Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, Indochina, Volume XIII, Part 2

751G.00/5–1854: Telegram

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

top secret
priority

Paris, May 18, 1954—1 p.m.

4424. Repeated information Geneva 252. For the Secretary. Limit distribution. Reference: Department’s telegram 4117.¹ Regarding paragraph 1 reference telegram I feel certain for reasons mentioned Embassy telegram 4416² that French wish to use possibility of our intervention primarily to strengthen their hand at Geneva. For this reason they definitely hope that at the proper time, which would probably be promptly after completion of negotiations, a public announcement could be made indicating our willingness to consider military intervention should the French request it. Thus, I think we should envisage course of events from French point of view as having three stages, namely:

1. Completion of negotiations.

2. Some sort of public announcement.³

3. Actual request for intervention.

Request for intervention would only be made if step 2 did not produce hoped for result at Geneva. This procedure seems slightly different to me from conception in paragraph 1 of reference telegram, which seems contemplate only two stages, completion of negotiations, followed by a request for US intervention.

In my next conversation with French I will make clear that US position regarding intervention will have to be based on conditions existing at the time.

Regarding paragraph 2 of reference telegram, I have been very conscious and concerned about this danger. This is one of the main reasons why I feel so strongly that we should attempt to find a new formula to replace right of withdrawal from French Union, which would certainly be considered here as posing terms so rigorous as to be obviously unacceptable.

Dillon

1. Dated May 17, p. 1575.
2. Telegram 4416 from Paris, May 17, has not been found in Department of State files. It apparently concerned a French initiative regarding the possible use of United States forces in Indochina. Telegram 4152 to Paris for the eyes of Ambassador Dillon only (repeated to Geneva as Tedul 89), May 19, read as follows: “FYI only. Pending outcome current discussions NSC we are unable provide reply to Schumann’s request (Embtel 4416) re limited commitment American ground troops.” (751G.5/5–1954) See also telegram 4194 to Paris, May 21, p. 1594.

3. Telegram 4212 to Paris, May 21, drafted by Secretary Dulles and repeated to Geneva as Tosec 235, read as follows:

   “Point 2 Your 4424. We doubt desirability of any public announcement at the time you suggest. We believe that the effect on Geneva will be at maximum without any formal public announcement which would have to be so carefully hedged and conditioned to avoid any appearance of moral commitment of US, particularly in advance of commitment of other powers, that the effect would be negative rather than positive.” (751G.00/5–1854)