Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume I, Vietnam, 1964

450. Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in Vietnam ¹

Washington , December 19, 1964–6:10 p.m.

1312. High-level meeting today² reviewed Ops program for next two weeks which will be covered by septels through military channels.³ Agreed to continue information policy of no comment in event of Hanoi charges, with any aircraft loss being handled from Washington according to circumstances. Reviewed third-country aid situation as covered septels.

Main discussion centered on question of surfacing infiltration evidence. Our feeling is that press both here and in Saigon now accepts increased infiltration as fact but that formal GVN/US release could be misinterpreted and become vehicle undesirable speculation. Accordingly, we believe we should handle this in two ways:

a. General background briefings both here and in Saigon should continue to indicate infiltration has increased without getting into specifics.

b. If Saigon continues to be pressed for more precise information, but in response to such pressure rather than on our initiative, Saigon could have one or more deep background sessions with American press to indicate general nature and thrust of information now available. Such backgrounders should draw on Cooper presentation as revised⁴ emphasizing 1964 increase rather than revision estimates for earlier years, and should avoid specific numbers game except as tentative orders of magnitude and should stress that picture constantly being adjusted to reflect latest information some of which necessarily subject considerations military security. In other words, we would be seeking to get general picture into survey stories such as Grose article of November 1⁵ rather than as spot news commanding wide attention. FYI: We would anticipate senior officials here will testify to Congress this subject perhaps in late January and would then give as specific figures as possible stressing that they are estimates and in response to Congressional inquiry. End FYI.

Saigon 1866⁶ received after meeting concluded. In view above decision on formal infiltration briefing, we accept your judgment resumption your periodic background meetings now desirable. It remains important, however, to avoid sensitive areas and even generalized discussion of plans related to infiltration problem. We believe line should be that we obviously concerned this problem but that any discussion specific actions not useful. Our impression here is that knowledgeable press now simply assumes we are doing more but fully accepts that we are not talking about it. Naturally you could use your own discretion in discussions GVN political situation and on plans for action within SVN.

Re Vientiane 904 and Bangkok 798⁷ both posts should take cue from Saigon on information given to RTG and RLG. Saigon should inform in advance when and if background sessions scheduled to permit simultaneous oral handling in other posts but avoiding transmission written document.

Ball

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, POL 27 VIET S. Top Secret; Priority; Exdis; Ivory. Drafted by William Bundy; cleared in draft with McGeorge Bundy, McNaughton, and Forrestal; and initialed by Harriman. Repeated to Bangkok, Vientiane, and CINCPAC.
2. In addition to Operations Plan 34A and infiltration, the meeting, which was held at the Department of State at 10 a.m. and was attended by William (Chairman) and McGeorge Bundy, Ball, Forrestal, Vance, McNaughton, Cooper, Rowan, McCone, Mustin, and others, discussed Laos and third country aid including the formation of an international force. (JCS 2339/166, December 19; National Archives and Records Administration, RG 218, JCS Files)
3. These telegrams have not been further identified.
4. On December 4, Cooper had sent to William Bundy a memorandum attaching a summary statement and detailed discussion of Viet Cong infiltration, a list of questions and answers that could be used in connection with its release, an explanation of past low estimates, and a list of supporting evidence. On December 9, Bundy attached Cooper’s presentation to memoranda to Rusk, McNamara, McCone, McNaughton, Ball, and McGeorge Bundy. Cooper’s and Bundy’s memoranda are in Department of State, Central Files, POL 27 VIET S. The attached four documents have not been found.
5. For text, see The New York Times, November 2, 1964, p. 1
6. Telegram 1866, December 19, reported that relations with the press in Vietnam had improved in recent months, but failure to provide information on infiltration either in briefings or at backgrounders would jeopardize the situation. (Department of State, Central Files, POL 27 VIET S)
7. In these telegrams, December 16 and 19, respectively, the Embassies reported that they had received Cooper’s report on infiltration and wanted to present copies of it to local officials. (Ibid., POL 27–3 LAOS–VIET N and POL 23–7 VIET S)