Foreign Relations of the United States, Diplomatic Papers, 1943, China

893.44 Chiang Kai-shek/122

The Ambassador in China (Gauss) to the Secretary of State

[Extracts]

No. 1651

Chungking, October 6, 1943.
[Received October 28.]

Sir: Referring to the Embassy’s despatch No. 1220 of May 31, 1943, in regard to the publication of General Chiang Kai-shek’s book China’s Destiny, I have the honor to enclose⁵⁶ (a) a copy of a critical review of the book written by a Chinese Communist and distributed in English translation by Communist Party representatives at Chungking; (b) a brief digest of the review prepared by the Embassy; and (c) a copy of an article entitled “Questioning the Kuomintang,” which is said to have appeared in the Communist daily at Yenan on July 12, 1943, and which was received by the Embassy from Communist sources.

Summary. The review of Chiang Kai-shek’s book is bitterly critical of the Kuomintang, expresses belief that the author of China’s Destiny opposes democracy and states that the viewpoints in the book contradict those of Dr. Sun Yat-sen. The article from the Communist daily at Yenan is equally critical of the Kuomintang and charges many Kuomintang members with being traitors. These articles, together with similar articles by Chinese Communist writers distributed in Chungking, apparently mark the beginning of a Communist campaign to expose Kuomintang shortcomings as a means of meeting the recently inaugurated Kuomintang press propaganda campaign to give publicity to Communist “crimes.” Possibilities of any agreement between the two parties are expected to be lessened by the increasing bitterness likely to result from this propaganda war. End of summary.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

It would seem that the Chinese Communist Party is determined to meet the Kuomintang propaganda campaign to expose Communist “crimes” with one intended to give publicity to Kuomintang “crimes.” The Communist delegate to the Third People’s Political Council has informed an officer of the Embassy that the Chinese Communist Party has been forced to take such action because: (1) at the end of June when General Chou En-lai and General Lin Piao returned to Yenan, the Communist Party had assumed that the Kuomintang intended to reach a political settlement of outstanding questions between the two parties, but the concentration of Central Government troops around the Communist areas during early July convinced the Communists that a military solution was the only one envisaged by the Kuomintang; and (2) the Kuomintang had long called the Communists “traitors” and their armies “traitor armies” and had recently begun a press campaign to discredit the Communists and to make a pretense of strong public opinion for the disbandment of the Communist Border Government and its army. Thus in self defense the Communists, who had never directly attacked the Kuomintang in their propaganda, were now forced to retaliate and expose Kuomintang “crimes.”

It may be concluded that, in spite of the ostensibly conciliatory policy adopted by the Kuomintang at the time of the C. E. C. Plenary Session in September, a lessening of tension between the Kuomintang and Communist parties is scarcely to be expected if the propaganda campaigns continue with resultant growing bitterness between the two.⁵⁷

Respectfully yours,

C. E. Gauss

56. Enclosures not printed.
57. In a memorandum dated November 5 Augustus S. Chase of the Division of Far Eastern Affairs made the following comment: “This despatch describes a newly launched Chinese Communist propaganda campaign against the Kuomintang … A surprising feature of the new campaign is the fact that the Communists appear to have been distributing their propaganda openly at Chungking—even using the local mails.”