Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, United Nations Affairs, Volume III

Department of State Committee files, lot 54 D 5, “Working Group on Colonial Problems”

Minutes of Meeting of the Working Group on Colonial Problems, Department of State, August 26, 1952, 2:30 p.m.

secret
CP M–10

Washington, September 29, 1952.

• Present: Messrs. Benjamin Gerig, UND, Chairman
• Ward P. Allen, EUR
• L. W. Cramer, TCA
• Leo G. Cyr, AF
• Nicholas Feld, AF
• L. J. Halle, Jr., S/P
• R. E. Hoey, PSA (FE)
• Harry N. Howard, NEA
• Vernon McKay, UND
• Miss Louise McNutt, FE
• Messrs. George Monsma,ARA
• L. H. Pollak, S/A
• M. Rashish, ED
• F. L. Spalding, WE
• Eric Stein, UNP
• A. E. Wellons, AF
• E. M. Christensen, S/S–S, Secretary

[Here follows a brief statement by the Chairman (Gerig) regarding Doc. CP D–12, “Surinam and the Netherlands Antilles in the United Nations”, not printed.]

Dilemmas of U.S. Foreign Policy Objectives With Respect to Colonial Areas

2. Action: In the absence of any final conclusions with respect to the dilemmas in CP D–11, it was agreed to schedule further discussion of this paper at the next meeting of the Working Group.

3. Discussion: The Chairman called attention to the NSC Staff Study relating to North Africa and asked whether copies of the Study would be distributed. Mr. Cyr indicated that he had several copies which he could distribute to interested offices upon request and that, if necessary, additional copies could be ordered. He reported that the present draft is the fourth one and was prepared by OIR. The original draft had been prepared jointly by NFA, EUR and OIR. He expressed the view that the present draft constituted an excellent point of departure for any group concerned with the North African problem. Mr. Stein commented that the NSC Staff Study seemed to him to be a very good and fair paper and therefore suggested that this Study might provide a better basis for a discussion of the dilemmas that the U.S. faces with respect to colonial problems in North Africa. Mr. Cyr noted that the NSC Staff paper was directed more toward the long range problems involved.

4. The Chairman then requested that Mr. Stein comment on the memorandum relating to Tunisia and Morocco included in CP D–11. Mr. Stein noted that this memorandum simply suggested some of the problems that exist in these two colonies. French North Africa is unique with respect to other colonial colonies in view of the large French settlements there. In both Tunisia and Morocco the economic and social benefits derived by the Arabs have been negligible compared to those of the French colonists. A major question concerns the dynamics of nationalism in these two areas and whether it will fall and then rise again. Nationalism now seems to have wide popular support in both places although it is somewhat stronger in Tunisia. Some of the reasons for this growing nationalism have been the granting of independence to Indonesia and Indo-China, the re-organization of the Moslem League and the increasing opportunities for education among the Arabs in these areas. It seems almost certain that the spirit of nationalism will grow, and if the nationalist leaders cannot secure concessions from the French they will probably turn to more radical solutions. The more articulate groups in Tunisia and Morocco seem to feel that nationalism is the only way to secure the economic and social gains that they desire. Mr. Stein said that the basic question seems to be, as stated in the third paragraph of his memorandum, “For France, it is impossible either to grant its protectorates independence or ruthlessly suppress the nationalists because of the political and philosophical cleavage among the French themselves.” He said that it was very important to determine whether French policy is directed toward the transfer of control of the colonies from Paris to the French colonists. Apparently the French believe that the granting of any concessions to the nationalists will lead to the loss of their colonies. For the U.S. the conflict with respect to Tunisia and Morocco seems to be between our long term tradition of supporting colonial aspirations for independence and the short range problem of building strength in Europe against the USSR.

5. The Chairman said that apparently some of the points set forth by Mr. Stein applied to other areas as well. One of these is the question of white minorities in such areas as Rhodesia, Kenya and Indonesia. Mr. Cyr said the white minority problem does not really apply to Morocco and Tunisia since the French may not grant complete independence to these two areas. Mr. Wellons pointed out that NIE 69, which is currently being prepared, will be of considerable help in discussing this question since it points out that North Africa is essentially a different problem from that of other areas and that it will always be closely tied to Europe for strategic and economic reasons. The Chairman asked whether this concept was generally accepted in the Department. Mr. Howard pointed out that NIE 69 defines the problems without providing a solution for it. The Chairman pointed out that although we might accept such a concept, the Arab states would never admit it.

6. Mr. Halle asked whether it would be fair to say that the U.S. is primarily interested in stable and cooperative governments. If this is the U.S. objective and it is assumed that there will be a trend toward independence for colonial areas then the U.S. should use its efforts to see that this trend is an orderly process. Mr. Allen said that he did not agree completely since part of the conflict for the U.S. is between long range and short range policy. He also questioned the wisdom of granting independence to such areas as Libya at a time when the older nations are moving toward increasing interdependence. Mr. Halle said that he was assuming that the UN and the trusteeship system look forward to eventual sovereignty for all areas. Mr. Howard pointed out that it was possible to criticize the whole nation state system but that this was not a sufficient argument for frustrating the desires of the nationalists in the colonial areas.

7. Mr. Cramer asked how strong nationalism was in French North Africa. Mr. Cyr said that a few years ago the Moroccan nationalists were supporting a system of local autonomy within the French Union but that they are now insisting on complete independence. Mr. Allen said that he considered some form of self-government inevitable for Tunisia and Morocco and so the question is how to deflect their immediate demands for independence.

8. Mr. Wellons asked whether CP would prepare a position paper on Tunisia and Morocco for use in the General Assembly. The Chairman said that it was too soon to say but that he hoped it would be possible for the Department to arrive at a common policy. Mr. Halle said that he would strongly urge that a common policy be adopted for all colonial areas. Instead of formulating our total policy on a case by case position, he said that what was needed was a policy. Mr. Cyr noted that it was evident from the discussion that it would be enough of a problem to get a decision on Tunisia and Morocco alone without lining up a policy which would apply to all areas. Mr. Wellons pointed out, however, that it should not be forgotten that North Africa really constitutes a separate case.

9. The Working Group then turned to a consideration of the Indo-China section of CP D–11. Mr. Hoey noted that the problem in Indo-China is different from the one faced in either Tunisia or Morocco but that by our actions in Indo-China we have alienated some of the Asian countries. Until 1950 the U.S. took no part in the problem of Indo-China since it was regarded as an internal French matter. Since that time we have supported the experiment. Indo-China differs from North Africa in two respects. The threat of Communism represents a serious problem and the force of nationalism is clearly recognized by the French. He pointed out that the memorandum included in CP D–11 on Indo-China simply pointed out the dilemma that we face without answering the question of whether we should adopt a different course of action with respect to the Associated States. Mr. Spalding asked whether our course in North Africa is inconsistent with our policy in Indo-China. Mr. Hoey pointed out that the support of the French in Indo-China and our support of them in North Africa actually means two different things since the French are anxious to withdraw from Indo-China. Mr. Halle said that the conflict seemed to be between long range and short range objectives. He suggested that it should be possible to determine, through an overall examination, what factors the various colonies have in common.

10. Mr. Howard asked how acceptable the idea of French Union was in Indo-China. Mr. Hoey replied that in view of the incompatibility of the Three Associated States, French Union seems to be the only practical solution. Under the circumstances it seems foolish to Balkanize the three states or to federalize them. He noted, however, that if North Africa would join the French Union it might be even more practical as a solution for Indo-China. Mr. Howard asked whether it was possible that North Africa would accept the Vietnam treatment. Mr. Cyr said that Arabs seem to feel that they cannot cooperate with the French.

11. Mr. McKay said that it was entirely possible that on the basis of the examination of colonial dilemmas the group might find that there is no “colonial question” and therefore it is impossible to have a common policy. Mr. Halle said that there are 20 different Latin American states and yet we have found it possible to adopt a common policy toward all of them. Mr. Allen noted that the Latin American countries have many more things in common then do the colonial areas. Mr. Hoey added that even in the case of the Associated States it is hard to apply a common policy. Mr. Pollak noted that one common element in Indochina and North Africa is that the U.S. must consider French interests in connection with both areas. Mr. Halle said that nationalism vs. the support of the colonial powers is always the basic problem.

12. The Chairman said that in any statement by the Secretary of State it would seem necessary to express approval of the historical policy of encouraging trends toward legitimate self-government. He suggested that it might be possible for CP to agree that we should encourage trends toward greater federation of colonial areas where economically and politically feasible.