751G.5/3–1151: Telegram
The Minister at Saigon (Heath) to the Secretary of State 1
priority
1605. At noon yesterday De Lattre gave luncheon in honor of Sarraut, Governor of IC 40 years ago. Before the lunch, De Lattre approached me and said that he had just received my letter2 and thought he could reconcile the EGA irrigation project at Sontay with his military plans and in general thought there need be no conflict between us regarding America’s aims to extend American influence in IC. I interrupted to say that was not our aim and I thought we should have a very frank talk as soon as possible. He fixed the hour at 7 p. m.
For more than two hours he discussed the military and political situation in Viet Minh [Nam]. (See preceding Legtels numbers 1603 and 1604 dated March 11, repeated Paris 693 and 694.)3 I had the impression he wished to avoid a discussion of the conflict of American and French aims in IC which he had alleged in his last talks with me and with Blum.
Finally I interrupted to say that I had been disturbed over the insinuations in our last talk that American policy and operations were pursuing a course inimical to legitimate French policy in Indochina.
[Page 393]We had come into the area with a supplementary program of arms and economic aid, and had recognized Bao Dai on the request of the French Government and on assurances of the sincerity of French policy for revolutionary development of the independence of the Associated States within the framework of the French Union. This continued to be American policy and there was determination in Washington and the Legation that we would carry out this policy locally. If he had any criticism of our carrying out our policy, I hoped he would voice it frankly and immediately to me. If his criticism were founded, I would take prompt action to correct the American persons or operations concerned.
De Lattre replied: “I am a soldier, not a diplomat, and am accustomed to speak frankly without any detours.” I interrupted him saying that I was a diplomat accustomed to speak clearly and with the frankness that must characterize the diplomacy of any really great nation.
But De Lattre did not, as might have been expected from his initial statement, launch into a frank bill of complaints. Instead he delivered a long, and I thought an excellent analysis of the state of French spirit as a result of the last war and French economic losses and inferiority. France would revive but meanwhile he and we as the dominant nation must reckon with the inferiority complex and feeling of the humiliation in the French Government and among their people and particularly among the French officials and the French colony in Indochina.
I said I had made it my endeavor to see that the Legation staff should recognize the legitimate position France should enjoy in Indochina as a result of her sacrifices of blood and treasure, and asked for any particulars wherein we had failed of such recognition.
The only specific complaint that De Lattre then brought forth was that at Hanoi annual “Kermesse” or charity festival, last winter, the USIS exhibit had the most impressive and [apparent omission] exhibit putting French exhibits in shade. As result he had not attended the Kermesse.
I remarked that the size had been awarded by the Vietnamese authorities and that I, and doubtless he, had observed that the Viets fairly frequently yielded to the very human temptation of showing undue attention to Americans with idea of promoting rivalry and conflict between French and Americans. He agreed with a smile to this statement and said that such actions were to be expected from Vietnamese and were not to be taken too seriously. He appreciated that I had acted loyally and only asked that in our operations we used attitude and moderation that took into account French susceptibilities and interests. I replied we would of course keep that in mind.
In spite our declared policy of cooperation there were, De Lattre [Page 394] alleged, forces in the US that were pushing American policy in IC to actions injurious to French prestige but he accepted my assurance that our official policy remained firm in the lines of cooperation laid down year ago. I could count on his complete frankness, which he had just displayed, in his exposition of the Viets military and political situation.
He would not have thought that such a pitch of confidence and frankness would have been reached in our relations in mere matter of three months.
Comments: I doubt that as a result of our talk De Lattre is entirely cured of his suspicions of American activities which are constantly fanned and refomented by certain members of his entourage. I believe however our talk did a good deal to put him straight and I hope our relations will henceforth be good. They are bound to be sometimes marred by the unpredictable squalls of De Lattre’s susceptibilities and temperament.
I would appreciate Department’s comments or instructions with respect to conversation reported in this telegram and mytel 1567, March 7.4
Sent Department 1605, repeated info Paris 695, Hanoi unnumbered.