Foreign Relations of the United States, 1958–1960, Arab-Israeli Dispute; United Arab Republic; North Africa, Volume XIII

293. Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in France ¹

Washington , June 20, 1959—5:42 p.m.

5009. Paris 4641 reporting your talk with Debré re subject FLN activities this country and your recommendations contained last paragraph:² Department appreciates that while significance this matter exaggerated out of all proportion, it apparently remains uppermost Debré’s mind and becoming more critical issue US-French relations particularly with approach next UNGA session. Moreover given intensity and emotional nature of French feelings, difficult provide arguments that might fully convince French it simply not feasible for US Govt deport FLN members now legally in this country or put stop to their activities which do not involve violation U.S. laws. However, you should at your discretion point out following to Debré and/or provide memo to member Debré’s cabinet covering following points. (It might be well take matter up in addition with COUVE who seems to be less emotional on subject.)

1. On formation “PAG” not only did US publicly refuse recognize it but made its intention not to do so clear to other governments.

2. No official or special status accorded FLN members in this country. No question of US Govt “offering hospitality”, facilitating their activities here or making special exceptions their cases. Many other foreign dissident and rebel groups traditionally come to US as they do to France.

3. In accordance Prime Minister’s request FLN members are not for present being received by Dept. Moreover French Government kept informed of previous meetings.

4. Numbers and effectiveness FLN members this country greatly exaggerated. To Department’s knowledge there are only two—Yazid and Chanderli—and very doubtful their existence and efforts known to but relatively few US citizens. Department not aware contacts foreign Embassies may have with FLN and has no intention dictating to them whom they may and may not see. (If FLN wishes contact the foreign governments concerned they can do so in other capitals in addition Washington.) In this connection Dept some time ago urged FLN through intermediary not to proceed with their plans for setting up office in Washington. (FLN accordingly desisted, but in fact there is no way preventing them from doing this if they decide to go ahead.)

5. Yazid and Chanderli obtained immigration visas and have status alien residents. There is simply no grounds for deporting them. (French Government has been faced with similar problems, e.g., Zlatowski case to which US Govt attached great importance.)

6. Re FLN members being here “under false pretences” as bearers non-French passports, US laws provide for granting visas to individuals in possession valid travel document. Fact that nationality of bearer may be different than issuing state does not make document invalid as travel document for visa purpose.

7. Similarly if foreigners register as foreign agents with Department of Justice, they free disseminate propaganda. The two FLN members who are so registered have to Department’s knowledge been careful comply in every respect with US laws. Under circumstances their current propaganda activities cannot legally be stopped without possibility encountering challenge of persecution and violation constitutional guarantees re freedom speech.

8. In this connection French Govt must appreciate adverse effects that would result if US Govt attempted comply with French Government’s requests and endeavored take action against FLN members here without sufficient legal grounds and in contravention US liberal traditions. Extensive court processes that these individuals would have recourse to, concomitant publicity and reactions certain Congressional and public elements would only redound markedly to benefit FLN and to harm US-French relations and France’s prestige this country.³

Dillon

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 751.13/6–1359. Confidential. Drafted by Looram on June 18; cleared with Valenza, McBride, Dunnigan, Porter, Raymond, SCA, and L/EUR; and initialed for Dillon by Murphy. Repeated to London, Bonn, Rome, and Algiers.

2. Telegram 4641, June 13, requested information on the “status in United States of persons there under false pretenses, e.g., French citizens of Algeria under Syrian passport, and what can be done to prevent them in engaging in political activities,” recommended reconsidering these policies, and asked for “more ammunition quoting pertinent phrases of our laws or policies as to why we can’t be more cooperative with French on this painful subject.” (Ibid.)

   Houghton spoke with Debré on June 13 in response to Debré’s letter, Document 290. The Department had initially instructed Houghton to respond orally to the letter. (Telegram 4479 to Paris, May 15; Department of State, Central Files, 751.13/5–859) Houghton, however, had felt a written reply was needed. (Telegram 4519 to Paris, May 21; ibid., 751.13/5–2159) On May 29, the Department authorized him to give Debré a memorandum summarizing his oral presentation (telegram 4627 to Paris; ibid., 751.13/5–2959), which Houghton did on June 13.

3. Debré sent Houghton a second letter on July 2 about FLN activities in the United States. (Airgram G–5 from Paris, July 3; ibid., 751.13/7–359) The Department sent the Embassy a draft response on July 30. (Airgram G–49 to Paris; ibid.) No record of its delivery has been found.