Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, Indochina, Volume XIII, Part 2

751G.00/8–3054: Telegram

The Ambassador in France (Dillon) to the Department of State

secret
priority

Paris, August 30, 1954—2 p.m.

873. Repeated information Saigon 94. Pass FOA.

1. In view current overriding preoccupation Mendes with EDC debate, we expressed to LaChambre this morning Dept’s views along lines indicated Deptel 733.¹ Inasmuch as we had just discussed this general subject with LaChambre together with Sen. Mansfield, LaChambre’s views this regard substantially those indicated Embtel 849,² i.e., French Govt feels change in near future indispensable, however, they determined not pull strings or try force any Vietnamese Govt out of office or into being. He said they expecting report from Ely this general subject end of this week. Ely’s most recent report, he said, indicated only that he thought it undesirable for Bao Dai return at this time. LaChambre stated he understood Bao Dai did not now intend return Vietnam Sept. 2 as had been announced by press, and that he (LaChambre) thought that Bao Dai would listen to advice he currently receiving counseling against returning Vietnam. LaChambre said he had nothing to add regarding who might be Diem’s successor in event a change occurred. He felt Tam at minimum ought be Min of Interior in any Vietnamese Govt in order counter Vietminh pressures. He said that he had just had conversation with Col. Leroy who favored Tran Van Huu. When queried about Huu’s position at Geneva on Vietminh, LaChambre came Huu’s defense saying that Tran Van Do had first approached Vietminh (Dong) and that Huu had not seen Dong until some 48 hours later. This general connection, he added Buu Hoi enroute Paris and said he hoped there would be no difficulty re his visa since this might have unfortunate consequences, with which we agreed.

2. We took this occasion inform LaChambre (per Deptel 730)³ that Secretary’s letter did not address itself to question continuation US budgetary support expeditionary corps, and made clear this open question at present.

3. Inasmuch as Deptel 737⁴ transmitting translation French aide-mémoire received prior taking action Deptel 730, and since LaChambre asked if we had received copy aide-mémoire, we predicated our request for info re current French thinking on size expeditionary corps to be left [garble] para 2(A) aide-mémoire. We asked whether para 2(A) to be construed as request for continuation budgetary support expeditionary corps, stating that if so, it would be necessary that we be informed re French thinking as to level expeditionary corps to be left IC and related data. We said that Emb econ and USOM/F reps would indicate similar reaction French econ authorities concerned and that we would inform FonOff our expression this regard (MAAG will also talk to Min Defense). This connection, we preferred predicate our request for data re expeditionary corps on aide-mémoire since it would appear as logical reaction to an apparent official French request for continuation US budgetary support and less like we taking initiative in absence official French communication this subject.

LaChambre said he would endeavor obtain this data for US soon as possible. He added that Ely’s initial thinking was that present approximate strength expeditionary corps of 180,000 men would be gradually reduced to about 150,000 by end CY 1954, and to 100,000 by end CY 1955. At same time, compensating increase would be effected Vietnamese National Army which presently totals about 155,000 men.

This connection, LaChambre took occasion to emphasize necessity adopting joint Franco-US approach to econ and technical assistance Assoc States IC. As we indicated to Lavaill August 27 (Embtel 825),⁵ we said this problem under discussion Saigon and Washington and we not in position discuss.

4. We also pointed out to LaChambre that statement para C aide-mémoire to effect French legal advice considered it out of question under cessation hostilities agreement to replace MAAG administrative personnel with training personnel, ran counter views he expressed to US and Sen Mansfield as reported Embtel 849. LaChambre acknowledged discrepancy and said that while he and Ely considered such replacement desirable, legal adviser FonOff had taken opposing position and that this had been one incorporated aide-mémoire. LaChambre then said that he thought possibility could be explored of sending Vietnamese cadres to Korea or Philippines for training as alternate solution, and said that he would ask his people take up with FonOff legal adviser this and other possibilities.

5. LaChambre said he leaving Paris for Saigon enroute Philippines (SEATO) September 2.

Dillon

1. Dated Aug. 28, p. 1993.
2. Telegram 849 from Paris, Aug. 28, summarizing a discussion between Senator Mike Mansfield of the Foreign Relations Committee, Minister for the Associated States La Chambre, and Ambassador Dillon, is not printed. (751G.00/8–2854) Senator Mansfield was in Paris in connection with a study mission on Indochina. His report was submitted on Oct. 15, 1954, as Report on Indochina: Report of Senator Mike Mansfield on a Study Mission to Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos. Committee Print, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, 83d Cong., 2d sess. (Washington, Government Printing Office, 1954) The report urged that the United States continue to support the Diem government.
3. In telegram 730 to Paris, Aug. 27, not printed, the Embassy was informed that the question of U.S. budgetary support for the French Expeditionary Corps in Indochina was still under study. (751G.00/8–2554)
4. See footnote 2 to the memorandum of conversation by Tyler, p. 1993.
5. Telegram 825 from Paris, Aug. 27, summarizing a conversation with Henri Lavaill, Chief of the French Economic and Technical Cooperation Mission at Saigon, is not printed. (751G.5 MSP/8–2754)