Document date: 04/17/2018
Document type: PAPER-TEXTUAL DOCUMENT

## Page 1

JFK ASSASSINATION SYSTEM

IDENTIFICATION FORM

AGENCY : NARA

RECORD NUMBER : 176-10036-10263

RECORD SERIES : National Security Files: William H. Brubeck

AGENCY FILE NUMBER

ORIGINATOR : NUFK

FROM :

TO :

TITLE : John F. Kennedy document Control Record

DATE : 5/28/1963

PAGES :12

_SUBJECTS :

DOCUMENT TYPE :

CLASSIFICATION :

RESTRICTIONS :

CURRENT STATUS :

DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 9/10/2000

OPENING CRITERIA :

COMMENTS : National Security Files, Box 383: Congo 2/63-7/63. Box 3.

49061

DocId: 32626331

Page

---

## Page 2

19a

CONFIDENTIAL.

GONGO OIL REMINERY PROBLEM

At the time of the Congo's independence and ever since there

have been four petroleum companies operating in the Congo: Mobil

(US), Petrofina (Belgian), Shell (UK), and Texaco (US/Canadian).

They have been exclusively engaged in the distribution of refined

products; there are neither wells nor refineries in the Congo.

A year or so ago, these four compantes began serious consi

deration of a proposal to build a refinery in the Congo which would

be jointly owned by the foux compandes (with possible provision for

the Congo Goverment sharing in the ownership) to refine products

for consumption in the Congo with, because of product mis, surplus

for reexport.

The crude would be brought in from Gabon.

purpose the four companies would form a consortium in the form of a

wholly for jointly with the COC) owned subsidiary.

The consortium delayed taking any definitive steps toward im-

plementation of this proposal until the fate of the katanga secession

became clear.

Shortly after the events of last December-January the

consortium told us that they were preparing a formal approach to the

Congolase Government for permiasion to build the refinery and to pur-

chase land on which to build it.

The formal approach was not in fact

made until February 18, 1963, although In December Adoula had given

the project his informal blessing.

Meantime, the Italian company, ENI,

sent representatives to leo and quickly negotiated a contract to build

a refinery.

The news of that negotlation became public before the

consortium made its approach to the COQ. The consortium, speaking to

us through Mobil, Indicated great concern that the provisions of the

INt contract were monopolistie and would exclude the consortium refinery

altogether. The consortium also feared that the ENt contract would

ultimately put them out of business as distributors. Mobil asked ua to

use our Influence with the God to see that it had a chance to have ita

proposal fairly presented and considered by the GOC. Particularly be-

cause Mobil (to a greater extent than the three other members of the

consortium) had cooperated with the USG in every way with regard to ita

activities in Ratanga and had seen some risks in doing so, the Department

Instructed Ambassador Gullion to make a very firm approach to Adoula

requesting an opportunity for the consortium to present its proposal

and to have it fairly considered by the GOC. Ambassador Gullion made

this approach to Adoula and got his concurience with our request.

The consortiun did not ask for an exclusive right to build a refinery

and has specified its willingness to refine crude for other distributors

Including ENI, but is convinced that 1f 1t gets permisalon to build ENI

will not go ahead with 1ta project. The consortium presented 1ts

proposal to the GOC on February 18, 1963, but the latter has not yet

have fron time to time urged officiala of the COC to approve the

consortium's proposal and our reporte have indicated that virtually all of the

Council of Ministers, which must approve 1t, are in favor of 1t. There

•1.

CONFIDENTIAL

HH 19061 DocId: 32626331 Page 2

---

## Page 3

CONFIDENTIAL

has, nevertheless, been considerable delay on this matter, perhaps

indicating a serious lack of agreement among the Council of Ministers.

Mobil and other members of the consortium have indicated that they

believe the Council'y failure to act favorably la a result of

bribery by ENI.

Our Embassy has stated that there is evidence that

some GOC officials "may have received favors from ENI" and this is

perhaps borne out by the fact that Tona-Masea, Deputy Director,

Bureau of Economic Coordination, is to be President of the ENI-

sponsored Congo refinery company.,

• Our most recent report from the Embasay (Leo's 2891, May 25)

indicates that an Embassy officer raised the matter with Acting

Prime Minister Rasongo on May 22. Although Kasongo stated that he

was concerned about possible production in excess of the Congo's

requirements and of the ability to re-export, he nevertheless assured

the Embassy officer that the consortium's proposal would be approved.

(On the other hand, Mobil states that it recently refused a request

from Rasongo for a $2.5 million bribe.)

The same message reported that Mobil'a representative in

Leopoldville stated that Mobil and possibly other members of the

consortium would undertake a high pressure publicity campaign to

suggest that the ENI contract (and by implication GOC's failure to

approve the consortium's contract) was the result of corruption in the

Adoula Goverment.

The Department is currently making Inquirtes about

this suggested publicity campaign by Mobil.

Group 4

Downgraded at 3 year

Intervale; declassified

after 12 years.

AF: AFC: AWFord:mr/edr 5/28/63

CONFIDENTIAL

HH 49061 DooId: 32626331

Page 3

---