Foreign Relations of the United States, 1958–1960, Africa, Volume XIV

311. Memorandum of Conversation⁰

October 25, 1958.

SUBJECT

• Guinea

PARTICIPANTS

• The Secretary
• Ambassador Hervé Alphand, French Embassy
• M. Charles Lucet, Minister, French Embassy
• Mr. Robert H. McBride, WE

Ambassador Alphand asked regarding the US attitude on the Guinea situation.¹ The Secretary said this had been simmering in his absence. Ambassador Alphand said there was no question but that Guinea would be independent and a member of the UN, but we did not wish to go too fast. Guinea will be separated from the French Community and will have to be recognized. However, we should study this problem and not rush diplomatic representation nor UN membership. In response to the Secretary’s question, Alphand said France thought she would have to veto Guinea’s membership in the UN this year but would much prefer in the Security Council to obtain five abstentions so that a veto would not be required. He expressed the hope that the US would abstain the Security Council if this matter arose and expressed the belief that the UK would abstain.

The Secretary expressed the view that in the case of Guinea and others, voting UN membership was really a violation of the UN charter since these states had demonstrated no capacity as required by the charter. The result was the weakening of the UN. However, he thought the present trend had gone so far that it was questionable whether it could be reversed. Alphand noted that all cases of admission of new states in the past had taken a certain length of time noting the cases of Libya, and the future case of Togo. Even Morocco and Tunisia had waited until after the signature of the treaties of independence, an occurrence which had not yet taken place in the case of Guinea. The conduct of foreign affairs, defense, etc., had not yet been transferred to Guinea.

The Secretary noted that the British were somewhat worried over non-recognition because of the effect in Ghana and elsewhere. The Secretary added he had a basic sympathy with the French position but noted that the precedents for delaying UN membership were not good. Alphand said he did not know when France would turn Guinea loose entirely, but that the territories voting in favor of the French Community obviously took precedence and that the whole question of the relationship of the Community to Guinea must be developed. If the other territories believed it was favored, they would be encouraged to follow the same course with the resulting Balkanization of Black Africa, a development which would be against the interests of the West as a whole.

0. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 770B.00/10–2558. Confidential. Drafted by McBride.
1. Lucet had conveyed the French position on Guinea to Satterthwaite the previous day. According to a memorandum of conversation, he said the French considered that Guinea had “juridically speaking become a separate entity” by its negative vote but that it was not capable of exercising sovereignty. He said they did not object to U.S. recognition of Guinea’s “new status” but hoped it would be qualified rather than formal recognition as a fully sovereign state. It would be “very premature” to consider establishment of diplomatic relations or admission to the United Nations. Satterthwaite replied that he did not find the French position very clear. (Ibid., 770B.00/10–2458)