45. Letter From the Ambassador in Vietnam (Nolting) to the Assistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs (Harriman)1
Dear Governor: This is in response to your letter of February 182 outlining Mike Forrestal’s thoughts about more contacts between American personnel in Viet-Nam and non-Communist members of the Vietnamese opposition.
[Page 127]I am sorry that Mike didn’t voice these thoughts while he was here. We could then have filled him in on what is done in this regard on a regular basis and with the knowledge of the GVN. In fact, I should have been glad to introduce him to dozens of non-commie members of the Vietnamese opposition at our home. These might have included a wide assortment of Vietnamese friends—bankers, businessmen, labor leaders, landowners, layers, doctors, university professors-who would doubtless have had a field day criticizing the government in varying degrees and from various angles. But what good this would have done—outside of demonstrating a point and possibly stimulating a coup—I don’t know!
I must confess to being somewhat astonished by the implication that we are living in cocoons here, dealing only with GVN officials and deliberately cutting ourselves off from other Vietnamese elements. This has never been the case since I have been here. One of the first things I did upon arrival was to tell President Diem personally that I intended to see and talk with members of the opposition; that I wanted him to know this and trusted that he would not consider it as plotting or as throwing doubt on US support of South Viet-Nam through its duly elected government. He accepted this in good spirit and we have been doing it ever since. All members of my staff know that they are free to do the same. I have heard some false reports to the contrary. These I attribute to the proclivity of certain oppositionists (and to certain former members of our Mission) to charge a freeze-out when, after hours of conversation, they fail to change one’s opinion.
There is, of course, a great difference between being accessible to oppositionists and giving them encouragement. Many of them tend towards radical solutions and we give them no encouragement. If we are not crystal clear on this, we would stimulate revolution. We have, however, frequently passed on to members of the government what seemed to be reasonable suggestions from oppositionists, and some of these have resulted in government actions. I think, for example, of suggestions about “the complaints department”, the Council of Economic Advisors, and the Provincial Advisory Councils; also such specific complaints as local officials’ overcharging for identity cards in certain Saigon districts.
In brief, I think we have been doing all along what Mike suggests, if I interpret the suggestion correctly. If, however, the idea is to try to build up an alternative to the present government, I believe you already know that I am opposed, for reasons: (1) that I see no viable or better alternative; (2) that any such attempt would ruin the carefully built base of our advisory and supporting role here, which must rest on persuasion and on confidence in our integrity.
[Page 128]I should add that, after the unequivocal public pronouncements of Vice President Johnson two years ago, and more recently the Attorney General and other high US officials, which I myself thought right and proper, I would not find it possible to be the agent in a change of. US policy away from forthright support of the legitimate government, which happens also, in my opinion, to be the best available at the present time.
Sincerely yours,
P.S. I am enclosing a memo4 from Barney Taylor on what we’re doing vis-a-vis the CVTC.