255. Editorial Note
At the morning Staff Meeting of Acting Secretary of State Robert Murphy, September 4, the situation in Laos was discussed as follows:
“Mr. Parsons said that press tickers this morning reported that the Lao Ambassador in London had publicly said that Laos has asked the UN to send troops to Laos. He said there was no confirmation of this from Vientiane or USUN. (Subsequently the text of the Lao appeal to the UN was received in the Department.) Mr. Parsons said that Ambassador Smith had recommended sending troops and issuing a serious warning about US intentions. Mr. Parsons said that a general comprehension is developing that the Communist aggression in Laos is more serious than had heretofore been assumed and that we have not done enough to stop it. Mr. Murphy suggested that a preliminary intra-Departmental meeting be held immediately and that later in the day a meeting be held with Defense and other interested agencies. Mr. Murphy said that one basic difficulty is that we still lack facts about the situation. For example, is Ambassador Smith right that another attack by the Communist forces will bring an end to organized Lao military strength. Mr. Parsons said that he felt the way to stop the Communist advance was to convince Moscow and Peiping that we will resist. Mr. Murphy said that in the last analysis the whole burden would fall on the US and that long lines of communication and the interior position of Laos would make military action extremely difficult. Mr. Parsons said that he could foresee three alternative lines to follow: (1) a public warning (2) resort to the UN (3) an approach to Khrushchev to tell him that we are committed to the defense of Laos and will have to live up to our commitment. Of the three he felt that the last would be most productive. Mr. Murphy said that various possibilities could be discussed in the meetings he had suggested.” (Notes by Thomas McElhiney of S/S; Department of State, Secretary of State’s Staff Meetings: Lot 63 D 75)