279. Memorandum of Conversation1
SUBJECT
- Rumanian Approach on Viet-Nam
PARTICIPANTS
- H.E. Sergio Fenoaltea, Italian Ambassador
- The Acting Secretary2
- Robert H. Miller, Director, Viet-Nam Working Group
The Acting Secretary received the Italian Ambassador at the latterʼs request on October 22. Ambassador Fenoaltea said that he had just received word from his Foreign Office that the Rumanian Ambassador in Rome had seen a senior Italian Foreign Office official on October 20. The Rumanian Ambassador stated that his government had carefully analyzed the situation in Viet-Nam and that on the basis of this analysis and various contacts which the Rumanian government had had, the Rumanian government had concluded that if the U.S. were to cease its bombing of North Viet-Nam permanently, a concrete response from North Viet-Nam would not be lacking. Ambassador Fenoaltea said that the Italians had queried the Rumanian Ambassador for clarification of the phrase “permanent cessation” on the grounds that it was difficult to imagine the U.S. taking such a step without a clear indication of what counteraction would come from the other side. According to Fenoaltea, the Rumanian had replied that the U.S. should not declare publicly a cessation of bombing for a limited time or with any conditions. The Rumanian had said that the 37-day pause last December and January had had the appearance of an ultimatum to Hanoi, and that the U.S. should now be asked to cease its bombing without any time limits or conditions. The Rumanian Ambassador repeated that his governmentʼs information had brought it to believe that if such a move were to take place, an appropriate and a positive reaction from the other side would not be lacking. The Rumanian Ambassador noted that a sentence in Rumanian Foreign Minister Manescuʼs recent speech in the UNGA3 had apparently escaped the attention of the Western world, and that this sentence had particular significance.
Ambassador Fenoaltea said that he had asked to see the Acting Secretary on Saturday4 because he had been instructed to seek the U.S. Governmentʼs reaction to this Rumanian approach before Tuesday night, when the Rumanian Ambassador would be seeing the Italian Foreign Minister.
The Acting Secretary noted that the U.S. position with respect to a cessation of bombing of North Viet-Nam was most recently stated by Ambassador Goldberg in the UNGA.5 He said that it was difficult to know who was speaking for Hanoi, if they were actually able to speak for Hanoi, and furthermore what the specific response to a cessation of bombing would be. In other words, the Acting Secretary said, we had to have a firmer and more specific idea of Hanoiʼs intentions.
In response to Ambassador Fenoalteaʼs query as to whether this Rumanian approach to the Italians might possibly be the beginning of “the [Page 769] right channel,” the Acting Secretary expressed some skepticism. He observed that, although there is a feeling in some quarters that if the U.S. would stop bombing North Viet-Nam something would happen, this had not happened in response to the two previous bombing pauses. The Acting Secretary stressed that it was extremely important to be clear as to the specifics of any bona fide approach from the other side. He suggested that the Italian Foreign Minister press the Rumanian Ambassador hard on the details of the Rumanian approach to the Italians and to quite frankly emphasize to him that this was not a game. The Acting Secretary emphasized that the U.S. Government could not just turn the bombing of North Viet-Nam on and off lightly and that we really had to know whether the Rumanian approach was serious. We had to know, in specific terms, publicly or privately, what response would be forthcoming to a cessation of bombing. The Acting Secretary said that, on the basis of what we knew of the Rumanian Ambassadorʼs approach in Rome, he was not disposed to take it too seriously, but that of course we would be interested in any indication of serious intent.
Ambassador Fenoaltea referred to press reports that Philippine President Marcos was proposing a bombing pause in connection with the Manila Conference. The Acting Secretary noted that, in our view, there was no relation between the question of a pause and the Manila Conference, and that our position was as stated by Ambassador Goldberg.
Ambassador Fenoaltea asked whether he could report that the U.S. Government was not interested in a suspension of bombing as a good will gesture. The Acting Secretary replied affirmatively and added that the U.S. Government needed to have, publicly or privately, a concrete indication of what response a cessation of bombing would bring.
The Acting Secretary expressed appreciation for the information conveyed by Ambassador Fenoaltea and emphasized that the U.S. Government would be most interested in any indication of Hanoiʼs serious intent to resolve the Viet-Nam conflict.