890E.01/144: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (Winant)49
3970. Since his arrival in Beirut, De Gaulle has repeated to Gwynn several times, with emphasis, his determination to force a show-down now regarding British Free French relations in Syria. De Gaulle has complained that the British, by intervening through Spears in internal affairs, have violated their promises to acknowledge Free French predominance in local affairs. De Gaulle has declared firmly that if the British do not agree to remove Spears, it will be the end of all collaboration.
De Gaulle seems convinced that the British are trying to eliminate the French from the Levant, and dismissed as of little interest Gwynn’s statement, based on your 4259, July 30, that Britain has no other than its publicly declared policy in these territories.
As regards the granting of independence, De Gaulle informed Gwynn that Fighting France, as well as France, was determined ultimately to fulfill the terms and purpose of the mandate and to grant when possible independence to Syria and Lebanon but that this could be done only when the peoples were prepared for it, and that the time had not come and might not come for many years.
De Gaulle has not specifically requested American mediation but he has pointedly kept our representative in Beirut fully informed. While he has agreed with Gwynn that it would be unthinkable for a complete rupture between the British and Free French to occur, his attitude is that if the British Government retains Spears and supports continued British interference in internal affairs in Syria, all collaboration will end.
The British Embassy in Washington has been given the substance of our recent telegrams from Beirut, in an effort to make certain that the seriousness of the situation is not minimized.
The Department has not undertaken to weigh the relative merits of the two contending positions. It nevertheless considers that De Gaulle’s statement that Syria and Lebanon may not be ready for independence for many years is not consonant with Free French and British statements on the eve of their occupation of Syria, when they announced, notably for its propaganda effect on the Arabs, that the Allies were bringing independence to the two areas, nor with Catroux’s subsequent proclamations that Syria and Lebanon had entered upon independent life. On the other hand, the British Minister in Beirut appears at least to have construed his duties to be more than those ordinarily devolving upon a foreign diplomatic representative.
[Page 620]Please discuss the subject again with Mr. Eden at an early opportunity, and assure him of our willingness and desire to contribute to a better understanding between the British and the Free French. You may inform Mr. Eden in all frankness that this Government is not able to support either the British or Free French positions in their entirety, nor does it believe a useful purpose would be served by our doing so. This Government can not remain indifferent, however, to a controversy which affects in an important manner the common war effort.
The Department is repeating this telegram to Gwynn for his guidance. He is being requested to express his appreciation to General De Gaulle for having kept us so fully informed. He is being requested to point out to General De Gaulle, with equal frankness, our serious concern, as a nation joined in the common cause against the Axis, that the assurances given the Syrians and Lebanese be scrupulously fulfilled. Without this, not only the Arab world but all peoples who are asked to place reliance in our sincerity will form justifiable doubts of the assurances of any of the nations or groups associated against the enemy.49a