Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T06:24:15.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

President Kennedy and United States Policy in Laos, 1961–63

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 April 2011

Usha Mahajani
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In his short administration, President Kennedy was called upon to deal with several Southeast Asian developments but none that had reached such a high watermark of an international crisis as the question of Laos. As in Berlin, he inherited in Laos a situation aggravated by near-direct armed confrontation between the Soviet Union and the United States. Kennedy's response to that situation was a complex set of policy moves and measures that alternately raised a spectre of large-scale, direct American military intervention and prospects of East-West agreement on Laotian neutrality, only to end eventually on the same note of anti-communist crusade as in the preceding Eisenhower administration.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Southeast Asian Studies , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , September 1971 , pp. 87 - 99
Copyright
Copyright © The National University of Singapore 1971

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Wise, David and Ross, Thomas B., The Invisible Government (London: Macmillan, 1966), pp. 148–52.Google ScholarChampasak, Sissouk Na, Storm Over Laos (New York: Praeger, 1961), pp. 63–64, 160–61Google Scholar; Smith, Roger M., “Laos in Perspective,” Asian Survey, January 1963, p. 63Google Scholar; New York Times, 4, 8 and 23 October 1960 and 10 October 1961; Toye, Hugh, Laos: Buffer State or Battleground (London: Oxford University Press, 1968), pp. 148–49Google Scholar; Time, 17 March 1961, p. 21.

2 Current Digest of Soviet Press, vol. XII, no. 40, 2 November 1960, p. 24; New York Times, 13 and 14 October 1960; Asian Recorder, 1960, p. 3695; interview with State Department officials, December 1969.

3 New York Times, 13 and 14 October 1960; Dommen, Arthur, Conflict in Laos (New York: Praeger, 1964), p. 159Google Scholar; Fall, Bernard, Anatomy of a Crisis, the Laotian Crisis of 1960–61 (New York: Doubleday, 1969), p. 194.Google Scholar

4 New York Times, 27 July 1962, referred to Phouma as currently visiting the same White House where Eisenhower had approved plans to overthrow him.

5 On 30 December Macmillan wrote to Eisenhower proposing that Phouma should be induced to resign for after all Eisenhower had “always been skeptical as to Phouma's value;” that Phouma could serve the western powers most usefully by resigning his office; and that the next step would be to legitimize Boun Oum by getting the National Assembly's approval according to the Laos Constitution, which MacMillan was confident would be easy; but in case the Assembly turned “nasty.… this should be within our power to handle.” Eisenhower approved this strategy but de Gaulle was not cooperative. Text of letter in Eisenhower, Dwight D., Waging Peace (New York: Doubleday, 1965), p. 717Google Scholar; also p. 611. Author's italics. The United States strongly denounced Phouma and his cabinet for fleeing the country and thus having “abandoned any realistic pretence of fulfilling their responsibilities as a government.” Department of State, “Situation in Laos,” 7 January 1971, p. 1. Copy supplied.

6 Ambassador Georgi M. Pushkin's reported statement to Averell Harriman at the Laos Conference, 1961–62, Wise and Ross, op. cit., p. 151.

7 Testimony by Sullivan, Ambassador William, United States Security Agreements and Commitments Abroad, Kingdom of Laos, Hearings before the Subcommittee on United States Security Agreements and Commitments Abroad of the Committee on Foreign Relations, October 1969, U.S. Senate, 91st Congress, 1st session (Washington D.C.: Government Printing Press, 1970), p. 145.Google Scholar Hereafter cited as Laos Hearings, 1969.

8 New York Times, 13 and 27 January 1961.

9 United States and Southeast Asia, Report of Senator Mike Mansfield to the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate (Washington D.C.: Government Printing Press, 1963), p. 9.Google Scholar

10 Eisenhower, op. cit., pp. 607, 609–610.

11 State Department Bulletin, XLIV (16 January 1971). p. 76; Keesings, vol. 13, 1961–62, p. 17978; New York Times, 31 December 1960 and 1, 6, 27 January 1961; Washington Post, 25 December 1960; United States in World Affairs, 1960, pp. 284–85.

12 Cambodge d'aujourdhui, January 1961. Sihanouk had also sent a memorandum to Hammerskjold but the latter, generally pursuing a policy parallel to that of the United States, completely ignored it. New York Times, 14 October 1969; Survey of International Affairs, 1959–60, p. 280; Realitees Cambodgiennes, 9 December 1960.

13 Sorensen, Theodore, Kennedy (New York: Harper and Row, 1965), p. 640.Google Scholar Also Schlesinger, Arthur, A Thousand Days, John F. Kennedy in the White House (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1965), pp. 163–64Google Scholar; Clifford, Clark, “A Vietnam Reappraisal,” Foreign Affairs, July 1969, p. 604.Google Scholar

14 Sorensen, op. cit., p. 640; Schlesinger, op. cit., pp. 307–309, 329–30; Adams, Nina S. and McCoy, Alfred W., Laos War and Revolution, (New York: Harper and Row, 1970), p. 162Google Scholar; Cooper, Chester, The Lost Crusade (New York: Dodd, Mead and Co., 1970), p. 162.Google Scholar Kennedy died before he could write his memoirs. His mind therefore has to be gauged from writings of his close associates and his own moves and speeches.

15 United States: Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States, John F. Kennedy, 1961, (Washington: Government Printing Press, 1962), pp. 16, 23.Google Scholar Hereafter cited as Public Papers, 1961, or Public Papers, 1962, as the case may be.

16 Texts of British and Soviet notes in Miscellaneous no. 25 (1965), Documents Relating to British Involvement in the Indo-China Conflict 1945–1965, Cmnd 2834, pp. 166–68; hereafter cited as British Involvement; editorial in Pravda, 23 February 1961, Keesings, vol. 13, 1961–62, p. 17979.

17 Asian Recorder, 1961, p. 3811.

18 New York Times, 20 January 1961 and Public Papers, 1961, pp. 122, 149.

19 Premier U Nu's Press Conference, 25 February 1961, The Nation, (Rangoon), 26 February 1961; Peking Review, 3 March 1961, p. 7.

20 Press Conference, 3 March 1961, Public Papers, 1961, p. 154.

21 State Department Bulletin, 27 February 1961, pp. 299 and 303; ibid., 27 March 1961, p. 436.

22 Keesings, vol. 13, 1961–62, p. 17980.

23 Hilsman, Roger, To Move a Nation (New York: Doubleday, 1967), pp. 127–29.Google Scholar

24 Ever since intensive American bombing of Pathet Lao territory and the H o Chi Minh trail began in early 1965, these two towns have been totally bombed out.

25 Dommen, Arthur, Conflict in Laos (New York: Praeger, 1964), pp. 189–90 and 193Google Scholar; Peking Review, 3 March 1961, pp. 8–9.

26 Asian Recorder, 1961, p. 4013; Sorensen, op. cit., pp. 510–11, 641–43; Hilsman, op. cit., pp. 131–32.

27 Text in Public Papers, 1961, pp. 213–18.

28 On the CIA role in the Cambodian coup, see Mahajani, Usha, “Foreign Role in the Cambodian Coup,” National Herald, (New Delhi), 22 November 1970Google Scholar; Mayer, Charles, “CIA Role in the Cambodian Coup,” American Report (New York), 26 March 1971, p.I.Google Scholar

29 Dommen, op. cit., p. 191. Also Kennedy's conversations with Chalmers Roberts, Washington Post, 30 November 1962.

30 Sorensen, op. cit., p. 644. At another stage Kennedy stated that Laos, like Berlin and Cuba, provided a potential ground for “major clashes with the communists” which “is rather unhealthy in a nuclear age”. ibid., p. 724. Similar comments by Ambassador Sullivan, Laos Hearings, 1969, p. 419.

31 Statement, 15 June 1961, Hearings on International Development and Security Acts, 87th Congress, 1st session, HR 7372 (Washington D.C.: Government Printing Press, 1961), p. 340Google Scholar; Peking Review, no. 14, 7 April 1961, pp: 12–13.

32 Text of SEATO resolution in New York Times, 30 March 1961; also editorial, “SEATO and the Soviets,” ibid., 31 March 1961.

33 News Conference of Tiao Sopsaisana, Boun Oum's Foreign Minister, 19 April 1961, Asian Recorder, 1961, p. 4016.

34 Hilsman, op. cit., p. 134.

35 White House Conference on 1 May 1961; Sorensen, op. cit., p. 646.

36 State of the Union message, 25 May 1961, Documents on American Foreign Relations, 1961, p. 72.

37 Joint statement, 26 March 1961, Public Papers, 1961, pp. 228–29; Hilsman, op. cit., p. 131.

38 Dommen, op. cit., p. 190. An American-piloted C-47 transport plane had just been shot down and the only survivor, a major, was in Pathet Lao hands.

39 Article in Pravda, 28 March 1961. Kennedy's meeting with Gromyko on, that very day was also not a one way traffic of warnings from the United States to the Soviet Union. Asian Recorder, 1961, p. 4016; Keesings, vol. 13, 1961–62, p. 18561; Hanson Baldwin, “The Realities of Laos — View is that Rise in Communist Arms will make U.S. ‘Put Up or Shut Up’,” New york Times, 7 March 1961; ibid., 28 March 1961.

40 See Hilsman, op. cit., p. 133; Dommen, op. cit., p 204; Lancaster, Donald, The Emancipation of French Indochina (London: Oxford University Press, 1961), pp. 330–37.Google Scholar

41 Press Conference, 15 March 1961, Public Papers, 1961, p. 185.

42 New York Times, 30 March 1961.

43 ibid., 28 March 1961.

44 Pravda, 27 March 1961. cited in Asian Recorder, 1961, p. 4016.

45 ibid., p. 4016; New York Times, 31 March 1961; nos. 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, British Involvement, pp. 171–74; State Department Bulletin, XXXXIV (8 May 1961), pp. 688–89: Hilsman, op. cit., p. 133.

46 Hilsman, op. cit., pp. 135 and 139; Dommen, op. cit., p. 204; Schlesinger, op. cit., p. 313. Sihanouk, whose help was sought by Harriman, was probably instrumental in arranging the meeting. Details in Field, Michael, The Prevailing Wind, Witness in Indochina (London; Methuen, 1965), p. 130.Google Scholar

47 Hilsman, op. at., p. 129.

48 Statesman (Calcutta), 5 January 1961 and New York Times. 19–20 January 1961; Asian Recorder, 1961; p. 3811. Author's italics.

49 Le Monde, 4 February 1961; Peking Review, no. 10, 10 March 1961, pp. 14–15. Phouma was then also engaged in negotiating with the Right-wing behind the backs of Kong Lae and the Pathet Lao who alone recognized and in fact made him Prime Minister. His deals with Phoumi Nosavan were publicly praised by the State Department. Keesings, vol. 13, 1961–62, pp. 17977 and 17980.

50 Galbraith, John K., Ambassador's Journal (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1969), p. 177Google Scholar; Hilsman, op. cit.. pp. 138–39.

51 Debate on 5 September 1961, Nation (Rangoon), 7 September 1961; Agence Khmer de Presse, 6 September 1961; Lall, op. cit., p. 167.

52 The actual proceedings are classified. Summaries of various speeches are given in Modelski, George, International Conference on the Settlement of the Laotian Question 1961–62, Department of International delations, The Australian National University, Canberra, 1962Google Scholar; also Lall, Arthur, How China Negotiates (New York: Columbia University Press, 1968)Google Scholar chapt. XIII; and Le Monde, South China Morning Post, Globe and Mail, Pravda, Nation (Rangoon), all for 16–31 May 1961; Asian Recorder, 1961, Keesings, vol. 13, 1961–62; and State Department Bulletin, vol. 44, 5 June 1961, pp. 844–48; ibid., 26 June 1961, pp. 1023–27.

53 Joint statement, 4 June 1961, Documents on American Foreign Relations, 1961, p. 136. The two leaders also discussed nuclear tests, Germany and disarmament but only agreed on Laos. Harriman had flown to Paris to brief Kennedy on the sluggish non-activity that had paralyzed the Conference. Le Monde, 1 and 3 June 1961.

54 This point has been stressed by Averell Harriman, Official Report of the United States Delegation to the International Conference on the Settlement of the Laotian Question, Geneva, Switzerland, May 16, 1961-July 23, 1962, submitted to the Secretary of State, 21 September 1962, p. 5.

55 Sorensen, op. cit., pp. 553 and 648.

56 Harriman, op. cit., pp. 5 and 25. His report repeatedly points out when and why various American demands were dropped in the interest of international conciliation. For further details on the intricacies and interplay of diplomatic moves, see Lall, op. cit., pp. 107–12; and John J. Czyzak and Carl F. Salans, “The International Conference on the Settlement of the Laotian Question and the Geneva Agreements of 1962,” American Journal of International Law, vol. 57, 1963, pp. 300–17. The authors were among the four who prepared the Harriman Report.

57 Le Monde, 2–3 July 1961; Pravda 24 June 1961, Current Digest of Soviet Press, vol. XIII, no. 25, 19 July 1961, p. 26. American press did not give extensive coverage to the Laotian question and the Geneva Conference.

58 Le Monde, 2–3 July 1961

59 Peking Review, no. 38, 22 September 1961, p. 11.

60 New York Times, 12, 15 and 23 September 1961. Harriman in his report (.op. cit., pp. 6–7) states that his main purpose was to visit Phouma and “make clear to him the conditions precedent to American support for him” as Prime Minister.

61 News Conference, 11 October 1961, Public Papers, 1961, p. 660; New York Times, 23 September 1961; Time, 29 September 1961, p. 33; ibid., 27 October 1961, p. 33.

62 62 Peking Review, no. 47, 24 November 1961, p. 11 and speeches of U.S. and Laotian Rightwing delegates, 1 November 1961, Modelski, op. cit., pp. 128–29.

63 The ICC report of 2 November confirmed the incident over Xieng Khouang. Four U.S.F-84 strafed Mahaxay on 19 January 1962. Peking Review, no. 2, 12 January 1962, p. 6; ibid., no. 5, 2 February 1962, pp. 8–10; ibid., no. 17, 27 April 1962, pp. 9–10. Subsequently western sources corroborated these charges. Adams and McCoy, op. cit., pp. 311–19; Report by Jacque Nevard from Vientiane,New York Times, 22 February 1962.

64 New York Times, 10, 11, 12, 13 May 1962. The leftist version is given in Burchett, Wilfred, The Furtive War, The United States in Vietnam and Laos (New York: International Publishers, 1963), pp. 204–205.Google Scholar

65 The United States expressed its “concern” indicating that the Nam Tha incident would provoke an American response. New York Times, 10 May 1962.

66 Kennedy's announcement, Public Papers, 1962, p. 396; see also New York Times, 11, 12, 13, 16, 30 May and 1 and 3 June 1962; Hilsman, op. cit., pp. 143–50; Wise and Ross, op. cit., pp. 151–52.

67 New York Times, 8, 12 January 1962; Wise and Ross, op. cit., pp. 152–53; Asian Recorder, 1962, pp. 4399, 4421, 4480, 4542, and 4592; Hilsman, op. cit., pp. 137–40; Dommen, op. cit., p. 216.

68 Harriman was not the ideal choice of the hard liner cold warriors in the State Department. They were opposed to giving him a free hand to carry on negotiations after November 1961 when he had compromised on many aspects of the ICC. Kennedy overruled them. Galbraith, op. cit., pp. 178, 242–43.

69 The only way to acquire even a fraction of an idea of this post-1962, total U.S. involvement in Laos is to read the entire texts of Adams and McCoy, op. cit., and Laos Hearings. 1969. The latter are as informative through heavy deletions as through inclusions of extensive testimony.