Foreign Relations of the United States, 1955–1957, Africa, Volume XVIII

97. Memorandum of a Conversation, Department of State, Washington, December 2, 1957¹

Washington, December 2, 1957

SUBJECT

• Algeria

PARTICIPANTS

• Secretary of State John Foster Dulles
• Hervé Alphand, French Ambassador
• Charles Lucet, French Minister
• Francois de Laboulaye, Counselor, French Embassy
• Francis O. Wilcox, Assistant Secretary of State
• C. Burke Elbrick, Assistant Secretary of State

Alphand said that Foreign Minister Pineau had asked him to see the Secretary, in accordance with an understanding he had had when he was recently in Washington, to explain Pineau’s position following various consultations in New York on the Algerian question. Pineau had, among others, talked to the Moroccans and Tunisians. The French are unwilling to accept any intervention in the Algerian matter by the Tunisians, although they are more receptive to suggestions from the Moroccans. France may find it useful at some time in the future to use the good offices of the King of Morocco in this matter. They could not, however, contemplate any intervention by Bourguiba at this point. The French do not wish publicly to entertain any thought of accepting the good offices of the Moroccans, although they might find it useful to do so at a later date.

Pineau feels that resolutions on the Algerian question presumably would fall into two categories: (1) a strong resolution calling on France to enter into negotiations looking to the independence of Algeria, and (2) a resolution by friendly States along the lines of last year’s resolution, but somewhat stronger than the latter. The first type of resolution, Pineau thought, would be defeated, at least in the General Assembly; if it is too strongly worded, it could be defeated in the Political Committee. The second type of resolution would also be rejected, in Pineau’s opinion, since it could not command a two-thirds majority in the Assembly.

Under the circumstances, the French are exploring possible alternatives. It might be possible to end the debate on Algeria with no resolution at all. Alternatively, a compromise resolution might be possible. The French do not wish to make public at present any suggestion that they may be thinking in terms of a compromise. The Japanese have informed them that they would be glad to be helpful, however, and it is possible that they could be induced to sponsor such a compromise resolution. Generally, such a resolution might express the hope that, following a cease-fire, negotiations be undertaken between the French and representatives chosen by the Algerian people. Such a recommendation could be added to last year’s resolution. Alphand repeated that he did not wish this to be known publicly at this time.

Pineau feels that it is urgent that the United States take a position now and hoped that Lodge would be able to make a speech on Algeria tomorrow. The British and others have already expressed themselves and some Delegations are hesitant about making up their minds because the United States has not yet declared itself. In such a speech, Lodge might refer to Algeria as a special French responsibility, express the thought that the present situation offers more hope for a solution, refer to the evolutionary character of French legislation now under consideration, and state that interference by the United Nations at this time would not accelerate matters but would, in fact, make their solution more difficult.

The Secretary said that he felt it might be possible to respond to the French request, providing Lodge’s speech is not directed to any specific resolution. For that reason, he thought, it might be wise to make the speech before any resolutions are introduced. He thought that Lodge could say that matters are evolving in the direction that would afford the people of Algeria a greater measure of representative government.² The Secretary thought it was up to the French to decide what to do about the Moroccan-Tunisian proposal and not for the General Assembly to dictate. The Secretary felt that the General Assembly would be going pretty far afield if it tried to pass on the juridical separation of a territory from a governing State. He said there is little doubt what the reaction of the United States would be if a resolution of this type concerning Puerto Rico, for example, were introduced into the General Assembly.

Alphand asked whether our Delegation in New York could help the French in lobbying in connection with a possible resolution. The Secretary said this might be possible later on but we could not commit ourselves until we see what kind of resolutions are introduced.

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 751S.00/12–257. Secret. Drafted by Elbrick.
2. The text of the address was given to Lodge on December 2 for delivery the next day at the 919th meeting of the First Committee. He was advised to indicate its general outline to the French, Moroccans, and Tunisians ahead of time. For text of the speech, see Department of State Press Release 2830, December 3, or telegram 2088 to Paris, December 4. (Ibid., 751S.00/12–457)