Office of the Historian

109. Telegram From the Embassy in Laos to the Department of State1

Vientiane, June 27, 1956—6 p.m.

1661. Reference: Embtel 1655.2

1.

In course our conversation with Katay, when Sebald set record straight on pre-SEATO consultations (Deptel 13113), Katay remarked RLG never formally received copy of Manila Pact; its files on pact were put together from various sources including clippings. Sebald said we would try to remedy this.

Can Department obtain for presentation to RLG proper copy of pact and protocol, possibly certified true copy, from Government of Philippines as repository?4

2.
Katay also asserted Laos was glad of SEATO protection and would be happy to join were it not for Geneva agreement. Although it is generally assumed agreement forbids SEATO membership, assumption appears based on ambiguity of agreement and Laos declaration rather than on clear-cut prohibition. For background would appreciate knowing Department’s legal and political position in this matter, also, on defensive alliance with Thailand.5
Blancke
  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 790.5/6–2756. Secret. Repeated to Bangkok.↩
  2. In telegram 1655, dated June 27, Sebald reported on a lengthy conversation with Foreign Minister Katay, held on June 26 with Blancké present. (Ibid., 790.5/6–2756)↩
  3. Supra. Sebald had also brought up the representations contained in telegram 1311 in the course of a conversation with Prime Minister Souvanna Phouma, also held on June 26:

    “Re SEATO consultations, [he] admitted it may easily have been as we said. He had not been in country at time, and possibly consultations had not been properly reported by those involved. Neither he nor Crown Prince had researched archives but had simply stated their impressions. I added that, aside from our records of actual approaches, I had been in Manila during pact drafting and we had been explicitly assured that Lao consulted and agreeable; nor would we in any case have taken such step unilaterally.” (Telegram 1649 from Vientiane, June 26; Department of State, Central Files, 790.5/6–2656)

    ↩
  4. A marginal note beside this paragraph reads: “Pouched July 16, 1956”.↩
  5. In telegram 49 to Vientiane, dated July 16, the Department stated that the questions raised in this paragraph would be studied. (Department of State, Central Files, 790.5/6–2756)↩