S/P–NSC files, lot 61 D 167, “North Africa”
Memorandum by Harry H. Schwartz of the Policy Planning Staff to the Director, Policy Planning Staff (Bowie)
Subject:
- Africa
The subject of “Africa (entire continent)” is on the Planning Board because apparently the Vice President mentioned to General Cutler some time back that he was worried about developments in that area. Cutler has put the item on, then, for discussion tomorrow from two points of view: (a)what should be included in a paper on Africa? and (b)what are the important problems there about which we might be doing something?
Just about a year ago State drafted a paper on French North Africa and Libya. In August the Planning Board (both you and Cutler were absent that day) discussed the attached draft of August 18.1 The Sultan of Morocco had just been deposed by the French, and the other members of the Planning Board were irritated by this fact, by the difficulties encountered with the French on EDC and Indochina, and were disinclined to do other than criticize any paper which, like this one, states that our policy must thread its way between general North African interests on the one hand and French interests on the other. The paper has been lying dormant ever since, and I suggest that, although like any other NSC paper its language can probably be improved, the policy itself is good enough until someone produces a better one. Finally, of course, the problems of North Africa have very little connection with Africa south of the Sahara.
With respect to the area south of the Sahara and north of the Union of South Africa there is quite a good National Intelligence Estimate, NIE–83, Attached,2 and NEA has prepared a draft statement of policy—also attached,3 but less helpful. It is less helpful because, I think, the problems are not the kind which call for NSC policy guidance so much as they do for patience. As you will see from the attached draft, the only policy guidance that has a very clear-cut nature is contained in paragraph 10. This states that while the U.S. believes in eventual self-determination for all peoples we also believe that this development should be both evolutionary and orderly.
In Kenya, British Central Africa, and the Union there are serious racial problems (blacks, whites, and Indians). If there is any policy question to which the NSC might profitably address itself, it probably [Page 98] narrows down to this question of the warring races. But even here it is doubtful whether any really helpful policy decisions could be made which would give guidance to people working in the field which they don’t already have. At any rate, however, this problem is the most important one for the Planning Board to discuss.
Looking at the Union of South Africa alone, there is also the problem of the Afrikans vs. the British and the connection between this friction and the continuation of the Union in the Commonwealth. On this problem also I have some doubts about the degree of profit to be extracted from an NSC paper on this subject.
Attached also is a draft on the Union which is fairly informative.4
- Not found attached, but see S/P–NSC files, lot 61 D 167, “North Africa.”↩
- NIE–83, Dec. 22, 1953, was not attached to the source text; for the text, see p. 71.↩
- Not attached, but presumably the same as the draft statement of policy prepared by NEA and printed infra.↩
- The draft paper under reference here cannot be further identified. It was not found attached to the source text.↩