Foreign Relations of the United States, 1961–1963, Volume XX, Congo Crisis

355. Telegram From the Department of State to Secretary of State Rusk, at Paris¹

Washington, December 12, 1962, 9:39 p.m.

Tosec 15. For Secretary from Ball and McGhee. Following is a summary of developments and additional observations which might be useful to you in connection with your discussions with Mr. Spaak on Congo. You will have seen Spaak’s latest views and latest developments on GOB side in Brussels 840 and 842 to Dept² repeated for you Paris.

1. There is still question as to whether Spaak proposals to Tshombe for change in method UMHK payments to GOC are acceptable to Tshombe; final decision, with whatever conditions he may attach, expected within 24 hours. We have suggested, however, that Tshombe not announce this as his proposal since this might make more difficult Adoula’s acceptable (Deptel 885 to Brussels repeated Paris Tosec 14).³ We would prefer that the proposal be considered as coming from GOB and/or UMHK. Although we do not know the precise form of the Belgian proposals, we are concerned that they will not result in adequate foreign exchange being retained by GOC, particularly if GOC must purchase portion of Katangan francs required for UMHK counterpart needed in Katanga operations in foreign exchange as intimated GOB plan, rather than as credit or in exchange for Congolese francs.

2. SYG has sent letter to GOB urging change UMHK payments scheme and to UK, South Africa, and Portugal asking them to assist in denying passage of Katanga products. Secretary General holding for at least 8 days (until Dec. 19) letters to some 11 countries, including US, asking them to halt purchase Katanga products. If UMHK change in payments scheme becomes effective prior to that time, these letters would presumably not be sent. Adoula, however, has already appealed publicly for embargo

3. In Deptel 1597 to USUN repeated Paris,⁴ we have asked that SYG be advised of our concern that letter appears to imply UN intent take military action in event further Tshombe noncompliance. We have asked it be made clear that we do not consider provocative or aggressive measures justified present circumstances and that if not consulted in advance we would have to publicly disavow any unprovoked forceful measures.

4. FYI. We are not, however, optimistic that GOB–UMHK change in payments proposal will in itself produce necessary results, and remaining purely economic measures contemplated by UN considered likely to be even less effective. We see time running out on us and our choice as narrowing between disengagement, which after thorough study, does not appear acceptable, and a stronger approach. Such an approach also appears necessary if we are to be successful in producing a stable government in Leo. We are, in a separate cable, being repeated for you in Paris,⁵ requesting advice of Léopoldville, Eville and USUN regarding how this might be accomplished under assumption we are prepared to take stronger measures in backing up UN Plan. We are, without for moment discussing it with UN, other governments, or even specifically with our Embassies, giving urgent consideration in preparation for meeting with President Friday⁶ morning, possibility of offering support UN effort even, after all other measures fail, if use of force is required. We are in this connection giving consideration to what backup UN would in such circumstances need from us, perhaps in form of unit US combat aircraft. We are fully aware of issues, including those with our allies, which such a course would raise.

Ball

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 870G.00/12–1262. Top Secret; Priority. Drafted and approved by McGhee and cleared by Williams, Cleveland, and Ball.
2. Telegrams 840 and 842, December 12, reported conversations with Spaak and Rothschild concerning Spaak’s effort to obtain Tshombe’s acceptance of the plan for Union Miniere to make its payments to the Léopoldville government. Rector Dubuisson of Liege University had taken Spaak’s message to Tshombe to Elisabethville. Telegram 840 stated that Dubuisson had reported that he had not delivered the message but had discussed the subject with Tshombe and was optimistic. Telegram 842 stated that Dubuisson had reported that Tshombe had agreed to take the initiative in requesting Union Miniere to change its payments system. (Both ibid., 770G00/12–1262)
3. Dated December 12. (Ibid., 870G.10/12–1162)
4. Dated December 12. (Ibid., 870G.10/12–1062)
5. Document 354.
6. December 14.