Memorandum of Conversation with Secretary of State Dean Acheson and Ambassador of France Henri Bonnet

304 8366 DEPARTMENT OF STATE DECLASSIFIED E. O. 11652, Sec. 3(E) and 5(D) or (E) Memorandum of Conversation 84 Look 12-25-75 Dept. of State letter, Aug 2,7973 Ba NLT. HC , NARS Date 6.4.76 DATE: March 13, 1950 SUBJECT: Situation in Indochina, Meeting of NAT Council, Tripartite Conversations, Chinese Recognition, European Payments Union. PARTICIPANTS: Ambassador Bonnet The Secretary ARCHIVES NATIONAL RECORDS SERVICE** AND of s COPIES TO: FE - RA - EUR O Embassy Paris 1-1493 Ambassador Bonnet called today at his request. He said that he had just returned from a ten-day consultation period in Paris during which he had talked at length with Mr. Schuman, Mr. Pleven, and other members of the French Government and that Mr. Schuman had asked him to make certain views known to me. Ambassador Bonnet said that Mr. Schuman was anxious to know what progress was being made along the lines of granting military and economic aid to Indochina, both long term and short term. I said that the French requests had been received and were being actively studied and that we would let them know as soon as we were able to come to a decision. Mr. Bonnet said that Mr. Schuman was anxious to know when tripartite talks might take place regarding the common policy in Southeast Asia. I asked him to define what he meant by a common policy in that area and Mr. Bonnet replied that Mr. Schuman had in mind the common defense of the area against encroachment of communism with the emphasis, of course, on Indochina where the battle was being fought and that efforts should be made to find both military and political solutions to the problem. I said that it seemed to the that one of the necessary elements to a political solution would be an indication, as I had told Mr. Schuman in the past, of the fact that the March 8 Agreements would be a step toward real independence. I added that whatever the good faith of the French might be in their desire to carry out the March 8 Agreements, the South Asian Governments did not seem convinced of French good faith and were, therefore, withholding their recognition. I mentioned for example, that Bao Dai had not yet been allowed to move into his palace at Saigon which was being occupied by the French High Commissioner and that this was the sort of thing which in oriental eyes meant a great deal. Regarding tripartite conversations I said that we had tentatively set May 8 as a date for the meeting of the NAT Council which we expected to be held in London, since several meetings had already been held in Paris. On this occasion