Foreign Relations of the United States, 1955–1957, East Asian Security; Cambodia; Laos, Volume XXI

431. Memorandum From the Deputy Director of the Office of Southeast Asian Affairs (Kocher) to the Assistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs (Robertson¹

Washington, April 11, 1957.

SUBJECT

• British-French-U.S. Response to Royal Lao Government Note

I am attaching a copy of a draft reply to the Lao Government Note of February 22, 1957² requesting a joint British-French-United States declaration on the reunification of Laos. All three Western Powers have agreed that a joint public declaration is not justified by the present Lao political situation, but that we should strive for language to be used in three separate but identical Notes to the Lao Government which would then be published.

The attached draft represents language for such Notes agreed upon this morning in the tripartite working-level talks held with the British and French and chaired by Ken Young.³ Except for certain minor changes made today which the British and French are transmitting to their governments, the draft has the approval of the Quai d’Orsay and the British Foreign Office.⁴ For our part, we made it clear to de la Mare and Landy⁵ that the draft was subject to higher-level Departmental approval. Judging from earlier communications, we believe the text will be acceptable to our Embassy at Vientiane,⁶ but we shall again request its views by telegram today.⁷

We have succeeded in deleting any reference (desired by the British and French) to the right of the Lao people to decide the composition of their Government by constitutional means and indeed any mention of the Constitution at all, using the argument that since coalition would not be considered by the Lao to be an infringement of their Constitution, Souvanna might use the British and French phraseology as an indication of Western support of coalition at a later date.

We were less successful in our wish to spell out neutrality, acceptance of aid from Communist China, and Pathet Lao entry into the Cabinet as issues extraneous to the fundamental problem of reunification. Nevertheless, we did obtain a British substitution which retains an allusion to the undesirable Pathet Lao demands but is less specific.

With respect to the mechanics of the response, the tripartite working group has, subject to higher clearance, agreed that, when a text acceptable to all three Powers is obtained, the originals of the three Notes will be delivered to the Lao Ambassadors in Washington, Paris, and London, with oral comments on the nature of the “extraneous” matters mentioned in the Notes. We are proposing delivery at 11 a.m. in Washington (4 p.m. in London and Paris) on Tuesday, April 16. Information copies would be sent to the Lao Foreign Ministry from the three Western Embassies in Vientiane to arrive during the morning of April 18 local time. Publication would take place 48 hours after the Notes’ delivery to the three Lao Ambassadors, or, as the working group is suggesting, at noon on Thursday, April 18 in Washington, which would be 5 p.m. in Paris and London. In handing the Notes to the Lao Ambassadors we would request them to inform their Government of the April 18th publication and suggest that the text appear in the Lao Presse on that date. It would be made clear that, if publication by the Lao Government did not take place within a reasonable time, we would disseminate the text in Vientiane.

The Notes in English from the British and the United States will have attached an “informal French translation” provided by the Quai d’Orsay. In turn, the French Note will include an “informal English translation” which will, in fact, be the official text of our Note.

Recommendation

That you approve the attached draft reply to the Royal Lao Government and the mechanics of delivery and publication as suggested above.⁸

[Attachment]

PROPOSED TRIPARTITE WORKING-LEVEL DRAFT

In response to the request of the Royal Government of Laos to the Governments of the United Kingdom, France, and the United States for a statement of their policy toward Laos, the Government of the United States (France or the United Kingdom) confirms its interest in the peace, sovereignty, independence, unity, and territorial integrity of the Kingdom of Laos. The Government of the United States therefore continues fully to support the principle of the complete authority of the Royal Government of Laos over all its territory. It maintains the hope that a political settlement and the reunification of Laos will be effected in accordance with the principles of the Geneva Agreements on Laos of July 1954 and the Resolution of the International Control Commission of January 7, 1956.

The Government of the United States regrets that these objectives have so far been made impossible because the Pathet Lao forces, in spite of these Agreements and of the Resolution of the International Control Commission, have sought to place extraneous conditions upon their acceptance of the authority of the Royal Government and upon their reintegration into the national community. The Government of the United States welcomes the firmness with which the Kingdom of Laos has resisted this maneuver and is confident that the Royal Government will continue in its determination that the political future of the Kingdom of Laos shall not be dictated by dissident groups enjoying no constitutional status.

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 751J.00/4–1157. Secret. Drafted by Byrne and cleared with Sebald.
2. See Document 428.
3. A record of the tripartite meeting of April 11 is in telegram 1303 to Vientiane, April 11, not printed. (Department of State, Central Files, 751J.00/4–1157) Reports of earlier tripartite meetings, April 8, April 3, and April 1, are in telegrams 1289, 1263, and 1251 to Vientiane, April 8, 3, and 1, respectively, none printed. (Ibid., 751J0.00/4–857, 751J.00/4–357, and 751J.00/4–157)
4. That approval is contained in telegrams 5416 from London, April 4, and 5124 from Paris, April 5, neither printed. (Ibid., 751J.00/4–467 and 751J.00/4–557, respectively)
5. Pierre Landy was Counselor of the French Embassy in Washington and A.J. de la Mare was Counselor of the British Embassy.
6. Reference is to telegrams 1661, 1674, and 1711 from Vientiane, April 3, 5, and 10, none printed. (Department of State, Central Files, 751J.00/4–357, 751J.00/4–557, and 751J.00/4–1057, respectively)
7. The Department requested comments from the Embassy in telegram 1303 to Vientiane. (Ibid., 751J.00/4–1157) The Embassy, in telegram 1737 from Vientiane, April 13, noted that the working-level text was better than it had hoped for and offered no further comments. (Ibid., 751J.00/4–1357)
8. Robertson initialed his approval on the source text. Sebald wrote the following marginal note: “Having followed this work very closely, I think the result is as good as can be expected in any tripartite negotiation. WJS”.