    us urgent
niact

1225. In light of information contained in Deptel 908 and Department’s explanation to press received in Radio Bulletin 68 re refusal of visitors’ visas to French nationals invited to “world peace” conference,1 New York, I have decided to make no reply to Joliot-Curie’s2 and other letter received protesting Dept’s action.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

I venture to suggest that time has come for overall US Government policy decision to be taken at highest levels re readmission to US of representatives of Communist and Communist-front organizations from (a) USSR and iron curtain countries, and (b) rest of world, bearing in mind special public relations aspects in countries like France with important and highly-organized Communist Party. [Page 820] While this decision must naturally take all account of peculiarities our immigration laws as well as security considerations, it should in my opinion be primarily based on its potential effectiveness in cold war. In this connection, please see Embtels 984 and 1037, March 10 and 14.3

From Paris there would appear to be three alternatives:

(1)
Extension to resolution of world of policy enunciated by Assistant Secretary Allen on March 16 of granting visas on basis US “devotion to freedom of information and free speech on any issue.”4
(2)
Refusal of visas to all representatives of Communist or Communist-front organizations on both sides iron curtain, proceeding to private or unofficial conference.
(3)
Maintenance of present policy toward USSR and satellite nationals and refusal of visas to nationals of free countries on basis highly-publicized major policy decision.

If third alternative is chosen, I believe we would at least be in better position from propaganda point of view if it were based on some such argument as the following:

In Communist and Communist-dominated countries, political liberty does not exist and access to free information is denied: consequently, only opportunity for national these countries to be exposed to free exchange information is by attending conferences outside iron curtain. US would not care to deny this opportunity to such persons even when they are traveling on orders of government clearly opposed to freedom of information. Nationals of countries possessing free institutions, however, have not excuse of either ignorance or constraint and consequently it can be assumed they are Communist by their own free choice and conviction and as such enemies of US political and social systems. Under circumstances their admission to US cannot be recommended on grounds of national interest.

Basis distinction in granting or refusing visas for “world peace” conference appears to have been “official” character USSR and satellite delegates, even though conference was “private”. While this distinction may have sound legal basis under immigration laws, it appears highly technical to foreign opinion. From viewpoint of cold war, it not only fails to furnish convincing justification but has in our opinion adverse propaganda effect.

Caffery
  1. The telegram under reference here is not printed. Regarding Press Officer McDermott’s statement to the press, as reported upon in the Department of State Wireless Bulletin of March 22 (No. 68), see the editorial note, p. 808.
  2. Jean Frédéric Joliot Curie, professor at the College de France and French High Commissioner for Atomic Energy.
  3. Neither printed.
  4. Regarding the statement under reference here, see editorial note, p. 808.