316. Message From Secretary of State Herter to Foreign Minister Couve de Murville1
We have been much encouraged by report Bohlen has given me of luncheon conversation concerning French intentions in regard to settlement Algerian question in event expected Afro-Asian resolution UN referendum can be defeated in UN. We have had careful discreet analysis made of situation in New York and possibilities in light thereof success of procedures which were discussed by you with Ambassador Houghton and Bohlen in Paris.2 The result of this inquiry leads to the conclusion that an alternative moderate resolution along lines discussed would have very little chance of obtaining proper sponsorship or adoption or even of drawing off enough votes to constitute blocking third defeat UN referendum resolution unless UN members whose support is essential were convinced that this was not just another resolution but indeed a prelude to a determined French attempt to settle Algerian question along lines which you outlined to Ambassador and Bohlen.
We very much doubt if mere private indication in corridors of UN to that effect by French delegation or from us and British would be sufficient for this purpose. Furthermore, discreet dissemination in corridors would undoubtedly leak to press and result in direct inquiry being made to French Government. It, therefore, seems to us that some official French statement appropriate time prior to GA debate setting forth at least in broad outline proposed program of action for settlement Algerian question after UN debate is necessary if we are to have a reasonable chance of obtaining sponsors and sufficient votes for moderate resolution to achieve its purpose. It would of course be most helpful in any such statement if it could indicate that FLN would be one of the parties to proposed consultation after ceasefire.
I fully realize this is matter for determination by French Government in a matter of most vital concern to it. We fear in the absence of such statement it would be fruitless to endeavor to work out moderate resolution along lines discussed. Also, I venture to bring this to your attention since I understand a program of this nature is the genuine intention of the French Government in event the obstacles in GA [Page 703] debate, i.e. the UN referendum or plebiscite, can be overcome. In this light it is merely question of timing when the French program is to be made public.
We fear it will be virtually impossible in the absence of some such statement for any alternative resolution to block the expected Afro/Asian resolution for a UN-controlled referendum in Algeria with all the consequences that that would entail. With such a statement by the French Government France’s friends should be able to move forward in the Assembly along the lines we have discussed.
We see, moreover, positive advantages in the adoption by the Assembly of the kind of resolution we have in mind. Such an expression of view by the Assembly would constitute international support for the program of negotiation you intend to pursue. In this sense it would strengthen the position of moderate elements and offer to the African states as well some tangible result from the Assembly discussion. We would therefore wish to proceed on the basis of actively working with you for adoption of such a resolution by the Assembly.
I might also add that I believe a most important factor in the situation, both in the UN and out, will be the attitude of the African members of the French Community. If as a result of Houphouet-Boigny’s projected visit to Paris, agreement can be reached for strong public support of a moderate resolution by the African members of the French Community, this would be most helpful. Contrarywise, without such an agreement, we can see no possibility of a success at the UN. In this situation the reception accorded Houphouet-Boigny on his projected visit to Paris seems to us to be of crucial importance.
I would appreciate your letting me have your views on this since it is important that we waste no time in determining our position in regard to the forthcoming debate on Algeria in the UN.3
- Source: Eisenhower Library, Herter Papers. Secret; Eyes Only; Priority. Transmitted in telegram 1892 to Paris, November 2, which is the source text. Telegram 1892 was repeated eyes only, priority to Wadsworth at USUN.↩
- No record of this conversation, which the introduction to telegram 1892 to Paris indicates occurred on October 27, has been found.↩
- Telegram 1892 does not bear Secretary Herter’s signature.↩