Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume I, Vietnam, 1964

104. Memorandum From Michael V. Forrestal of the National Security Council Staff to the President’s Special Assistant for National Security Affairs (Bundy)¹

Washington, April 1, 1964.

SUBJECT

• Laos/Vietnam—Cross Border Operations

I enclose a draft telegram to Saigon and Vientiane, which it is proposed be sent today to the field.²

To send this telegram without Averell’s approval is just asking for trouble in my book. Sullivan tells me that he believes that the Governor would not object to the substance; but he admits that he has never shown anything quite like this cable to Averell. I am going to urge as strongly as I can that they not dispatch this cable until Averell’s return on Friday.³

On the substance, I think this is an ill-conceived plan, which could well cut the ground out from Unger in Vientiane. Souvanna has been increasingly nervous about his relations with Phoumi and has been making real gestures in the direction of leaving Vientiane with the neutral faction and returning to the Plain of Jars. He is also about to leave for Peiping and Hanoi. The possibility that an overenthusiastic MACV might order a raid into Laos without Unger’s knowing about it could, in my opinion, really upset the applecart. Sullivan thinks that the concept of “hot pursuit” and the fact that the border regions are generally uninhabited will, in effect, result in there being no action taken under these instructions. How he can think this so soon after the Chantrea incident puzzles me. I think at the very least we must give Unger a veto on the planned operations, subject to being overridden here in Washington.⁴ We can keep our fingers crossed on the “hot pursuit” activities.

I am going to talk to your brother about this to get his reaction. I know that the working-level of the State Department feels more concerned about this than I do.

Mike

1. Source: Johnson Library, National Security File, Vietnam Country File, Vol. VI, Cables and Memos. Top Secret. Also published in Declassified Documents, 1984, 002725.
2. Attached but not printed was a draft of telegram 1630 to Saigon, also sent to Vientiane as telegram 836, April 7. In substance the draft and the cable as sent were similar and they provided proposed guidelines for the types of operations in Laos by South Vietnamese forces for which the United States was prepared to provide financial and materiel support. The principal difference between the draft and cable was that the latter had an introduction that indicated that the guidelines were tentative and subject to comment by Ambassador Unger in Laos. (Department of State. Central Files. POL 27 VIET S)
3. April 3.
4. In telegrams 1116 and 1119 from Vientiane, April 10 and 11, Unger responded to telegram 836 to Vientiane and the guidelines for cross-border operations in Laos by stating that such activities would jeopardize the U.S. policy of Lao neutrality and would be opposed by Souvanna Phouma. In most areas of Laos, the presence of South Vietnamese troops would destroy existing U.S.-Lao cooperation in combating North Vietnamese presence in Laos. (Both Department of State. Central Files. POL 27 VIET S)