Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, Western Europe and Canada, Volume VI, Part 2

751.001/12–1654: Telegram

No. 685
The Ambassador in France (Dillon) to the Department of State¹

confidential

Paris, December 16, 1954—7 p.m.

2578. 1. With approach of debate on ratification London–Paris Agreements,² it may be useful to Department to have our views on current activities and present strength of Communist Party of France.

2. While Communist press has continued its strident campaign against ratification, this must be viewed in context of the almost certain drop in party membership, the fall in morale and declining circulation of the principal daily, Humanité. It is unanimous consensus of all sources open to us, ranging from the Socialists to the right, that PCF is going through period of internal crisis caused largely by its excessive if not complete concentration on Soviet foreign policy objectives at the expense of anything that could bring comfort to the French working class. While no precise figures are available, we have been informed by various reliable sources that current campaign for the taking out of party cards is probably 10 percent below the comparable figure for same time last year. Despite constant exhortations, there is no question but that Humanité is slipping badly, and that it is read by only fraction of Communist voters. From day to day this newspaper has been filled with virtually nothing but antiratification campaign; PCF has done little or nothing to push demands for higher wages and better living conditions, and indeed much of wind has been taken out of its sails in this regard by government’s current budget with its emphasis on more low-cost construction, better provisions for education, etc. It is a striking fact that Socialist leadership seems particularly impressed by the social provisions of the Mendes-France budget and feels that if they are consistently pursued it will inevitably lead to a drop in support for the Communists.

3. Further evidence that PCF in going through somewhat of an internal crisis can be read into general abstention from attendance at National Assembly sessions of more prominent PCF leaders, such as Torez, Duclos, Casanova, and Fajon. It occurs to us that their absence, and fact that party speech in Assembly tend to be made by second or third rate leaders, bespeaks uncertainty on part of Party leadership with respect to current objectives. Some of our sources go so far as to say that PCF leaders privately admit that their efforts to prevent French ratification of the London–Paris Agreements are proving abortive. Whether or not that is true is somewhat academic, however, since Party is doing all in its limited power to prevent ratification.

4. In our view, striking difference between the present situation and that immediately preceding defeat of EDC is fact that alliance between Communists and neutralists temporarily at least has been broken. Embassy has reported on more than one occasion, such newspapers as Le Monde in general have been giving full support to Mendes-France and his program, and many parliamentarians and intellectuals who had been forthright in their opposition to EDC seem reconciled to, if not enthusiastic proponents of, WEU. All this is not to say that Mendes-France has plain sailing ahead, for his many political enemies may yet concert to bring him down. However, as of this moment Communist power seems on wane and future of the party does not seem promising.

Clearly what has been regarded in French circles as dignified and calm attitude of U.S. to Soviet campaign of “peaceful coexistence”, and contrast to the sterility of recent Soviet notes on European problems, has contributed to the relative impotence of the Communists in this country. Communist meetings by and large are being ignored by the non-Communist press, and the government, by taking such actions as the recent refusal to give visas to Soviet and satellite delegates to a Communist-sponsored meeting held in Paris, December 11–12, to oppose ratification of London–Paris Agreements has somewhat dampened Communist fire. While PCF, through some transparent device of a simply-phrased wording opposing “rearmament revengeful Germany”, claim to have garnered two and half million signatures, this “success” appears to have made only slight impact on average Frenchmen if judged from the non-Communist press.

Dillon

1. Repeated to Moscow, London, Rome, Bonn, Berlin, The Hague, Brussels, and Vienna.
2. For documentation concerning the ratification debates in the French National Assembly on the London–Paris Agreements, see vol. v, Part 2, pp. 1370 ff.