851G.00R/6–1451: Telegram
The Minister at Saigon (Heath) to the Secretary of State 1
2218. In off record personal, frank expression of Fr views re their now almost openly admitted opposition to certain US programs in IC, Fr acting dipl counsellor made fol points in private conversation with Leg secy June 9:
- 1.
- STEM in IC. All Fr officials in IC, states dipl counsellor thoroughly appreciate US MDAP. Fr Govt in Paris, Wash, and Saigon long pled for mil aid which only US cld give and are both grateful for supplies furnished and gratified at results obtained. ECA aid is different. Basic difference is that Fr Govt at no time or place ever requested ECA aid or STEM Mission for IC but was compelled to accept both as part of price for US mil aid. Original misgivings have been more than fulfilled by way program has been administered. Manner that admin and types of resultant publicity are debatable; many Fr officials in HICOM’s office do not agree re difference ECA activities but all unanimous that program never requested or desired in first place.
- Leg comment: I believe this point requires immed clarification. Will Dept and Emb Paris advise me soonest exact circumstances in which decision was made to extend ECA aid to IC and whether record exists re Fr request for ECA aid to IC. Seems obvious that De Lattre believes and receives version cited above.
- 2.
- STEM admin and publicity. Dipl counsellor’s observations re Fr complaints re STEM program turned almost exclusively in this conversation on STEM publicity. Argument ran: Amer seems to think [Page 426] IC was discovered in 1950 and that history of civilization in IC begins with arrival US aid. If water pump or tractor delivered IC, it becomes, in STEM publicity, first water pump or first tractor that IC has ever had. If medical first aid station opened, it is inauguration of public health in IC. STEM publicity concentrates almost exclusively on deficiencies of Fr contributions to IC. Neither notice is given nor tribute paid to work Fr have been doing for generations and are doing today in 25 times the volume and with 1/25 the publicity. If STEM is compelled to make publicity here to demonstrate to US Congress how active STEM is, couldn’t publicity be less flaunted in faces of Fr who are dying for country’s independence? Or couldn’t expenses this publicity be devoted rather to useful projects which wld benefit Fr and Viet people and not merely US officials?
- 3.
- US informational activities. The publicity of USIE or “Brady’s crowd” was different and there was much less Fr objection to them. In particular Brady almost always checked his publicity angles and stories with High Commissioner’s office in advance, a form of coop which ECA has not practiced. Yet USIE English lessons for hundreds of Viets, according to dipl counsellor, have attracted much adverse comment in Fr official circles. Fr wonder why Amer Govt shld spend official funds to teach English here. Very few Viets know Fr well and their time and effort might be better spent in acquiring really useful knowledge of Fr which will be much more important to them unless Amer expects Vietnam not to remain in Fr Union. Language concentration on part Americans seem particularly odd to Fr who observe that wherever Russians have influence their first step is to open Russian courses in blind belief that all that is good is in Russian. USIE book translation program also at point. First book Americans had translated in Vietnam was history of US. This seems either absurd or offensive to most Fr who have found that even literate Viets know little of history of their own country and almost nothing of history of France. To expect them to read Amer history seems height of natl egotism on part Amers. Subsequently, USIE has put into translation nothing on Vietnam or on France and nothing except works violently pro-US or anti-USSR, issues which have little meaning for most Viets. Similarly, these Fr officials who have listened to VOA report Voice is uninteresting, more and more closely resembling Sov radio in its unvarying repetitions of crude natl propaganda, in its constant quotations of speeches US leaders, and in its unceasing claims of US championships in this or that. Most Fr or Viets who are accustomed listen fon broadcasts have been conditioned to regard BBC as model of excellence and VOA seems markedly inferior in program content and in diction of speakers.
- 4.
- Size of US mission in Saigon. Finally, there was matter of number official Amers in Saigon. Some of his friends believe that there were several hundred and talked knowingly of huge numbers secret US espionage operators here. Dipl counsellor knows there are under 200 US officials in IC; however, many Fr here cannot understand why Amers have five times as many officials here as all other fon missions combined or above all, why there seems no slackening in steady rate of arrivals of still more official Amers. Only explanation was in view of too many of his associates is that Amers were, if not preparing, at [Page 427] least looking forward to day of ouster of Fr from IC and of seizing opportunity for making IC zone US influence.
Acting dipl counsellor also intimated there were other Amer activities disliked by Fr. (See my personal ltr dated June 14).2 These are main points of substance. They come from young official who by no means anti-Amer, who not speaking for quotation or attribution, who was apparently sincerely attempting make Leg officer understand bases for increasing local resentment in Fr official circles to US aid and presence in IC. Leg officer believes this Fr official lacks mental ingenuity and experience in IC to draft this bill of particulars himself. Fact that he was thus retailing or synthesizing observations he has heard from his colleagues does not detract from their weight. Dept is particularly enjoined for sake of development of local content not to disclose identity this official. Any value this recital arises from its content, not its source.
Leg officers rejoinders to number of particular criticisms unfounded in fact or reason not here included. Significance is not that specific rebuttals can be made to individual Fr official but that his views seem widely shared.
These manifestations, not so much of anti-Americanism as of narrow gallicism, are of course only indication surf ace irritants to smooth course of Franco-Amer coop in FE. More fundamental is local Fr apprehension that conduct Amer policy must inevitably conflict with Fr plans to retain Vietnam in Fr Union but with Fr conception of evolution of rest of old Fr Empire.
There are of course certain Fr officials here who do not share apprehension, willful misapprehensions and jealousy of Amer policy and operations in IC voiced by dipl counsellor. In gen Fr mil, I believe, appreciate loyalty and disinterestedness of our contribution but I believe that dipl counsellor’s remarks do in fact represent attitude and opinions of majority of Fr civil officials and very probably of Gen De Lattre himself. These essentially groundless and unreasonable complaints reveal an unpleasant situation and an unpleasant state of mind; while we have not yet noted any direct interference with our USIS, MAAG or STEM programs, the atmosphere which now exists potentially harmful to future these efforts and cld embroil US-Franco-Viet relations in IC.
I believe this situation may be allayed after preliminary talks with De Lattre perhaps followed by examination with Fr in Wash or Paris.
The complaints against the publicity of STEM are, of course, a tribute to the exertions of its publicity staff. It is true that STEM has not in principle in the past believed it necessary to consult in [Page 428] advance with the Fr as regards its publicity operations. Under Pignon there seemed to be little necessity of so doing, nor was there any complaint made to STEM or to me regarding ECA publicity with the exception of one incident last year. Robert Blum has tactfully and efficiently managed the ECA program and has been correct in consulting the Fr with regard to projects in which he felt they had a legitimate interest and has kept them informed of the gen progress of the program. In negots of last year it was, however, decided that the program wld be one of direct assistance to the Assoc States, and not thru the Fr High Commissionership.
DeLattre has, however, a high appreciation of the value of publicity both personal and for Fr policy and a much greater determination than his predecessor that nothing shall be allowed to interfere with his formula for Franco-Vietnamese solidarity and his aim of insuring that Vietnam will remain in the Fr Union when hostilities cease.
When all of this is said however, we still must admit that our most immed concern in Indochina today is the mil def of its terr and that def today rests almost solely on the Fr. Their views as to the manner of the admin of US aid shld perhaps therefore receive at this time a more sympathetic hearing than might be the case in other less troubled parts of the world.
I expect to go to Hanoi during the next two days on DeLattre’s invitation. I am not sure since the visit presumably includes a tour of the battlefields and former Amb Bullitt3 will also be guest that it will be possible to go into these matters effectively.
I have shown this tel to Blum and suppose the Dept will wish to pass it to Foster and Griffin.
Sent Dept 2218, rptd info Paris 892, Hanoi unn.