795.00/1–754: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Embassy in the Soviet Union1
priority
444. 1. As summarized in Deptel 639 to New Delhi,2 being repeated Moscow as Deptel 443, we took position at Panmunjom talks that Soviet Union should attend Korean Political Conference as full voting participant. Chinese representative insisted USSR be invited as nonvoting neutral.
2. Chinese representative in informal conversation with Indian NNRC officials reported to have stated he unable understand why Ambassador Dean insisted USSR attend as voting participant and be signatory to conference agreements and asked if Dean intended this as insult to CPR. He also expressed surprise when Indians expressed conviction US would never agree have USSR attend as a neutral.
In reporting conversation to Ambassador Dean, Indians indicated it was their impression Chinese regard CPR as principal Communist power concerned with Korean matters and would be willing withdraw their proposal USSR be invited as neutral if we would not insist on its being a voting participant.
We have no other indication Chinese attitude, but question arises whether CPR, having already suggested secondary status for USSR, may in fact prefer USSR not attend conference in any capacity. If so, further question is whether CPR could or would agree to exclusion USSR.
3. For our part we are prepared reconsider our position in view present estimate that conference will not be able achieve major agreements re Korea’s future and likely at best do no more than arrange modus vivendi to supersede or supplement Armistice Agreement. In our view, Soviet adherence such arrangements not essential. We are of course also interested in possibility testing CPR-USSR relationship.
4. Your comments would be appreciated as to desirability and feasibility political conference without USSR and implications such a conference for CPR-USSR relations.