330/5–552: Telegram
The Ambassador in France (Dunn) to the Department of State1
6798. Embtel 6739, May 2.2 Subsequent to Amb’s conversation with Maurice Schumann re Tunisian issue as reported in ref tel, we conveyed our summary whole contents Deptel 63533 to Puaux of FonOff, who was already in possession memo left by Amb. Fol are Puaux’ comments.
Firstly, he stated that Dept appears to be laboring under misconception that every effort had not been exhausted to undertake negots with Chenik. Latter turned down offer made in Fr note Dec 15 and stubbornly refused any subsequent overtures. Min’s release wld not mean their cooperation. FonOff realizes value natl participation in comm, but latter’s adamant stand to boycott such body admittedly diminishes rep value of comm. Puaux feels that speedy action can [Page 744] only be obtained by Fr instituting reforms directly with Bey and Baccouche, abandoning, at least for time being, any idea of mixed comm.
When Puaux described tone of our memo as stern, we took occasion to reiterate pressure which was being brought to bear on Dept by Amer public opinion, Cong, and outside sources. He recognized this, but countered with argument that FonOff was also faced with public and parl opinion which made their handling of case most difficult. Robert Schuman’s liberal attitude, he stated, was not shared by members present govt who in last analysis decided policy towards Tunisia. Pinay and members of his Cabinet, reflecting rightist tendencies, had stiffened against too conciliatory stand of FonMin, and were not in any mood to accept dictates of UN led by such feudal and backward countries as Yemen, where conditions cld hardly stand comparison with those in Fr No Africa.
Puaux informed us that Fr reply to Amb’s démarche (which was drafted in FonOff for Bonnet to present to Sec State) had been cleared by Parodi, but still awaiting Schuman’s approval. Puaux said that FonMin might possibly decide to await Byroade’s arrival Paris beginning June to discuss matter with him, but he wld let us know.
Main theme of FonOff views to be given Sec State, according to Puaux, was that France wld not tolerate UN domination in such vital matters as Tunisia. If France were to accept emotional, irresponsible, propaganda-seeking UN decision pushed thru by group of backward Arab-Asiatic states regarding Tunisia, she wld be faced by succession of attacks aimed at complete destruction of Fr Union. Preservation of this Union was far more important to France than her membership in UN and if obliged to choose, she cld not hesitate. If carried to extremes, he commented half-jokingly, UN concern for nationalist movements might even lead them one day to support independence movement of Brittany.
Puaux added that present trend in UN was fitting nicely into Sov pattern of weakening big powers by using nationalist groups to cause disintegration of their empires. Fr, he stated, were well aware of need for econ, social and pol development in their dependent areas, had renounced old colonial practices, and were prepared to go forward with principles enunciated in UN charter and Fr constitution. They were not prepared, however, to allow unrealistic UN decisions to bring chaos in any part of Fr Union, thereby weakening family of free nations and playing into hands of Sovs.
We expressed our sympathy for difficulties France is facing but urged FonOff to take rapid and magnanimous steps re Tunisia and Morocco to forestall further criticism and UN action. Such action on part of France wld make it easier for her friends and allies to rally to her support.
[Page 745]Incidentally, Puaux stated that contrary to Maurice Schumann’s statement to Amb, there exists no text of reforms for Tunisia other than those contained in instructions to Hauteclocque and statement by Baccouche. Mixed comm, he explained, was supposed to work out details based on gen lines enunciated.