851.01/2016: Telegram
The Ambassador in the United Kingdom (Winant) to the Secretary of State
[Received April 6—6:55 p.m.]
2425. Embassy’s telegram No. 2364, April 3, 2 p.m., and No. 2402, April 5, 6 p.m.1 After considering the matter yesterday afternoon General de Gaulle and the French National Committee issued last night the following statement:
“General Eisenhower has asked General de Gaulle to delay his journey to French North Africa.
General de Gaulle and the National Committee regret the delay, which cannot be prolonged without serious disadvantage. General de Gaulle and several members of the National Committee have been ready for some days to leave for Algiers, in order to reestablish the unity of the Empire, which is necessitated by the national interest and demanded by French opinion at home and overseas.”
I learned of this statement at 10 last evening and immediately got in touch with Mr. Eden. I said that the statement was not a helpful one and that its publication both in Great Britain and in the United States cannot but lead to misinterpretation of the reasons for the delay in General de Gaulle’s visit to Algiers.
He agreed but ascertained that since no security censorship question was involved the statement had already been cabled by our correspondents to the United States and would appear in the British papers. He suggested that the best that could be done under the circumstances would be for the Foreign Office to issue some statement expressing concurrence with the postponement of de Gaulle’s visit.
The entire British press this morning carried de Gaulle’s statement on the front page under such headlines as the following: “General Eisenhower and General de Gaulle—request to delay visit to Africa” (Times); “General de Gaulle defers visit to North Africa—Committees Regret” (Telegraph); “De Gaulle’s visit again delayed—Eisenhower Request” (News Chronicle); “Eisenhower puts off de Gaulle” (Daily Herald); “De Gaulle visit surprise—Eisenhower asks ‘put it off’ “(Daily Mail); “De Gaulle visit stopped on departure eve” (Daily Express); “Last ditch fight to stop de Gaulle” (Daily Worker); “Eisenhower tells de Gaulle: delay trip to Africa” (Daily Mirror).
While a number of papers carry some comments sympathetic in varying degree to the attitude of the French National Committee, the Times alone seems to have followed Foreign Office guidance. That journal’s diplomatic correspondent writes: [Page 91]
“Although Fighting French circles in London seem to have been surprised by General Eisenhower’s request there is in fact nothing unexpected about it. At the moment all attention is concentrated on the military operations, and clearly General Eisenhower does not wish to turn aside to political considerations at a time when events in Tunisia are marching to a climax.
General de Gaulle’s visit to North Africa is of such cardinal importance that the cause of French unity, which both he and General Giraud have so much at heart, would be hindered and not helped if the wrong moment for the visit were chosen. General Giraud is with his troops.
The delay, which need not be long, will give General Catroux fuller opportunity to continue and perhaps to complete his inquiries. Moreover, General de Gaulle will wish to call on Mr. Eden, and to hear at first-hand an account of the discussions in Washington on French unity and the future of France.
It may be taken for granted that the British Government fully understand and sympathize with the reasons for General Eisenhower’s request, and share his hope that the meeting will take place when the military situation has been cleared up.”
An example of the different points of view—the News Chronicle has the following to say:
“The least that can be said is that it (the delay) has caused considerable disappointment in French circles here.
Several factors have led, I learn, to the American Commander-in-Chief’s appeal to de Gaulle.
One is that all energy for the time being is concentrated in North Africa in a final fight with Rommel2 to clear Tunisia of Axis forces.
Another factor is that certain French military elements in North Africa—notably senior officers who are still Pétainist—are reported to have warned General Giraud that they objected to any kind of unity or collaboration with de Gaulle and the Fighting French whom they still regard as rebels.
A third factor is that in view of recent progress in activities of the de Gaullist elements in North Africa in Algiers might lead to demonstrations and counter-demonstrations not only in Algiers itself but in other important centers of North Africa where the leader of the Fighting French is becoming more and more popular.”
Repeated to Algiers.