Foreign Relations of the United States, 1955–1957, Southeast Asia, Volume XXII

293. Telegram From the Embassy in the Netherlands to the Department of State¹

The Hague, November 20, 1957—7 p.m.

879. Van der Beugel, State Secretary Foreign Office, on being told Ambassador in Friesland until tomorrow, asked that acting DCM come to his office late this afternoon on matter of urgency. He began interview by reading slowly entire text of question and answer on New Guinea issue at Secretary’s press conference yesterday.² He said that statement that “we do not see a clear case to be made for either side” constituted a sharp and very disturbing change from the previous position of US, which the Netherlands had been led to believe was that we understood and accepted validity of Netherlands position, but for reasons of broad foreign policy were unable to make this known publicly, and therefore were obliged to abstain. The Secretary’s statement now casts doubt upon the merits of the Dutch position. Van der Beugel then said that for the Secretary to assert that US action in the UN “depends, of course, to some extent on what the ultimate form of the resolution is” would seem to disregard the Dutch view, made absolutely clear by Luns in Washington, that whatever the form of the resolution it would be objectionable, perhaps the softer in tone, the more objectionable.

Van der Beugel was accompanied by Van Tuyll, Secretary General Foreign Office during interview. They said that what Luns had told Ambassador (Embassy telegram 828³) with respect to White statement and its possible impact on UN situation related with far greater force to Secretary’s statement yesterday. They recollected that Luns had said that he could not believe that White reflected Secretary’s position. They regard Secretary’s statement both as it relates to Holland’s own vital interests in New Guinea, and as it may influence in unexpected ways voting of other members of UN as presenting implication of utmost seriousness to them.

Van der Beugel said that Dutch Embassy would be approaching Department, and that he wished to have foregoing views communicated from here as soon as possible.

Young

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 656.56D13/11–2057. Confidential; Priority. Repeated to Djakarta, Canberra, and USUN.

2. Dulles had been asked at his November 19 press conference for his views concerning the joint Netherlands-Australia statement. He replied as follows:

   “Our position on that matter is similar to that which we took last year. That is a position of neutrality. The arguments pro and con are closely balanced. We do not see a clear case to be made for either side sufficient, we think, to enable us to take a positive position on one side or another. So that we will continue, I expect, this year to abstain on the resolution. That depends, of course, to some extent on what the ultimate form of the resolution is. But that’s our present disposition: to take the same position we did in previous years.” (Department of State Bulletin, December 9, 1957, p. 918)

3. Telegram 828 from The Hague, November 13, reported a conversation with Luns concerning Lincoln White’s statement of November 12 (see supra). Luns told Young that the statement, because of the reference to differences which could be worked out, represented U.S. support of the Indonesian position and would be so construed. Luns asked Young to transmit to Secretary Dulles “an urgent appeal” to make an immediate statement that “US sympathies in this situation were not with the Indonesians”. After further discussion, however, he told Young that a “statement by the Secretary that White’s comments were inaccurate or incomplete or unauthorized and that this matter was still under consideration by Department would be helpful if that represented as far as the Secretary could go at this time.” (Department of State, Central Files, 656.56D13/11–1357)