856d.00/12–2148
Memorandum of Conversation, by the Acting Secretary of State
| Participants: | Mr. E. N. van Kleffens, Netherlands Ambassador |
| Mr. Robert A. Lovett, Acting Secretary of State | |
| Mr. F. E. Nolting, Jr., NOE | |
| Mr. W.S.B. Lacy, SEA |
Mr. van Kleffens called at his request stating that he wished to bring me up to date on the course of events in Indonesia. He said that Netherlands forces had occupied Jogjakarta and that reports to the effect that the Republic had retaken that city were untrue. He said that Netherlands forces had reached Tjepoe and Solo; that he had no reports on the Netherlands advance in Sumatra.
I asked about the report that the Cabinet of East Indonesia had resigned. Mr. van Kleffens replied that this was true but that the Cabinet of East Indonesia had resigned not in protest to Dutch military action but in order to remain on good terms with the Indonesian Republic, with whom they realized they would presently be associated.
[Page 595]Mr. van Kleffens then asked me to explain “how things stand” at Paris. I said that the state of affairs in Paris was not yet clear to me and that I was aware that a good many press reports were of a confusing character. I told Mr. van Kleffens, however, that I considered that the United States could take no other course than to support a resolution which would call on both parties to cease fire and which would also call upon the Committee of Good Offices immediately to present a full factual report to the Security Council on the latest developments. I said that I could not say at this moment what position we would take in respect of a resolution calling on both parties to return to the status quo ante.
Mr. van Kleffens said that he had read press reports to the effect that the United States representatives at Paris had already branded the Netherlands action as a breach of the peace. He said that his Government had always taken the position that the Indonesian problem was an internal affair to the Netherlands and that the United Nations was incompetent to deal with it. He went on to say that his Government had accepted the Committee of Good Offices voluntarily as a matter of serving their membership in the United Nations and that a breach of the peace was, therefore, excluded by definition. I said I was aware of the Netherlands Government’s position in this matter and that I did not propose to address myself to that at this time. I said I presumed he agreed, however, that it was altogether desirable for both parties to state fully their side of the question and for the Committee of Good Offices to submit a full factual report.1 Mr. van Kleffens appeared to assent.
Mr. van Kleffens said that he had the impression that some critical observers felt that Netherlands military action had been bungled at the outset, in the public relations sense. I said I certainly thought it had; that from information we had received, the manner in which the Netherlands had undertaken police action would not look pleasant for the Netherlands when it was spread on the record. Mr. van Kleffens said that, in his opinion, no matter how the action had been undertaken, the United States Government would one day be glad that the Netherlands had taken this course of action since it would have brought to an end the several years of disquiet and violence and would have created conditions under which a sovereign United States of Indonesia, including the Republic, could be called into being.
- GOC report dated December 22 to the Security Council, see SC, 3rd yr., Suppl. (Dec), p. 295; the text was transmitted in telegram 1147, December 23, Gocus 511, from Batavia. For GOC report dated December 23 to the Security Council, see ibid., p. 297; this text was transmitted in telegram 1150, December 23, Gocus 512, from Batavia. (501.BC Indonesia/12–2348)↩