249. Memorandum of a Conversation, Phnom Penh, August 25, 19551
CONVERSATION WITH COL. WILLIAM TUDOR2
PRESENT
- Senator Mansfield and Valeo
Tudor said that we were now backing Diem solidly. Just prior to the Sect war, however, Collins (advised by Paul Sturm) reposed complete confidence in General Ely without giving sufficient regard to the fact that the French general was operating on instructions from Paris. Since French policy was to eliminate Diem, Collins tended to play along with that policy and we came close to undermining the Viet Namese premier.
When the Sect war broke out, Collins was in the United States and Randolph Kidder was in charge. The State Department requested a report from Saigon and a country team meeting under Kidder recommended support of Diem.
Since that time support has been consistent for Diem and he is growing in strength and self-confidence. As for complaints that he cannot tolerate strong leaders in the Government, Tudor pointed out that “strong leaders” particularly military in the past have been unable to refrain from seeking political power. In that context, his position may be understandable.
Barring an invasion from the north, there is a good possibility that Diem can consolidate in the south.
On Diem’s attitude, Tudor says that he is very suspicious but that once he develops confidence and faith in someone, it is very complete. He believes Rhinehart [Reinhardt] is cultivating a good relationship with Diem.
[Page 525]As for Laos, Tudor believes it untenable militarily but that there is not likely to be a major Communist Viet Minh attack unless it is part of International Communist strategy. He does not think we should get too deeply committed there. Technical aid and some financial support to keep the present government operative should be the extent of our involvement.
In Cambodia, Tudor believes we may be pushing too hard, and there is a danger that it will produce an anti-American reaction and push the Cambodians into all-out neutralism. The approach there should be to let them take more of the initiative in coming to us. The elections, he says, are a factor in the present attitudes, but there may be something more in the developing of anti-Americanism—our own approach.