851.01/452½
The British Embassy to the Department of State
Aide-mémoire
His Majesty’s Ambassador reported to the Foreign Office the substance of his conversations with Mr. Welles on May 9th [8th?] and May 12th [11th?] with regard to the Free French Movement, and in particular Mr. Welles’ tentative proposal that the United States Government and His Majesty’s Government should work together with a view to reorganizing and strengthening the French National Committee, which might be composed of, say, 15 representative Frenchmen. The function of this Committee would, Mr. Welles suggested, be consultative with the United States Government and His Majesty’s Government, though it might also enjoy an administrative character with regard to the Free French Colonies. In no sense, however, should it be a government to which political recognition would be extended now or later. General de Gaulle ought to be a member and might naturally be the military member, with such responsibilities as the Committee might entrust to him. Wherever the Committee was located, Mr. Welles attached importance to having responsible representatives established in Washington. Mr. Welles also mentioned one or two names of persons who might suitably be members of the Committee or who might be consulted as to its constitution.
Lord Halifax has now received the views of His Majesty’s Government on these suggestions and on the general Free French situation. The aims of His Majesty’s Government are to encourage French resistance to the Germans in every way that they can, and to bring back into the war as much of the French Empire as possible in the hope that a fighting France may be able to take her place at the Peace Conference as one of the United Nations. For this reason, the closest contact with the people of France itself must be developed. The future of France and of Europe itself requires that efforts should be made to guide events along these lines.
His Majesty’s Government agree that it would be a mistake for the [Page 518] United States Government either to recognize the National Committee as a Government, or to go further than His Majesty’s Government have done in the degree of recognition to be accorded to them.
General de Gaulle has many defects but he has brought over important French territories, kept the French flag flying in the war, and made himself a symbol of resistance in Occupied France, which contains over two-thirds of the French population and where the tempo of resistance is rising. He has made a better impression on militant resisters in France than on men like General Odic, who have no first-hand knowledge of French popular feeling. The temper of the French people is shown by their acts of sabotage, while the violent attacks made on Gaullisme by German controlled propaganda indicate that he is regarded as inspiring the French to resist. If he were to disappear, there would be no obvious French personality to put in his place.
General de Gaulle has recently drawn up a declaration concerning the war aims of the French people, a copy of which is attached.43 This declaration was communicated to certain organizations in France, and may have provoked the following references to General de Gaulle contained in a May Day message from the Trade Unionists of France to the International Federation of Trade Unions:
“Our representative, the representative of the people of France, General de Gaulle, fights with the Allies. Although his army is still small, a huge imprisoned force is behind him in France. The enemy will not perhaps always be able to keep this force enchained.”
The Frenchman with whom General de Gaulle’s declaration was negotiated is regarded in London as a reliable person and he stated that the resisters in France were behind de Gaulle.
The best solution of the problem in the view of His Majesty’s Government would be that General de Gaulle should put his house in order and form a more broadly based Committee, bringing in at least a few more people of independent mind, who would not obey blindly, as do the members of the present Committee, whatever orders de Gaulle may give. The British authorities are trying to bring to London some leaders of the “Liberation” movement of left wing sympathies, who could speak with authority for opinion in France and who would not hesitate to stand up to de Gaulle. Thus reinforced the Committee might become an effective body. In view of its governmental responsibilities in respect of the Free French territories, the Committee must necessarily have executive functions and cannot be of a merely consultative character. The time may also have come for de Gaulle to launch a programme of wider appeal under which he might bring over many of those Frenchmen outside [Page 519] France who have hitherto refused to join him, On the military side, de Gaulle already has some excellent officers of whom he might make better use.
For the reasons given above, His Majesty’s Government consider that it would be impossible to reduce the General to a lesser position than that of President of the Committee. Moreover, his followers would not tolerate it. In commenting on local reactions to the recent British action in Madagascar, and the American action in the French West Indies, which are assumed to have been taken without consultation with the Free French Movement, His Majesty’s Consul at Brazzaville has reported that opinion in French Equatorial Africa is already gravely disturbed. Feeling is running so high that the Governor General has felt it necessary to send instructions to the Provincial Governors that discussion of the situation should be discouraged and anti-Allied criticism repressed. His Majesty’s Consul has stated that in his opinion there is no chance at all of all of the Free French African territories remaining with the United Nations should de Gaulle retire to his tent.
Since the main centre of French resistance is among the twenty-eight million in Occupied France, His Majesty’s Government think that the seat of the Committee would have to remain in London but they entirely agree with the United States Government on the importance of its suitable and adequate representation in Washington.
As regards the composition of the Committee, His Majesty’s Government fear that it would not be practicable for the United States Government and His Majesty’s Government to hand pick its members. As already stated, it is hoped considerably to strengthen the Committee by the addition of representatives of the resistance movements in France. His Majesty’s Government doubt whether any of the Frenchmen in the United States, with the possible exceptions of M. Léger44 and Professor Maritain,45 would strengthen the movement or increase its prestige. They are aware that attempts have been made by certain Frenchmen in this country—e.g. Messrs. Chautemps and Rougier,46—to form a middle movement composed of time servers who do not approve of General de Gaulle, who feel that Pétain47 is “doing his best” and who at the same time claim to be supporters of the Allied cause. His Majesty’s Government sincerely hope that the United States Government will give such a movement no encouragement. Chautemps is in their view the worst type of French politician and holds a large responsibility for the surrender of Bordeaux. Of the names mentioned by Mr. Welles to Lord Halifax [Page 520] in their recent conversation Admiral Auboyneau is already a member of the Committee which has functioned better since his arrival. Reports which His Majesty’s Government have received of General Sice’s behaviour in Africa do not however altogether lead them to share Mr. Welles’ favourable impression of him. Generals Catroux, de Larminat, Leclerc and other good soldiers are required in Africa. The chances of inducing such men as M. Jeanneney48 and Herriot49 to leave France are very slight and the main hope of strengthening the Committee would perhaps seem as stated above to lie in recruiting members of the movements of resistance in France itself.
- Filed separately under 851.01/847; not printed.↩
- Alexis Léger, formerly Secretary General of the French Foreign Office.↩
- Jacques Maritain, professor of philosophy at Columbia University.↩
- Professor Louis Rougier.↩
- Marshal Henri Philippe Pétain, French Chief of State.↩
- Jules Jeanneney, formerly President of the French Senate.↩
- Edouard Herriot, formerly President of the French Chamber of Deputies.↩