Office of the Historian

235. Memorandum From the Director of the Office of Philippine and Southeast Asian Affairs (Young) to the Assistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs (Robertson)1

Washington, July 25, 1955.

SUBJECT

  • Further to conversation with me this morning.

1. Regarding the parallel tripartite instructions to Saigon, I am convinced we gained a significant commitment from Eden and Faure personally supporting Diem, expressing understanding of his difficult internal position, making full allowance for his position on the Geneva Accords, and most important assuring him of French and British support on genuinely free elections. Diem has wanted such assurances from the French, Reinhardt has reported a number of times, during the past two months. I got those assurances in Geneva and I think that is a worthwhile accomplishment. As far as I can see there is nothing in the joint instructions which is inconsistent with the State Department’s position on elections and consultations. In view of the assurances being given to Diem from the French and the British, I did not think at Geneva nor do I now that a joint demarche should be prohibited. I feel that it was better to leave that up to Reinhardt’s good judgment. I have since seen his telegram No. 375 of [Page 497] July 23.2 The parallel instructions meet his points. However, neither in Paris nor in Geneva did I go into any detail with the French and British as to what kind of report Diem should make to the Viet Minh. Their views coincide with ours that this whole matter of consultations should be stretched out over a long period of time and that there is no need for any direct contacts with the Viet Minh.

[Here follows brief discussion on the precedent for using the term “Central People’s Government of the People’s Republic of China”.]

  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 751G.00/7–2555. Confidential.↩
  2. In this telegram, July 23, the Embassy urged that tripartite instructions for representations to Diem on elections seek a formula avoiding all reference to the Geneva provisions and allowing Diem to engage in consultations with the North outside the framework of the Geneva Accords. (Ibid., 396.1–GE/7–2355)↩