Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-5wvtr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T06:21:45.290Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Free France, the British Government and the Future of French Indo-China, 1940–45

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 April 2011

Martin Thomas
Martin Thomas
Affiliation:
University of the West of England
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article traces the development of Gaullist and British policies with respect to Indo-China from the fall of France in 1940 to the end of the Far Eastern war five years later. Directed toward restoring imperial influence in Southeast Asia, these policies were sophisticated and complex, but they bore little fruit owing to the relative strategic insignificance of Indo-China during this period, and the imperatives of Anglo-American relations.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Southeast Asian Studies , Volume 28 , Issue 1 , March 1997 , pp. 137 - 160
Copyright
Copyright © The National University of Singapore 1997

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

The author wishes to thank the British Academy for a personal research grant which funded the research for this article. He is grateful to Dr Kent Fedorowich and Dr Glyn Stone for their comments on earlier drafts of this paper.

1 Stein, Tønnesson, The Vietnamese Revolution of 1945. Roosevelt, Ho Chi Minh and de Gaulle in a World at War (London: Prio/Sage, 1991), p. 156;Google ScholarDunn, Peter M., The First Vietnam War (London: Hurst, 1985), pp. 59–63.Google Scholar

2 See, for example, the work by Sbrega, John J., Anglo-American Relations and Colonialism in East Asia, 1941–1945 (New York: Garland, 1983)Google Scholar, and his articles: “‘First Catch Your Hare’: Anglo American Perspectives on Indochina during the Second World War”, Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 14, 1 (Mar. 1983): 63–78;CrossRefGoogle Scholar“The Anticolonial Policies of Franklin D. Roosevelt. A Reappraisal”, Political Science Quarterly 101 (1986): 65–84;CrossRefGoogle Scholar“Determination versus Drift: The Anglo-American Debate over the Trusteeship Issue, 1941–1945”, Pacific Historical Review 55, 2 (May 1986): 256–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar See also, Hess, Gary R., “Franklin Roosevelt and Indochina”, Journal of American History 59 (Sept. 1972): 353–68;CrossRefGoogle ScholarLafeber, W., “Roosevelt, Churchill and Indochina, 1942–5”, American Historical Review 80 (Dec. 1975): 1277–95;Google ScholarChristopher, Thorne, “Indochina and Anglo-American Relations, 1942–1945”, Pacific Historical Review 45, 1 (Feb. 1976): 73–96Google Scholar [this also appears as chapter 4 in Thorne, C., Border Crossings (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1988)];Google ScholarDuiker, William J., U.S. Containment Policy and the Conflict in Indochina (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1994);Google ScholarWatt, Donald Cameron, Succeeding John Bull. America in Britain's Place, 1900–1975 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984), pp. 194–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Dunn, First Vietnam War, pp. 69–112. For a summary, see Tønnesson, Vietnamese Revolution, pp. 13–1

3 Thorne, Border Crossings, pp. 90–91; Sbrega, “First Catch Your Hare”, pp. 66–68.

4 Peter, Dennis, Troubled Days of Peace. Mountbatten and South East Asia Command, 1945– 46 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1987);Google ScholarDreifort, John E., Myopic Grandeur. The Ambivalence of French Foreign Policy toward the Far East, 1919–1945 (Kent, Ohio: Kent State University Press, 1991).Google Scholar A more detailed work is Stein Tønnesson's excellent Vietnamese Revolution, though his focus is upon the internal dynamics of the Vietnamese nationalist movement. Most recently, Martin Shipway has examined the break-down of French plans for reform and reconstruction in Indo-China from the 1944 Liberation to 1947, see his The Road to War. France and Vietnam, 1944–1947 (Oxford: Berghahn, 1996),Google Scholar part II. In works on the Free French, reference to Indo-China is scanty. Neither François, Kersaudy'sChurchill and De Gaulle (London: Collins, 1981),Google Scholar nor the excellent new study by Jean-Louis, Crémieux-Brilhac, La France Libre. De I'Appel du 18 Juin à la Libération (Paris: Gallimard, 1996),Google Scholar makes any mention of Indo-China at all.

5 Marshall, D. Bruce, The French Colonial Myth and Constitution-Making in the Fourth Republic (London: Yale University Press, 1973), pp. 133–34.Google Scholar

6 Decoux, Admiral Jean, A la barre de l'Indochine. Histoire de mon Gouvernement Général (1940–1945) (Paris: Plon, 1949).Google Scholar

7 Philippe, Devillers, Histoire du Viet-Nam de 1940 à 1952 (Paris: Editions le Seuil, 1952);Google ScholarGilbert, Sabattier, Le Destin de l'Indochine, souvenirs et documents 1941–1951 (Paris: Plon, 1952).Google Scholar Devillers did not write his own “documentary record” of wartime events in Vietnam until 1988: Paris-Saigon-Hanoi, les archives de la guerre, 1944–1947 (Paris: Gallimard, 1988). His earlier history was, like Sabattier's, very much written from a personal perspective.Google Scholar

8 Sainteny's, Histoire d'une paix manquée. Indochine 1945–1947, was reprinted by Fayard (Paris) in 1967.Google Scholar

9 Institut Charles de Gaulle, Gilbert, Pilleul (ed.), Le Général de Gaulle et l'Indochine 1940– 1946 (Paris: Plon, 1982).Google Scholar

10 Churchill College, Cambridge archive, MISC 17, A.C.M. Walter Cheshire, Memoir of allied disarmament commission, “The Gremlin Task Force”, n.d. 1965.

11 Ministère des affaires étrangères archive, Paris (hereafter MAE), Fonds Vichy, série E/Asie, vol. 255, tel. 272, Platon to General Charles Huntziger, 15 Oct. 1940; Service Historique de l’ Armée de Terre, Vincennes (hereafter SHAT), carton lP118/dossier 1, General Carles, Chef de l'Etat-Major des Colonies, bulletin mensuel de renseignements no. 3, Dec. 1940-Feb. 1941, pp. 59–67.

12 Raoul, Aglion, Roosevelt and de Gaulle. Allies in Conflict. A Personal Memoir (New York: Macmillan/Free Press, 1988), pp. 128–29, 184–90.Google Scholar

13 MAE, Archives Privées, Papiers Maurice Dejean, vol. 25, tel. 420, Tixier to de Gaulle, 1 June 1942.

14 Smith, Richard Harris, OSS. The Secret History of America's First Central Intelligence Agency (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1972).Google Scholar

15 Charles, Cruickshank, SOE in the Far East (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1983), pp. 122–36.Google Scholar

16 Duiker, U.S. Containment Policy, pp. 10–14, 22–26.

17 This is analyzed at length in Thome, Border Crossings, pp. 89–90, 98–100.

18 d'Alzon, Claude Hesse, La Presence Militaire Française en Indochine, 1940–1945 (Paris: Service Historique, Vincennes, 1985), pp. 85–87Google Scholar; SHAT 1P34/D7, Amirauté Française, section militaire, procès verbal, réunion interministerielle, 5 Oct. 1940. From Bastille Day, 1942, the Free French movement formally adopted the name “France Combattante” — “Fighting France”. In this article, the terms “Free French” and “Fighting French” are used interchangeably.

19 Tønnesson, Vietnamese Revolution, pp. 103–104.

20 Sainteny, Histoire d'une paix manquée, pp. 25–30; Christophe Babinet, “L'action du général de Gaulle en Indochine à partir de la Chine”, in De Gaulle et l'Indochine, pp. 43–45.

21 Emissaries were sent to Algiers and Paris in 1943–44, but achieved minimal success, see Tønnesson, Vietnamese Revolution, pp. 47–48.

22 Public Record Office, London (hereafter PRO), War Office Directorate of Military Intelligence files, WO 208/3040, F11986/87/10, Sir R.I. Campbell, Paris, to R.G. Howe, FO, 16 Nov. 1939.

23 MAE, Vichy-Asie, vol. 261, tel. 1, Charles-Arsène Henry, Tokyo, to direction politique, Vichy, Jan. 1941. The US government had been relatively sympathetic about these French capitulations; see Hurstfield, Julian G., America and the French Nation, 1939–1945 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1986), pp. 20–21.Google Scholar

24 Laffey, John F., “French Far Eastern Policy in the 1930s”, Modern Asian Studies 23, 1 (1989): 124–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

25 PRO, Air Ministry correspondence files, AIR 2/4128, Joint Naval and Air Staff sub-committee, “Report of Anglo French Conference at Singapore, June 1939”, 23 June 1939; Documents Diplomatiques Français, 2nd ser., vol. XVII, pp. 42–55.

26 Laffey, “French Far Eastern Policy”, pp. 141–43; Dreifort, Myopic Grandeur, pp. 146–54.

27 Dreifort, Myopic Grandeur, pp. 212–13. The Japanese attack on Langson stemmed from division between Japan's South China Army and the High Command in Tokyo, see Sachiko, Murakimi, “Indochina: Unplanned Incursion”, in Pearl Harbor Reexamined. Prologue to the Pacific War, ed. Hilary, Conroy and Harry, Wray (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1990), pp. 141–48.Google Scholar

28 SHAT, série K, Fonds Privés, Fonds du Général Jean Boucher de Crèvecoeur, 1K401, carton 1, General Martin, land forces commander, Indo-China, to Vichy War Ministry EMA-2, “Note sur le conflit Franco-Thailandais”, n.d. June 1941.

29 The two regions in question, around Paklay in Laos and to the north of Battambang in Cambodia, had been ceded by Siam to France in 1904 and 1907, see PRO, FO Mission to French national committee files, FO 892/30, tel. 310, Sir Robert Craigie, Tokyo, to FO, 25 Feb. 1941; Aldrich, Richard J., The Key to the South. Britain, the United States and Thailand during the Approach of the Pacific War, 1929–1942 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), pp. 289–90.Google Scholar

30 PRO, FO 892/99, tel. 32, Craigie to FO, 8 Jan. 1941.

31 See de Gaulle's much-quoted and whimsical description of Indo-China as a “great disabled ship” [un grand navire désemparé] disappearing into the mist: Gaulle, Charles de, Mémoires de Guerre. I: L'Appel, 1940–1942 (Paris: Plon, 1954), p. 145,Google Scholar also cited in translation in Jean, Lacouture, De Gaulle. I: The Rebel, 1894–1944 (London: Collins, 1990), pp. 280–81, and in Dreifort, Myopic Grandeur, p. 218.Google Scholar

32 MAE, Guerre 1939–1945, série CNF Londres, vol. 70 Indochine, Commissariat aux affaires extérieures, “Memo, relatif à la situation en Indochine”, 20 Jan. 1941; Affaires extérieures “Memo, relatif à l'Extrěme Orient”, 24 Feb. 1941.

33 Ibid.

34 SHAT, 1K401/C5, Rapport du Capitaine Caille, “Généralités: attitude Britannique vers l'lndochine”, 1 June 1941.

35 PRO, FO general correspondence, FO 371/27841, F3197/2957/61, Pleven to FO, 17 Apr.1941; F4908/2957/61, Far Eastern Dept. minutes, 12 Jun. 1941; MAE, CNF Londres, vol. 70 Indochine, Affaires extérieures, “Memo, relatif à la situation en Indochine”, 20 Jan. 1941.

36 PRO, SOE Far East files, HS 1/94, SOE memo., “S.O.E. Operations — French Indo-China, December 1941 to November 1944”.

37 MAE, CNF Londres, vol. 70, Direction des affaires politique, communiqué, 24 Jul. 1941.

38 PRO, FO 371/31771, F614/382/61, W. Mack to Far Eastern Dept., 17 Jan. 1942.

39 PRO, FO 371/31771, F908/582/61, War Office to Far Eastern Dept., 24 Jan. 1942; FO to Sir A. Clarke-Kerr, Chungking, 26 Feb. 1942.

40 MAE, CNF Londres, vol. 70, text of Reuters dispatch, 10 Feb. 1942.

41 MAE, CNF Londres, vol. 70, Escarra, Singapore, to de Gaulle, Rapport no. 1, 25 Nov. 1941. In 1943 Escarra went on to establish a Free French mission at Kunming, though he made little political impact. Regarding the wider Anglo-American strategic talks taking place in Manila in November-December 1941, see, Ian, Cowman, “Defence of the Malay Barrier? The Place of the Philippines in Admiralty Naval War Planning, 1925–1941”, War in History 3, 3 (1996): 413–17.Google Scholar

42 PRO, FO 371/31771, F3075/582/61, C.-in-C. India to WO, 16 Apr. 1942; F3140/582/61, Seymour to Eden, 25 Apr. 1942; Committee on Foreign (Allied) Resistance meeting, CFR (42) 6th meeting, 30 Apr. 1942.

43 PRO, War Office Directorate of Military Operations files, WO 193/867, tel. 61501, COS to C.-in-C. Far East, 1 Jan. 1942; Christopher, Thorne, The Far Eastern War. States and Societies, 1941–1945 (London: Unwin, 1986), pp. 106–107.Google Scholar

44 MAE, CNF Londres, vol. 70, Commissariat national à l'information, “Propagande sur l'lndochine”, 8 Aug. 1942.

45 MAE, CNF Londres, vol. 70, France Libre diplomatic memo, to Thierry d'Argenlieu, Noumea, 23 March 1942; Lt-Col. Tutenges, chef du service de renseignements, “Rapport sur la situation générate en Extrěme Orient”, 25 Feb. 1942.

46 MAE, CNF Londres, vol. 86, no. 1063, France Libre to Tixier, 16 Oct. 1942.

47 MAE CNF Londres, vol. 86, Institut des Relations de Pacifique, “Note relative à l'lndochine”, 10 Sept. 1942.

48 Hurstfield, America and the French Nation, pp. 188–89.

49 SHAT, 1K401/C1, De Crèvecoeur memo., “Histoire succinct de la création et de l'activité du détachement français des Indes”, 5 May 1945.

50 MAE, CNF Londres, vol. 73, CNF Bureau d'Indochine, 2 Apr. 1943; no. 327, “A/S de l'lndochine et les opérations futurs dans la Pacifique”, 2 Mar. 1943.

51 Grégoire, Madjarian, La question coloniale et la politique du Parti communiste français 1944– 1947 (Paris: Editions Maspero, 1977), p. 121; also cited in Philippe Devillers, Histoire de Viet- Nam, p. 110.Google Scholar

52 MAE, CNF Londres, vol. 73, no. 4195, Tixier tel., 9 Feb. 1943.

53 PRO, FO 371/35921, F4870/1422/61, minute by Strang, 8 Sep. 1943.

54 PRO, FO 371/35921, F4871/1422/61, Churchill message to Dominion heads of government, 1 Oct. 1943; Dreifort, Myopic Grandeur, p. 222.

55 PRO, FO 371/35921, F4879/1422/61, C.-in-C. India to WO, 12 Sep. 1943.

56 PRO, FO 371/35921, F4871/1422/61, note by Anthony Rumbold, 11 Sep. 1943.

57 PRO, FO 371/35930, F4023/4023/61, Memo, by G.F. Hudson, "President Roosevelt's Intentions on Indo-China", 26 Jul. 1943; Regarding the evolution of US ideas on trusteeship, see Sbrega "Determination versus Drift".

58 Cadogan did not broach the matter with Churchill until early November, see PRO, FO 371/35921, PM/43/382, Cadogan minute to Churchill, 3 Nov. 1943; Dreifort, Myopic Grandeur, p. 226.

59 PRO, FO 371/35921, F4646/1422/61, draft memo., “Indo-China and French Possessions in the Pacific”, submitted as W.P.(44)111, 16 Feb. 1944, see Prime Minister's Office files, PREM 3/178/ 2. The best account of the SEAC-China Command rivalry is Dennis, Troubled Days of Peace, chaps. 1 and 2.

60 Ibid; Thome, Border Crossings, pp. 96–97.

61 PRO, Admiralty war history cases and papers, ADM 199/1113, copy tel. Sir R. Campbell to Eden, 15 Oct. 1943; Dreifort, Myopic Grandeur, pp. 222–23.

62 PRO, FO 371/35921, F1422/1422/61, Charles Peake to William Strang, 5 March 1943. The future status of Indo-China was not resolved at Tehran, see PRO, PREM 3/178/2, Churchill to Attlee, 1 Dec. 1943.

63 PRO, SEAC files, WO 203/5068, COSSEA 6, Field Marshal Dill to ARMINDIA, 8 Nov. 1943.

64 PRO, FO 371/35921, F5379/1422/61, Sir R. Campbell, Washington, to FO, 15 Oct. 1943; F6059/1422/61, C.-in-C. SEAC, to FO, 17 Nov. 1943; F6782/1422/61, Far Eastern Dept. summary memo., 22 Nov. 1943.

65 For a summary of Chinese claims, see PRO, WO 208/3040, China Information Bulletin, no. 417, “Post-war status of French Indo-China”, 10 Aug. 1942; FO 371/35930, F5456/4023/61, minute by H. Ashley Clarke, 15 Oct. 1943; F6441/4023/61, minute by G.F. Hudson, 27 Dec. 1943.

66 Dreifort, Myopic Grandeur, pp. 230–31; Thome, Border Crossings, pp. 89–90; Dennis, Troubled Days of Peace, pp. 27–28.

67 PRO, ADM 199/1113, SEACOS 136, Mountbatten to COS, 13 Apr. 1944.

68 SHAT, 1K401/C1, MMFC, bulletin de renseignement no. 13, 19 Mar. 1944; P. Caille memo., “Note sur la résistance Indochinoise”, 9 Jun. 1944.

69 Shennan, Andrew, Rethinking France: Plans for Renewal 1940–1946 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989), pp. 146–48.Google Scholar

70 PRO, PREM 3/178/2, Eden to Churchill, 24 Dec. 1943; Churchill to Eden and Viscount Cranborne, 11 Mar. 1944; Dening to Cadogan, via Air Ministry, 11 Jan. 1944.

71 PRO, FO 371/41719, F3365/9/61, SOE memo., “French participation in the war against Japan”, 8 July 1944; HS 1/106, AD to BD/B100, New Delhi, 9 May 1944.

72 PRO, FO 371/41719, F2502/9/61, Churchill personal minute to Eden, 21 May 1944; also cited in Dreifort, Myopic Grandeur, pp. 227–28.

73 PRO, FO 371/41719, F3448/9/61, minute by W.H.B. Mack, 22 Jul. 1944.

74 PRO, HS 1/106, AD/1453, AD to V/CD, 14 Jun. 1944; Cruickshank, SOE in the Far East, pp. 123–24.

75 Gaulle, Charles de, Mémoires de Guerre, III: Le Salut, 1944–1946 (Paris: Plon, 1958), p. 192.Google Scholar

76 SHAT, 1K401/C1, Force 136 memo., “Forward planning in French Indo-China”, 20 Jun. 1944.

77 Claude Hesse d'Alzon, “L'évolution des conceptions stratégiques du commandement français en Indochine entre 1940 et 1945”, Revue d'histoire de la deuxième guerre mondiale 138, 1 (Apr. 1985): 13–15; Tønnesson, Vietnamese Revolution, pp. 50–51, 176–77.

78 Tønnesson, Vietnamese Revolution, pp. 51, 158–59.

79 MAE, Vichy-Asie, vol. 255, “Déclaration du GPRF à propos d'Indochine', 30 Aug. 1944.

80 Madjarian, La question coloniale, p. 126.

81 PRO, WO 193/195, COS(W)228, COS to JSM, Washington, 4 Aug. 1944; tel. 7532, Eden to Halifax, 25 Aug. 1944.

82 PRO, WO 193/195, tels 4617 and 4685, Halifax to Eden, 28 and 30 Aug. 1944; FO Ministers Resident papers, FO 660/227, F4018/56/G, FO to Dening, 4 Sep. 1944.

83 PRO, WO 193/195, tel. 134, Dening to Far Eastern Dept., 7 Sep. 1944.

84 PRO, WO 208/3040, China 148(a), ULTRA decode, 31 Aug. 1944.

85 PRO, WO 193/195, J.C. Sterndale-Bennett to W.T. Bett, WO/MO1, 28 Oct. 1944; Foreign Office views are summarized in Dennis, Troubled Days of Peace, pp. 25–29.

86 PRO, WO 193/195, SCAF 106, SHAEF HQ to CCOS, London, 16 Oct. 1944; Dennis, Troubled Days of Peace, pp. 30–31.

87 PRO, WO 193/195, Note by Vice CIGS, 23 Oct. 1944.

88 PRO, WO 193/195, WO note, “Participation of French naval forces in the war in the Pacific”, 22 Nov. 1944; PRO, WO 193/195, COS(45), 1st meeting, 1 Jan. 1945.

89 PRO, FO 371/46322, JP(45)83, Joint Planning Staff report, “French Indo-China — Recognition of General Blaizot”, 19 Apr. 1945, F2596/52/G61, JSM to FO, 24 Apr. 1945; PRO, WO 203/5561A, draft tel., Dening to Eden, n.d. Jan. 1945, fo. 611. Christopher Thorne has suggested that Roosevelt was more conciliatory towards Halifax at their January meeting; see Border Crossings, pp. 100–101. But the President had also objected to a French return to Indo-China in a conversation with Secretary of State, Stettinius, on 1 January, see Roosevelt to Secretary of State, 1 Jan. 1945, Foreign Relations of the United States (hereafter FRUS) (Washington: US Govt. Printing Office, 1969), 1945, vol. VI, p. 293.Google Scholar

90 PRO, ADM 199/1113, JP(45)6, JPS note, “French Resistance in Tongking”, 17 Jan. 1945.

91 Thorne, Far Eastern War, pp. 111–12; Tønnesson, Vietnamese Revolution, pp. 190–93.

92 PRO, WO 208/3042, War Office Military Intelligence, MO2, “Summary of Changes Occur[r]ed to the Japanese Forces in Indochina”, n.d. June 1945; for a full background to the coup, see Smith, R.B., “The Japanese Period in Indochina and the Coup of 9 March 1945”, Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 9, 2 (1978): 268–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

93 Nitz, Kiyoko Kurusu, “Independence without Nationalists? The Japanese and Vietnamese Nationalism during the Japanese Period, 1940–45”, Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 15, 1 (Mar. 1984): 114–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

94 PRO, WO 203/5561A, tel. 101901Z, SACSEA to Wedemeyer, 11 Jan. 1945.

95 PRO, WO 193/195, note on COS(45)143(O), “French Indo-China — letter from the Foreign Office”, 5 Mar. 1945; PRO, WO 203/5597, no. 1341, CPA to COS. 2 Feb. 1945.

96 PRO, WO 193/195, DMO note on JIC(45)339, “French Resistance in Indo-China”, 18 Mar. 1945.

97 SHAT, 1K401/C1, rapport du Lieutenant Pianelli, “Etude sur l'armée d'lndochine”, 1 May 1944.

98 PRO, FO 371/46322, COS(45)320, COS Committee memo., “French Participation in the War against Japan”, 8 May 1945; Smith, “The Japanese Period”, p. 287.

99 PRO, HS 1/106, Report on Comité Ministerielle sur l'Indochine, 30 Apr. 1945.

100 Shennan, Rethinking France, pp. 151–53; Devillers, Histoire du Viet-Nam, pp. 144–45.

101 Shipway, The Road to War, pp. 125–28.

102 Lacouture, De Gaulle. I, pp. 519, 538–39.

103 Tønnesson, Vietnamese Revolution, pp. 223–24, 259–60; Thorne, Border Crossings, pp. 98–101; PRO, HS 1/106, HNS/1597, P.N. Loxley note, 5 Jan. 1945.

104 PRO, WO 193/195, JSM 611, JSM to AMSSO, 18 Mar. 1945; CAB 122/1277, 78185, CIGS to Field Marshal Wilson, Washington, 20 Mar. 1945; Cruickshank, SOE in the Far East, p. 125.

105 PRO, WO 203/5210, CHBX 37689, Wedemeyer to Wheeler, SEAC, 19 May 1945.

106 Sainteny, Histoire d'une paix manquée, pp. 34–38.

107 PRO, WO 203/5561A, tel. 558, Counsellor, Chungking, to Dening, SEAC, 17 May 1945.

108 PRO, CAB 122/1177, FMW 16, Wilson to COS, 10 Mar. 1945.

109 SHAT, 1K401/C2, Philippe Milon, MMFC, to Wedemeyer, 12 Feb. 1945.

110 PRO, WO 193/195, tel. 485, Horace Seymour to FO, 18 May 1945; CAB 122/1177, CBFX 37689, Wedemeyer to SACSEA, 28 May 1945.

111 SHAT, Fonds Privés, Papiers du Général Marcel Alessandri, 1K306/D6, Etat-Major Forces Américaines, minutes of Wedemeyer-Sabattier interview, 4 Jun. 1945.

112 PRO, WO 203/5210, Wilson, JSM, Washington, to COS, 29 May 1945; FO 371/46322, F3239/52/G61 and F3519/52/G61, Seymour to FO, 18 and 29 May 1945.

113 PRO, CAB 122/1177, War Cabinet office to Brigadier A.T. Cornwall-Jones, 26 Feb. 1945; CIGS to Wilson, 20 Mar. 1945; FMW 100, Wilson to COS, 1 Jun. 1945.

114 Devillers, Histoire du Viet-Nam, pp. 133–35; Jean-Marie d'Hoop, “Du coup de force japonais au départ du Général de Gaulle”, in Pilleul (ed.), De Gaulle et l'Indochine, pp. 142–43.

115 SHAT, 1K306/D6, Troupes Francaises en Chine, Etat-Major Cabinet, record of Alessandri — Ho Ying Ching interview, 26 Jul. 1945.

116 PRO, CAB 122/495, JP(45)207, Joint Planning Staff report, “Liaison with European Allies”, 16 Aug. 1945; WO 203/4564, SEAC Joint Planning Staff draft memo., “Occupation of French Indo-China”, 28 Aug. 1945; WO 208/4927, Lt-Col. Chapman-Walker to WO DMI, “Report on North Indo-China”, 12 Jan. 1946.

117 FRUS, 1945, VI, US Embassy, Paris, tel. to Byrnes, 11 Aug. 1945, p. 639; Judith, Munro-Leighton, “The Tokyo Surrender: A Diplomatic Marathon in Washington, August 10–14, 1945”, Pacific Historical Review 65, 3 (Aug. 1996): 467–68.Google Scholar

118 Dunn, First Vietnam War, pp. 119–22; Duiker, William J., The Communist Road to Power in Vietnam, 2nd ed. (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1996), pp. 95–104.Google Scholar

119 PRO, CAB 122/495, JP(45)273, JPS report, “French Indo-China and Netherlands East Indies”, 14 Oct. 1945; Dennis, Troubled Days of Peace, p. 52.