751G.00/2–2350: Telegram
The Ambassador in France (Bruce) to the Secretary of State
secret
Paris, February
23, 1950—8 p. m.
860. Mytels 837 and 840. I saw Bidault last night. He stated:
- 1.
- He had to date been opposed and expected to remain very skeptical about any advantages to be derived by France from the recognition of Mao Tse-tung. However, he thought it advisable to feel out Chinese Communists and ascertain what they might profess themselves willing to do in exchange for recognition. If then any deal were suggested that appeared at least on surface advantageous to France, government would consider whether or not any confidence could be placed in agreement with Mao, which he personally doubted.
- 2.
- Withdrawal by French from Indochina had long been pet project of Communists as well as of some Socialists. It was unthinkable for many reasons, amongst others that in France itself it would immediately provoke an “insurrection”. France was carrying burden in Indochina which he hoped would be lightened by assistance from other powers interested in combating Communism in Far East but even in absence of such assistance, she could not nor did she intend to lay it down.
- 3.
- Our two governments seem to be talking at cross purposes as to what is meant by the term independence for Indochina and what an evolutionary statement should contain. The French expect Indochina to remain within French Union and are willing to grant further concessions as Vietnamese show themselves capable of taking over additional responsibilities and of safeguarding their own security interests. Time-table idea does not strike him sympathetically for chief evidence of alleged French imperialism is presence in Indochina of French troops, withdrawal of whom cannot be fixed in point of time.
- 4.
- He believes neither in US nor in Asia does public realize how extensive has been grant of powers to Indochinese nor how sincerely French would like to have these peoples take over further responsibilities as they are able to, and thus relieve France of its ungrateful and exceedingly expensive task there. He thinks French Government has been most inefficient in its propaganda on this subject and hopes to do something that will clarify situation.
In connection with above and other conversations we have had recently, especially one yesterday with Pignon, whom I regard as competent and enlightened administrator, we are preparing study on pros and cons of “evolutionary statement” idea which has domestic, political and North African implications, as well as those bearing on SEA scene.
Sent Department 860 repeated London 268, for Butterworth.
Bruce