Foreign Relations of the United States, 1958–1960, South and Southeast Asia, Volume XV

429. Telegram From the Embassy in the Philippines to the Department of State¹

Manila, November 22, 1958—10 p.m.

1652. MILBA. Reference: Embtel 1648.² While we never believed that Phils would observe security as we understand it in regard to my talks with Serrano, the breach of our clear understanding on this point by the Dept of Foreign Affairs is so flagrant that it cannot be ignored. Leading Manila newspapers this morning carry a full but heavily slanted account of yesterday’s discussion. Since no one familiar with matter in Emb has seen or spoken to a reporter and from tendentious nature of accounts it was obviously result of FonOff briefing of press. This of course is reminiscent of Phil tactics during Bendetsen talks which by general admission including Serrano was a major factor in deadlock. We are convinced that unless steps are taken now to put a halt to this type of publicity entire purpose of my talks with Serrano will be lost. Only question is what should we do at this end. I am convinced that only firm position on US part which would really impress Phils would have any such effect. Merely to protest breach of our understanding on the confidential nature of the talks would I believe have little value. One possibility would be for me to issue press statement referring to our agreement and correcting misstatements of US position which appeared in most of today’s press accounts. This however would merely compound the felony and transfer the talks into a publicity match with virtual elimination of any prospect of success. I would therefore not recommend this course of action except as last resort. A preferable method and one that might give Serrano pause (since his personal prestige is heavily engaged in these talks) would be for me to call on him early next week and tell him that not only is such publicity from his Dept contrary to our clear understanding but is so destructive of the whole purpose of these talks, that if continued, the US Govt will have to consider whether it is worthwhile going on with them in Manila or whether it will not be necessary to transfer them to Wash. This I believe would seriously worry Serrano and might induce him to respect our agreement on secrecy which in view of small number of persons (two from Phil side) is quite within his power to do. I might add that I will have to take up whole matter with Pres Garcia if there is any repetition.

Such an approach to Serrano would only be effective if I were authorized to speak in name of my govt.

Since I feel very strongly that we must deal with this problem before we resume the talks next week I request Dept to examine this recommendation as a matter of urgency and give me instructions by Monday (Manila time) if possible since delay would weaken effect.³

Bohlen

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 711.56396/11–2258. Secret; Niact. Repeated to CINCPAC for POLAD, CINCPACFLT, CINCPACAF, CINCUSARPAC, CINCPACREPPHIL, COMNAVPHIL, and 13th AF.
2. Telegram 1648 from Manila, November 21, reported ongoing negotiations on the jurisdiction issue. (Ibid., 711.56396/11–2158)
3. This authorization was given in joint State–Defense telegram 1441 to Manila, November 22. (Ibid., 711.56396/11–2258) Bohlen saw Serrano alone on November 25 to discuss the problem of news leakage. Serrano admitted, apologetically, that Arreglado had held a press briefing; he promised to use the full force of his office to prevent leakage in the future. (Telegram 1669 from Manila, November 25; ibid., 711.56396/11–2558)