Office of the Historian

626. Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in South Africa1

Washington, September 21, 1966, 8:29 p.m.

51780. Ref: a) State 30251;2 b) State 45251.3

1.
Aide memoire ref a) delivered by Asst. Sec. Palmer to SA Ambassador Taswell Sept 21.4 Following based on uncleared memcon:
2.

Palmer emphasized a) U.S. view our aide-memoire July 15 did not represent “interference by bringing unwarranted pressure bear” on SA;

b)
our view July 18 judgment in no way diminishes authority ICJ advisory opinions; and
c)
US will continue be guided by concern for well-being of SWA inhabitants and rule of law.

Taswell persisted that a) US July 15 aide-memoire constituted interference; b) USG clearly had anticipated and made elaborate plans only for judgment adverse to SA as demonstrated inter alia by time taken to give US reaction to judgment and our failure provide SAG copies of parallel US pre-judgment demarches to Liberia and Ethiopia; c) applicants [Page 1060] had withdrawn charges of oppression SWA clearly absolving SA of charges; d) USG hopefully equally concerned over welfare inhabitants Ethiopia and Liberia in order that their standards might be brought up to those of inhabitants SWA and e) Gross and Ambassador Goldberg at UN struggling cover up fact Liberia and Ethiopia had withdrawn charges of SA oppression SWA.

4.
Palmer a) maintained view USG demarche appropriate and not interference; b) emphasized US demarches to SAG, Ethiopia and Liberia strictly matter US diplomatic relations with individual countries; SAG publicly referred to our approach to it; other two have not done so; US could not have reacted complex judgment on merits any faster than to judgment rendered; c) emphasized narrowness of issue (jurisdiction, not merits) decided by ICJ on July 18 and d) said he could not accept Taswell’s inappropriate remark re Ambassador Goldberg suggesting if SAG had any question it would be one to be taken up by SA UN Del with Ambassador Goldberg.
5.
Palmer said SAG would do service to all by carrying out continuing obligations regarding SWA and he hoped SAG would take careful account of present UNGA which could prove unusually difficult one for SAG.
6.
Interesting Taswell put more emphasis on shift in applicants’ contention before ICJ than on any implications from obiter dicta in judgment in seeking paint judgment as vindication of SAG.
Ball
  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, POL 19 SW AFR. Confidential. Drafted by Ralph W. Stephan of AF/AFS and Runyon, cleared by Campbell and Popper, and approved by Palmer. Sent to Cape Town, and repeated to Pretoria, London, and USUN.↩
  2. Dated August 17. (Ibid.)↩
  3. Dated September 12. (Ibid., POL 15–1 S AFR)↩
  4. For text of the aide-memoire of September 21, see Department of State Bulletin, October 10, 1966, pp. 567–568.↩