Foreign Relations of the United States, 1958–1960, Africa, Volume XIV

162. Telegram From the Department of State to the Consulate at Elisabethville⁰

August 4, 1960, 7:45 p.m.

37. Dept suggests in talks with local officials, residents and consuls you take line previously suggested that USG continues to support unified Congo and does not recognize independent Katanga. We supported two SC resolutions each dealing with Congo as unit. Further Dept continues feel best hope for Congo is UN military presence and economic reconstruction in the entire Congo with Katanga contributing full share to government revenue. UN presence in Congo will, in our view, objectively and effectively discharge its mandate to maintain order and thereby contribute to preserving investments and restricting communist penetration of Congo. Dept hopes UN troop arrival Katanga will not be opposed and considers that Europeans should be able to repose same confidence in UN military as in Belgians. (We informed only Irish Moroccan Swedish and Tunisian troops will be used.) UN effort should be presented as not prejudicial Katangan political interests and does not mean UN taking sides internal matter. If in fact Tshombe commands significant support and loyalty for his policies, there is no reason why admission UN troops should prevent him from continuing efforts to work for increased autonomy or federation with other provinces as desired. UN is on record as stating it does not take orders from central government.

You should extend all possible assistance to Bunche including communications if he has need therefor.¹

Herter

0. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 332.70G/8–460. Confidential; Niact. Drafted by Woodruff; cleared with Satterthwaite, Penfield, Wallner, and Robert M. Beaudry of EUR; and approved by Herter. Repeated to Léopoldville, Brussels, London, and Paris.
1. In telegram 41 from Elisabethville, August 6, Canup maintained that if he pursued the points contained in telegram 37, it would possibly trigger the accusation from Tshombe that the United States was engaged in a behind-the-back campaign against him. Tshombe did not count on U.S. aid and was unlikely to be influenced by U.S. views. Canup recommended, therefore, presentation of the U.S. viewpoint directly on the basis of instructions. (Ibid., 332.70G/8–660)