320/8–1152
Memorandum of Conversation, by the Deputy Director, Office of United Nations Political and Security Affairs (Popper)1
Subject:
- Tunisian Question in the United Nations.
Participants:
- Mr. van Laethem, First Secretary of the French Embassy
- Mr. Popper, UNP
- Mr. Stein, UNP
Mr. van Laethem called at his request to discuss the United Nations aspects of the Tunisian problem.
In a general discussion of the problems arising out of the inclusion of the Tunisian question on the provisional agenda of the Seventh Assembly Mr. van Laethem made the following principal points:
- 1.
- The French Government is distressed by the prospect that the Tunisians will not take any positive steps on the reform program within the next three months, in the expectation that General Assembly debate will be helpful to their cause. This unfortunate prospect can be avoided only by a strong French statement that France will pay no attention to whatever comes out of the Assembly debate; such a statement would be effective only if it received immediate and strong international support. Such support, however, is obviously not forthcoming, and thus there is little anybody can do to stimulate a more cooperative Tunisian attitude in the next three months.
- 2.
- The principal French objection to United Nations discussion of the Tunisian question is the conviction of the French Government that the consideration of this case will open the door to “20 other cases” involving in the end all of French Africa, Cyprus, etc.
- 3.
- There are two possible positions the French could take: (a) vigorously oppose the inclusion of the Tunisian matter on the agenda and refuse to participate in the debate, making it clear that they will have nothing to do with any resolution adopted by the Assembly; and (b) acquiesce in the inclusion of the matter on the agenda with an express reservation on the jurisdictional angle, and state vigorously the French case on Tunisia. Mr. van Laethem intimated that he would personally support the latter course.
I told Mr. van Laethem that as his Foreign Office is aware we would be much happier if the French would accept the inclusion of the matter on the agenda, which in our view is unavoidable regardless of the [Page 795] position France or the United States may take. In the subsequent debate, we will of course do our best to exert moderating influence on the extremist delegations and we will oppose action in the General Assembly hostile to France. I said that we fully appreciated France’s concern as to the precedent which might be established in the United Nations by a discussion of the case, but we could see no alternative since the inclusion of the question in the agenda appears unavoidable.
In response to a question, Mr. van Laethem said that the French would very definitely not favor a proposal that the General Assembly should ask the International Court of Justice whether the Assembly has the right to consider the Tunisian problem. We pointed out that if the French stress the jurisdictional issue and argue predominately on a legal basis, such a proposal will probably be made in the Assembly.
- This memorandum of conversation was drafted by Stein (UNP) on Aug. 13.↩