Office of the Historian

28. Letter From the Director of the Office of Southeast Asian Affairs (Kocher) to the Ambassador in Vietnam (Durbrow)1

Washington, August 13, 1958.

Dear Durby: We have read with much interest your Telegram No. 206, August 5, 1958,2 on the idea of introducing jet military aircraft into Viet-Nam. We agree that the reaction of the ICC would be vehement, particularly in view of the fact that Article 17 of the Geneva Agreement explicitly prohibits the introduction of jets. We also agree that it would be out of the question to consider proposing the introduction of jets at this time with the MAAG ceiling problem still under consideration and the ICC’s favorable credits decision not yet implemented.

The Defense Department has not yet completely checked out its position on this question; but we have received the following tentative reaction: The main Defense interest is in jet airport facilities in Viet-Nam for use by U.S. aircraft in the event of necessity. (We also have been given a hint that even this may not be of transcendent importance in view of the fact that such facilities already exist in Thailand.) The Air Force is still reviewing its position on the question of jet aircraft for Viet-Nam, but it seems likely that AD propeller-type aircraft will be as suitable or more suitable for the mission in Viet-Nam than jet planes.

[Page 74]

We note that your Telegram No. 206 also lists jet airport facilities as our basic objective, and that you are using commercial jet aircraft as the cover for plans in this field. Military jets for Viet-Nam do not, therefore, appear necessary as a justification for these plans.

We are not certain whether you have complete information on hand regarding the alternatives to the existing F8F’s of the Vietnamese Air Force, for which spares will soon become non-existent. We are, therefore, enclosing for your background information a copy of a Memorandum for the Record prepared by Colonel Evans of Defense on July 8, 1958.3 It outlines why the AD propeller-type craft is believed to be superior to jet T–33’s as replacement for the existing F8F’s. It also indicates that the AD’s will apparently remain in production. For these reasons they seem to us appropriate for replacement of the F8F’s.

We shall be in touch with you again when we have received more definitive Defense views.

With best regards.

Sincerely yours,

Eric Kocher4
  1. Source: Department of State, Vietnam Working Group Files: Lot 66 D 193, Jet Aircraft. Secret; Official–Informal. Drafted by Mendenhall. Approved by SEA and FE and the Department of Defense in substance.↩
  2. Document 25.↩
  3. Document 22.↩
  4. Printed from a copy which bears this typed signature.↩