Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume XXIV, Africa

467. Memorandum of Conversation¹

Washington, September 20, 1965.

SUBJECT

• Southern Rhodesian UDI and Ramifications

PARTICIPANTS

• The Honorable, Cledwyn Hughes, Minister of State for Commonwealth Relations
• Sir Savile Garner, Permanent Under Secretary, CRO
• Mr. Michael Stewart, Minister, British Embassy
• Mr. Angus Walker, Second Secretary, British Embassy
• The Secretary
• J. Wayne Fredericks, Acting Assistant Secretary, Bureau of African Affairs
• Edward W. Mulcahy, Deputy Director, Office of Eastern and Southern African Affairs

The Secretary told the Minister of State that he would like to discuss the Southern Rhodesian problem and its impact on the UK and the US.

Mr. Hughes summarized the most recent developments for the Secretary. Last February Smith was clearly ready to make concessions; today “he is the captive of the extremists of his party,” he said. He is a hard man to deal with, not very intelligent but very shrewd. During the talks that had gone on regularly for several months with Smith and during his own visit to Salisbury in July, HMG had stuck to insisting upon its three principles: (1) assurance that the safeguards embodied in the “entrenched clauses” of the Rhodesian 1961 constitution would be preserved, (2) guarantees for African political and social advancement and (3) removal of all racial discrimination (including specific repeal of the Land Apportionment Act). For some time Smith seemed to be reasonable and to be prepared to make concessions himself. Now things had changed for the worse.

The Minister of State said that HMG was “anxious to avoid a unilateral declaration of independence.” But the present situation was viewed as most serious by the UK because of its probable impact on the Commonwealth and its potential adverse effect on the already precarious UK balance of payments picture. The tolerable relationship had worsened recently when Smith took to the offensive with the Reedman appointment to Lisbon. However, HMG would have to stand firm on this issue. The Portuguese were being watched very closely. As the next step, the Minister of State indicated, Commonwealth Secretary Bottomley would go to Salisbury on October 12. Bottomley will make an effort to have Smith come to London for a final confrontation with Prime Minister Wilson. The situation promises to remain very critical for the next few weeks.

The Secretary asked whether HMG had felt the discussion last week in the NATO Council had been useful. From the UK’s point of view, Mr. Hughes and Sir Savile agreed, it had been very encouraging to have such a solid display of support for its position. The backing given by the US had been especially appreciated.

The Secretary said that he had talked with three Zambian cabinet ministers last week² and had been impressed with their story of the new coal deposits (at Kandabwe) that Zambia was developing. Mr. Hughes agreed that this was an encouraging development but it would be too little to make a real change in the prospects facing Zambia in the event of UDI and the possible cutting off of the Wankie coal sources. Sir Savile said that HMG was coming back to the thought that only an airlift could keep the Zambian economy afloat if worse came to worst. Mr. Hughes agreed, adding that President Kaunda would probably have to yield to African pressures to take a firm stand against the Rhodesian rebels after UDI, bringing the full wrath of the Smith Government down on Zambia. Sir Savile added that, under such circumstances, Rhodesia would lose trade worth 30 million pounds a year. This in addition to the other measures that could be taken by the UK and the rest of the world might succeed in bringing Southern Rhodesia to her knees.

The Secretary asked whether the British believed that Kaunda would assist infiltrators to enter Southern Rhodesia after UDI. Mr. Hughes and Sir Savile thought it was likely that Kaunda would ultimately have to yield to African pressures to do so. In addition, he would probably have to give a haven to a Rhodesian government-in-exile and probably to a Mozambique government-in-exile.

Mr. Hughes said he felt that if Smith could be removed from the bad influence exerted on him by Harper, Lilford, Knox, Gaunt and Benson it might be possible to deal with him more rationally. But the situation was becoming critical and HMG was bending very effort to “postpone the evil day” when UDI would come. There were a few good members in Ian Smith’s cabinet, he said, citing Mr. Howman as an example, but their influence was not strong. They were a small group, the Minister said.

Mr. Fredericks inquired how the Governor (Sir Humphrey Gibbs) stood in the present controversy. Mr. Hughes and Sir Savile agreed that he was tired and asked often to be relieved of his heavy duties. In the present situation he was “quite powerless.” Sir Savile stated that only the judiciary had been able to resist the SRG’s efforts to control it, otherwise Smith held all the cards.

The Secretary asked whether there was any possibility of using British troops to quell a rebellion after UDI. The British officials indicated that there was not the slightest chance of this. There were not enough troops in any case and none near enough to be of any use. Mr. Hughes said that the only conceivable circumstances under which he could envisage the use of British troops would be upon the request of the SRG if absolute chaos within the country occurred (implying a massive African uprising), but he saw little probability of that. Mr. Fredericks agreed that our estimate of African nationalist capability to provoke violence also made such a situation unlikely.

Secretary Rusk inquired whether the British officials felt the US and UK were “in line” with regard to the Southern Rhodesian problem. Mr. Hughes and Sir Savile unhesitatingly said that they were confident we were “in line.” Mr. Hughes then said that we would have to give much thought to keeping “in line” when and if it came to handling the question in the UN after UDI. He believed it important that HMG seize and maintain the initiative in the UN. The Secretary said he agreed and asked whether they believed the African members of the Commonwealth would be together with the UK in the UN debate. Sir Savile indicated there was room for doubt on this point since the African Commonwealth members would probably join in a demand for some form of UN military action, which Britain, of course, would have to oppose. He added that, on his recent West African trip with Mr. Bottomley, the Southern Rhodesian question was the main subject of interest everywhere. Feelings on it were very strong, he said. Strangely enough, however, the only leader who did not raise the issue with them was President Nkrumah, although his Foreign Minister had done so.

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, POL 19 RHOD. Secret. Drafted by Mulcahy on September 21, and approved in S on September 25. The source text is marked “Section II of V.”
2. A memorandum of the Secretary’s conversation with the Zambian Cabinet Ministers on September 14 is in the Johnson Library, National Security File, Country File, Zambia, Vol. I, Memos and Miscellaneous, 8/64–9/68.