489. Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in Laos1

440. For Ambassador from Robertson. Vientiane 663 repeated Paris 130 London 124 Saigon 175 Bangkok Phnom Penh Unnumbered passed CINCPAC;2 Vientiane 668 repeated Paris 133 London 127 Saigon 179 Bangkok Phnom Penh Unnumbered passed CINCPAC.3

We were shocked at irresponsibility or even stupidity of RLG delegation revealed in terms secret political agreement (Vientiane 6594) and are therefore extremely pleased Council Ministers’ disavowal that document and significant revision text proposed joint communiqué. I wish commend you and staff for your untiring and successful efforts bring about these two favorable developments.

We shall attempt as you suggest minimize U.S. role and emphasize this turn of events is result RLG decision after careful study proposed texts in light Laos’ national interest. British French Australians Canadians however were told in response their questions past week that American Ambassador had been instructed inform appropriate Lao leaders of danger spots U.S. saw in projected settlement terms.

Revised communiqué is remarkable improvement (PL activities after entry Cabinet might be circumscribed if RLG already in effective [Page 1010] control two provinces and PL troops.) We believe however it may be advisable suggest any revisions even before it presented to PL. We concur desirability addition reference to dissolution PL movement and remain somewhat concerned integration PL military limited only by phrase “within budgetary availabilities”. Is this workable from our point view?

Request you cable new full text.5

Dulles
  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 715J.00/10–2657. Secret; Priority. Drafted by Byrne, cleared in substance by Robertson, and approved by Young. Repeated to Paris, London, Saigon, Phnom Penh, Bangkok, and CINCPAC for POLAD.
  2. See footnote 3, Supra.
  3. In telegram 668, October 26, the Embassy noted that if the deal between Pathet Lao and Royal Government failed, the United States would be blamed. Furthermore, the Embassy requested comments on the revisions to the proposed joint communiqué made by the Council of Ministers. (Department of State, Central Files, 751J.00/10–2657)
  4. See footnote 5, Document 485.
  5. See paragraph 1, Infra.