Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, Indochina, Volume XIII, Part 1

751H.00/6–1653: Telegram

The Ambassador in France (Dillon) to the Department of State

confidential

Paris, June 16, 1953—9 p.m.

6493. Department pass USUN; repeated information Saigon 297, Bangkok 13, New York 65. After completing discussion subject mentioned Embtel 6492,¹ Bidault said that he wanted to take up another matter—the question of possible Siamese appeal to the UN in the light of the present situation.

He reinforced everything Maurice Schumann had told me last night, as related in Embtel 6473,² and said that he wanted to state personally how serious he felt the situation was. Any appeal to the UN by Siam would now, in his opinion, be inextricably tied in with the situation in Cambodia, and so the sole defendant before the UN would be France. In view of France’s present burden in carrying on the war in Indochina and in trying to handle the situation in Cambodia, the addition of a UN problem would make France’s position insupportable. He felt that any such action would greatly strengthen those forces in the French Parliament who were desirous of giving up in Indochina and accepting a settlement with the Viet Minh. He said that he regarded this question now as the crucial test of United States willingness to support the French position in Indochina.

Dillon

1. In telegram 6492 from Paris, June 16, not printed, Ambassador Dillon reported a discussion with Foreign Minister Bidault on the Rosenberg case. (761.5211 Rosenberg/6–1653)

2. Telegram 6473 from Paris, June 16, read in part as follows:

   “Schumann said that he, Bidault, and permanent staff at Foreign Office considered this to be most serious and critical situation, and that Bidault wished me to communicate his views on this subject promptly to the Secretary. They feel that it fully justifies their opposition to any Siamese move whatever before the UN at this time. Such a move now would inevitably mean that Cambodian situation and whole political system in Indochina would be questioned and debated at UN. Thus, their former opposition to any move by Siam before the UN is confirmed and strengthened to the point of bitterness.

   “Schumann said that it would be most difficult now as result of Cambodian developments for French not to consider as an unfriendly act continued approval, even though only tacit, by US of any Siamese appeal to UN. This obviously includes Laotian case.

   “Comment: It is difficult to overemphasize present concern and bitterness of French on this subject.” (751H.00/6–1653)