740.0011 European War 1939/11755: Telegram
The Ambassador in France (Leahy) to the Secretary of State
[Received 11:45 p.m.]
652. The only mention which has been permitted in the French press in the unoccupied zone concerning the statement which the Secretary made at his press conference on June 5th,91 is the following officially inspired article which appears in identical form in this morning’s papers:
“Franco-American relations.
Our policy is not a policy of aggression and oppression, declare authoritative French circles, in answer to a declaration made by Mr. Cordell Hull.
Mr. Cordell Hull made a declaration on Franco-American relations at a press conference, in which he stated: ‘If the French Government [Page 187] should adopt a policy of collaboration with other powers for the purpose of aggression and oppression, this policy would be considered inimical by the United States.’
There is astonishment in authoritative French circles at what the American Secretary of State qualifies as a policy of aggression and oppression, a policy which is directed against nobody and which intends no harm to the interests of any other power, which is inspired only by the sole anxiety to establish better relations in Europe and maintain, against all attacks, the liberty of the French Empire and of its means of communication.
It is noted that the French Government intends, for its part, to maintain friendly relations with the United States, but the Federal Government cannot fail to understand that the first task of the French Government in the particularly difficult situation in which it finds itself, is to safeguard the vital interests of France and of its Empire.”
It will be noted that the Ministry of Information selected for quote a single sentence from the Secretary’s statement to which to make public reply. The obvious intention of the above press release apparently was to convey to the French people that the United States is adopting a quite unjustified menacing attitude toward their country. While official circles in conversation have so far maintained the “no comment” attitude apparently imposed upon them, some of our Foreign Office friends tell us privately that the promptness and vigor of the Secretary’s statements have made a “real impression” and have had a “salutary” effect.
With reference to the Embassy’s telegram 1090, December 6, 11 a.m. [p. m.]92 and previous; and to the Department’s 818, December 7, 6 p.m.,92 the suppressing from the public of the Secretary’s statement—as in the earlier cases of the President’s declaration of May 15 and the watering down of the President’s speech of May 27—appears to furnish important examples of the real need to keep the French public better informed. A growing number of people in various walks of life have in the past fortnight urged that American news broadcasts in French be transmitted if possible through London. As I have reported in the past, the public here has much confidence in the impartiality and accuracy of our broadcasts and little in the British broadcasts which it feels contain much propaganda. If we are to hope to keep the French people informed of our policies and our views, I feel that it is of real importance to endeavor to arrange relaying of American broadcasts through England or some other point on the European Continent.