Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Source Description
Senator John F. Kennedy's reply to criticisms to his speech on Algeria which he delivered on the senate floor, July 2, 1957.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
193187
label
Remarks of Senator John F. Kennedy on the Senate Floor in Reply to Criticism on his Call for Freedom for Algeria July 8, 1957
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
193187
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Remarks of Senator John F. Kennedy on the Senate Floor in Reply to Criticism on his Call for Freedom for Algeria July 8, 1957
description
Senator John F. Kennedy's reply to criticisms to his speech on Algeria which he delivered on the senate floor, July 2, 1957.
citationUrl
collections
Papers of John F. Kennedy: Pre-Presidential Papers: Senate Files
Files Related to Speeches and the Press
subjects
Kennedy, John F. (John Fitzgerald), 1917-1963
Speeches, addresses, etc.
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
193187
levelOfDescription
item
productionDates
day
8
logicalDate
1957-07-08
month
7
year
1957
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
photo
mediaId
b79df6e68839da00
ocrText
FROM: OFFICE OF SENATOR JOHN F. KENNEDY
SENATE OFFICE BUILDING
WASHINGTON, D. c.
REMARKS OF SENATOR JOHN F. KENNEDY (DEM, -MASS.) ON THE SENATE
FLOOR IN REPLY TO CRITICISM OF HIS CALL FOR FREEDOM FOR ALGERIA
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: MONDAY, JULY 8, 1957
Mr. President:
I want to reply briefly to the criticisms of my recent speech on Algeria
delivered yesterday by the French Minister for Algeria, Robert LaCoste, and by
others who have joined in that criticism. II might say at the outset that I was
fully aware, when preparing my speech of last Tuesday, of the disfavor with which
it would be regarded by our Department of state, the French Government and others--
but I felt nevertheless that these were facts that needed to be stated fully and
frankly.
The reaction to my remarks both at home and abroad has further strength-
ened my conviction that the situation in Algeria is drifting dangerously, with
the French authorities refusing to seek a freah approach and our American authori-
ties refusing to recognize the grave international implications of this impasse.
No amount of hopeful assertions that France will handle the problem alone, no
amount of cautious warnings that these are matters best left unmentioned in public,
and no amount of cherges against the motives or methods of those of us seeking
a
peaceful solution can obscure the fact that the Algerians will someday be free.
Then, to whom will they turn -- to the West, which has seemingly ignored their
plea for independence, to the Americans, whom they may feel have rejected the
issue as none of our affair while at the same time furnishing arms that help
crush them or to Moscow, to Cairo, to Peking, the pretended champions of
nationalism and independence?
And who, by that time, will be leading the Algerians -- the Moderates
with a pro-Western orientation with whom negotiations might still be conducted now--
or the Extremists, Terrorists and outside provocateurs who inevitably capture such
a movement as the conflict drags on? Finally, what will such a settlement in
Algeria at some distant date mean to France then? Will it not mean the loss of
all her economic, political and cultural ties in North Africa which could still be
salvaged in a settlement today? Will it not meen that France will have suffered
a weakened economy, a decimated army and a series of unstable governments only to
learn once again as she learned too late in Indo-China, Tunisia and Morocco --
that man's desire to be free and independent is the most powerful force in the
world today?
Of course Algeria is a "complicated" problem. Of course, we should not
assume full responsibility for that problem's solution in France's stead. And,
of course, the Soviet Union is guilty of far worse exemples of imperialism. But
we cannot long ignore as none of our business, or as a French internal problem,
a struggle for independence that has been and will be a major issue before the
U.N., that has denuded NATO of its armies, drained the resources of our French
allies, threatened the continuation of Western influence and bases in North Africa
and bitterly split the "Free World" we claim to be leading.
The Algerian situation is a deadly timebomb steadily ticking toward the
day when another disaster to the Free World -- worse than Indo-China -- might
explode.
When the roll is called on Algeria this fall in the United Nations, as
it must inevitably, we in this nation will be forced to face this issue publicly.
If no reasonable proposal for settlement has by then been put forward by the
French and encouraged by the West, will we be able to say to the General Assembly
in all sincerity that progress has been made will we again vote against the
anti-colonial bloc that controls the world balance of power or will we finally
take back from the Soviets the leadership that is rightfully ours of the worldwide
movement for freedom and independence?
I repeat my opening observations of last Tuesday -- that we dare not
overlook, in our concern over legal and diplomatic niceties, the powerful force of
man's eternal desire to be free and independent. The worldwide struggle against
imperialism, the sweep of nationalism, is the most potent factor in foreign affairs
today. We can resist it or ignore it, but only for a little while we can see
it exploited by the Soviets, with grave consequences -- or we in this country
can give it hope and leadership, and thus improve immeasurably our standing and
our security.