Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, Africa and South Asia, Volume XI, Part 1

772.00/8–652: Telegram

The Chargé in the United Kingdom (Holmes) to the Department of State¹

secret

London, August 6, 1952—4 p.m.

668. Re Deptel 831 on Tunisia.² Official Brit position will be discussed at mtg August 6 but fol is present FonOff thinking:

1. If only question were that of UN tactics, FonOff agrees that probably Fr shld not object to inscription of item on agenda and shld be forthcoming in debate.

2. On principle, however, UK believes issue raised is one of deepest concern both to Fr and to UK because of UK’s own colonial interests. UK cannot admit competence UN in non self governing territory field and believes that if exception made for Tunisia Brit’s own colonial position may be weakened vis-à-vis nationalist agitators; one of UK’s main concerns in this respect is Cyprus particularly since Grks “may not exercise restraint” and Cyprus question may be on agenda.³ Importance of this question of principle has been agreed by Eden and Secty State for Colonies.

3. Brit will back up Fr on issue altho their support does not rule out attempting to influence Fr posit. FonOff did not completely rule out possibility some formula cld be found to permit discussion Tunisia without raising issue of principle and undesirable precedents.

4. BritEmb Paris does not believe there is danger hasty Fr action freezing Fr posit since mins are on vacation, officials cannot make decision, and Fr attitude will depend somewhat on circumstances in Tunisia at time of discussion etc. Therefore, UK wonders if this is appropriate time to raise question with Fr since Fr posit will probably be formulated in Sept. FonOff thinks it wld be unfortunate if US and UK shld appear to be putting pressure on Fr.

Emb is pessimistic about UK going along with US on this in view evident conviction FonOff that Brit’s own colonial posit is inextricably involved, particularly since Eden shares this view. Unless legal advisors can demonstrate conclusively that Tunisia discussions wld not create precedents etc, UK will probably remain firm on issue of principle. Even if satisfaction cld be give on legal issues, sentiment at working level appears to be that from psychological standpoint of Brit colonies themselves dangers of permitting UN discussion outweight recognized tactical advantages.

Since foregoing written I have had personal discussion with Eden. He believes raising Tunisian matter in GA violation of UN charter which expressly excludes intervening in internal affairs of member states. He thinks Fr should be urged to show progress with Tunisian reforms in order counteract criticism in GA. Eden also took same posit outlined above about fear of precedent dangerous to UK.

Holmes

1. This telegram was repeated to Paris and USUN.
2. Aug. 5; not printed. It reported the Arab-Asian group had requested the Secretary-General to place the Tunisian question on the provisional agenda of the Seventh General Assembly. It requested the Embassy in Paris to make every effort to persuade the French to agree to the debate. It requested the Embassy in Iondon to inform the Department of State as soon as it could find out the British Government’s position on the issue. (722.00/8–652)
3. For documentation on this topic, see volume viii.