848A.24/9–144: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Minister in South Africa (Holcomb)
142. As you know, some months ago agreement was reached in principle with the South Africans that all mutual aid transactions between our two governments should be placed on a cash basis effective as of February 15, 1944.
Discussions have been held recently between the State Department and FEA representatives on the one hand and the South African Legation, the South African Supply Mission and Dr. Holloway on the other with a view to putting this agreement into effect.
We were under the impression that the only practical detail to be settled within this principle was the question of lend-lease equipment [Page 264] furnished from the United States through United Kingdom to South African troops. We urged upon the South Africans that the Union Government, in view of its exceptionally strong financial position, should make a payment to us for lend-lease material provided South African troops through the British. We mentioned our understanding that the Union Government pays to the United Kingdom an arbitrary figure of £1,000,000 per month for equipment and maintenance of South African forces under British operational control. We stated that we believed it would be appropriate if a similar sum were paid to us for the equipment provided by us through the British. The South Africans replied that the Union Government has an agreement with the British Government under which the latter assumed responsibility for the equipment and maintenance of South African Forces under British operational command. The Union Government states that such equipment never comes into its possession and disclaims any liability for it.
After considerable discussion the South Africans still refuse to admit responsibility for material provided by us for the South African troops under British operational command. They likewise disclaim responsibility for materials going to the Union itself for United Kingdom account. They propose that the Union Government accept liability only for goods supplied direct by the United States to the Union Government on orders placed by the Union Government after February 15, 1944.
Thus the responsibility for goods supplied by us for various purposes would be as follows:
- 1.
- South African troops in the European-Mediterranean theater under British operational command—United Kingdom responsibility.
- 2.
- The RAF flying boat squadron based on Durban—United Kingdom responsibility in so far as aircraft, spares and equipment are concerned.
- 3.
- Air training scheme—United Kingdom responsibility in so far as planes and personnel are concerned and South African responsibility in so far as ground facilities, lubricants, and possibly fuel are concerned.
- 4.
- Material and equipment for maintenance of Air Patrol to protect, shipping routes around the Cape—South African responsibility.
- 5.
- South African forces in the Union—South African responsibility.
The South Africans have emphasized that General Smuts15 has outlined to Parliament the arrangements with Britain and that South Africa’s contribution to the war, both in money and materials, has been on the basis of this agreement and on the understanding that no [Page 265] change would be made in lend-lease arrangements. They state that General Smuts could not now go before Parliament and ask for a new arrangement.
We are convinced that in view of South Africa’s strong financial position it is well able to make full payment for lend-lease materials, provided from this country.
On the other hand, there is merit in the South African position that they should not be required to pay for equipment ordered by the United Kingdom for use in carrying out United Kingdom commitments and over which the Union Government does not have control. A third possibility would be to charge the United Kingdom for equipment used by South African forces, but this would create a distinction both in principle and in practice from the treatment of equipment, furnished the United Kingdom for use by other Commonwealth forces. Furthermore, we feel that the United Kingdom’s contribution to the war effort is far greater in proportion than the Union’s contribution. In all circumstances we are inclined to accept the proposal outlined above without making any change in treatment of equipment furnished the United Kingdom for use of South African forces.
We should appreciate receiving your views at your early convenience.
- Gen. Jan Christian Smuts, South African Prime Minister.↩