851.48/371: Telegram
The Ambassador in France (Leahy) to the Secretary of State
[Received April 26—11:55 p.m.]
488. The Embassy has received the following note with an urgent request that the sense thereof be cabled to Washington:
“On April 17 the French Ambassador at Washington informed the Ministry of Foreign Affairs that during an interview which he had on that day with Mr. Sumner Welles the latter stated that he had been unable, in spite of the guarantees of control offered by France for the distribution in the free zone of American wheat imported into that zone, to obtain from the British Government the authorization which he had hoped for.
Mr. Henry-Haye having asked Mr. Sumner Welles to give the reasons for this attitude by pointing out that the critical period of the French supply in wheat was drawing rapidly near, the under Secretary of State stated that the British Government had succeeded to a certain extent in making the State Department share the anxiety [Page 156] which it feels with regard to the policy of Franco-German collaboration.
Mr. Haye then recalled Marshal Petain’s latest declarations renewing the assurances that the French Government intended to restrict itself to the terms of the armistice. Furthermore and in spite of the satisfaction given on the French side the matter of the transfer of the warship Dunkerque was not mentioned.
Mr. Sumner Welles then mentioned to the French Ambassador the transfer of goods (bauxite, rubber, gasoline) considered as a direct help to England’s enemies.
On Mr. Henry-Haye’s insistence Mr. Sumner Welles was good enough to agree to examine again with Lord Halifax the question of supplying the free zone of France American wheat with the sincere desire to persuade the Ambassador of the British Government to accept a regular plan of supply.
The French Government has informed the French Ambassador at Washington that it has taken note with painful surprise of the foregoing information.
It was pointed out to Mr. Henry-Haye that the latest advices received from his Embassy stated that the American Administration ‘intended to win acceptance for the principle of the controlled supplying of the unoccupied zone and that in consequence it would take the necessary action with the British Government’. It was pointed out to Mr. Henry-Haye that on April 10 Mr. Sumner Welles had informed him that the State Department hoped to communicate to him within a few days the lines on which an agreement could be reached for the supplying of the unoccupied zone.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs pointed out to Mr. Henry-Haye that the attitude of the State Department is all the more surprising in as much as in his last speech [to?] the House of Commons Mr. Churchill himself stated that although the British Government was unwilling to allow the shipment to unoccupied French territory of goods which might be utilized by the army of the enemy he would not be opposed to sending foodstuffs to the free zone.
Mr. Henry-Haye was invited to take the first favorable occasion to remind Mr. Sumner Welles of this fact and also to call the Under Secretary’s attention to the following arguments:
1. The critical period for the supplying of the free zone with wheat is not only very close but it is possible right now to say that it has begun. As a matter of fact until the present time the supplying of the seven departments of the south which do not produce wheat and where the shortage is greatest (Bouches-du-Rhone, Var, Alpes Maritimes, Gard, Herault, Pyrenees Orientales, Aude) has been assured:
- (a)
- By requisitions made in departments of the unoccupied zone producing wheat and better provided.
- (b)
- By imports from North Africa.
Imports from North Africa can no longer be counted upon and on the other hand the available supplies of the wheat producing departments of the unoccupied zone are no longer sufficient to allow them to continue to supply as they have done up to the present the departments which have shortages.
[Page 157]Consequently the supplying of the free zone with wheat can no longer be assured after May 1st except by contributions from the free zone. Now these which amount to 40,000 tons per month are quite insufficient to satisfy even a small portion of the needs of the departments which have the greatest shortage. Consequently and in order not to create too great a disparity between the food rations of the departments in the free zone which have the greatest shortage and those of the departments which are better off the Secretary of State for Supplies will find himself obliged, if no fresh shipment is sent from America, to reduce the individual bread ration already very insufficent by at least 50 percent.
In view of this very critical situation and while awaiting the adoption of the regular plan of food supply promised by the State Department, the French Ambassador at Washington was instructed to submit the following proposals: The French Government asks that the American Government agree to send, at the beginning of July at the latest, the two ships loaded with wheat for the free zone.
This wheat will be bought by the French Government and will be sold in accordance under the usual commercial conditions. The two ships will bring to the unoccupied zone the control personnel judged necessary who will be assigned to the American Consulates. It will only be after the favorable report which will be made by the controllers concerning the distribution of this wheat in the unoccupied zone, that two other ships will be sent and so on as long as a decision has not been taken at Washington with regard to the regular supplying.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs does not doubt but that this request, being thus limited, will be accepted. The Ministry will be most appreciative if the Embassy will recommend it to the State Department.
2. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs informed the French Ambassador at Washington moreover that nothing justified the apprehensions shown on the American side concerning the conditions under which the French Government intended to apply the provisions of the armistice conventions.
In this respect the assurances which Mr. Henry-Haye was instructed to give to the State Department retain all their value. These assurances are the following:
- (a)
- The French Government will not accept any aggravation of the conditions imposed by the armistice in favor of the occupying power;
- (b)
- It goes without saying that there can be no question of asking the French Government to evade the execution of obligations undertaken by it in the armistice conventions;
- (c)
- The French Government will endeavor to limit as strictly as possible the numbers of the control commissions, and will take care to limit their duties and activities to the framework set forth in the armistice conventions in order in particular not to compromise the normal control of the French authorities over ports, airdromes and means of communication of French Africa.
3. The decision taken by the French Government concerning the transfer of the Dunkerque gave the necessary assurances to the Government of the United States. Mr. Sumner Welles personally showed [Page 158] himself particularly satisfied. Inasmuch as no new occurrence has taken place since then with regard to this warship which would be of a nature to cause anxiety to the American Government Mr. Henry-Haye was invited to renew to the Under Secretary of State the assurances already given on this matter to His Excellency the American Ambassador at Vichy. Mr. Henry-Haye was asked to deny formally the allegations of a certain propaganda tending to present as ‘alarming’ the measures which at one time were envisaged with regard to the transfer of this warship.
4. By a note transmitted on April 11 to the Embassy of the United States the Ministry of Foreign Affairs answered point by point the allegations published by the New York Times which emanated from the British Ministry for Economic Warfare.
These allegations related to the importations into the free zone of bauxite, aluminum and rubber sent from overseas.
The French Ambassador was invited to ask Mr. Sumner Welles to be good enough to communicate the foregoing arguments to Lord Halifax at the next meeting which the Under Secretary of State for the United States will have with the British Ambassador concerning the supplying of the free zone with wheat.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs would be particularly grateful if the Embassy of the United States would not [now?] recommend favorably to the Federal Government the démarche which the French Ambassador in the United States has been instructed to make in pursuance with the foregoing indications.”
As the Embassy has so often indicated in the past, it is strongly of the opinion that the sending of limited quantities of wheat for the unoccupied zone, in view of the means of control and the unlikelihood that equivalent amounts of wheat or similar products would reach either Germany or the relatively well supplied occupied zone area, is thoroughly sound policy. We feel that the political advantages of such a gesture hold equally true regardless of the quantities of raw materials or manufactured products which the occupied zone and/or the Germans may be acquiring from this area. It is the only insurance against the effectiveness of the anti-blockade propaganda which will surely be launched if this limited amount of aid is not forthcoming.