310.2/7–2254
The Deputy Under Secretary of State (Murphy) to the United States Representative at the United Nations (Lodge)
Dear Cabot: This is a belated reply to your confidential letter of July 22, as I followed your good example and was away over the weekend.
I talked with the Secretary about the contents of your letter. He, as you know, gave this question a great deal of personal consideration. It is his opinion, which in this case I frankly share, that to have talked to the Dutch about the Chinese representation question first in the hope of obtaining a commitment from them and afterwards informing them that we would not support the Van Kleffens candidacy would have really envenomed The Hague. The shock there was bad enough, but had it been done the other way, I really believe we would have had an exceedingly poisonous reaction.
The unfortunate part of this matter is that we all feel that Van Kleffens would make an admirable President of the 9th General Assembly. The Secretary did have very much in mind not only Prince Wan’s disappointment of last year and the preceding situation (in 1951, I believe), but more especially our current need for all the support we can get in Southeast Asia. [Page 569] Personally, I regret very much if this question has added to your full platter of troubles. It would be nice to do something to make life easier for you.
All the best.
Yours ever,