Office of the Historian

163. Telegram From the Ambassador in Vietnam (Durbrow) to the Department of State1

Saigon, May 17, 1960—1 p.m.

3218. ReDeptel 2070.2 Have given further thought Lansdale suggestion. Apart from those already given mytel 3013,3 still somewhat reluctant concur his coming for following reasons:

1.
Do not believe Diem desires him as much as advisor anti-guerrilla activities, but hopes use “old sympathetic friend” to reverse pressure Dept and Embassy putting on Diem to take what we consider needed steps his and our interests.
2.
Situation has changed considerably since 1956 and might be difficult for Lansdale become sufficiently steeped in current atmosphere to be effective.

On other hand since Diem seems most anxious Lansdale come indicating confidence in his advice and since my efforts so far apparently have not opened Diem’s eyes, possibility exists that Lansdale, if fully briefed and instructed, might serve useful purpose provided (a) he follows fully Dept’s instructions, is under my control and cooperates fully and openly with me; (b) reports accurately talks with and advice given Diem; and (c) that no fixed TDY period be named in [Page 463] order be able play it by ear to see whether Diem listening Lansdale’s advice and if he being effective, could stay up to 60 days.

I do not know Lansdale well enough to make firm judgment re his effectiveness under present circumstances, but if you believe worth trying, I concur.

Durbrow
  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 751K.5811/5–1760. Secret.↩

  2. In telegram 2070, May 13, the Department added the following to the Lansdale issue:

    “In conference with Defense today we have agreed to send you through this same channel message asking your opinion regarding Ed Lansdale’s assignment to Vietnam either for brief TDY period or longer. We reluctant endorse this proposal due to grave misgivings which we entertain based on his past performance and peculiar relationship to Diem. We of course have your earlier response but would appreciate again your very frank opinion in response to the proposal going out today.

    “We recognize that in the midst of present delicate relationships with Diem in our current efforts to get him to mend his ways any extraneous elements of this character could provide you with a real problem. We have made no commitment to Defense other than to tell them that we would seek your views.” (Ibid., 751K.5811/5–1360)

    ↩
  3. Document 145.↩