390.1115A/7–3144
The Ambassador in China (Gauss) to the Secretary of State
[Received August 14.]
Sir: I have the honor to refer to despatch no. 55, July 25, 1944, from the Consulate General at Kunming, entitled “Protection of Americans in Combat Areas in China”, which is going forward in the same pouch as this despatch.
Mr. Langdon sent me his despatch for forwarding or return to him for revision if that seemed desirable; I am forwarding it because I believe that he should be free to place his opinions before the Department and because also the Department should have the benefit of his opinions. The Embassy, however, does not concur in the views he expresses with regard to the possible return to combat areas of American civilian residents, chiefly missionaries, who have recently withdrawn from southeastern China. We believe with General Chennault (enclosure no. 346 to Mr. Langdon’s despatch) that the situation does not justify the return of civilian residents to the areas in question and are accordingly of the opinion that those who have withdrawn to Kunming and elsewhere should be advised not to return to their stations and should not be afforded any facilities—passport or transportation—for return. We believe also that evacuees now temporarily in Kunming should be urged to make arrangements as soon as possible to proceed to the United States.
Our frequent telegraphic reports on the military and political situation will, it is believed, provide the Department with sufficiently full information in support of our attitude. While Hengyang has not yet fallen to the Japanese its early fall is anticipated and the way will then be open for the investment of Kweilin. Notwithstanding the heavy attacks on Japanese supply lines by the U.S. 14th Air Force, Japanese need of eliminating or neutralizing our southeastern air bases is as great as ever and military and other observers are in general in agreement that if the Japanese wish to make the effort they can in due course capture Kweilin, thus creating a threat to Kweiyang and even Kunming. In these circumstances it seems to us highly advisable that the process of withdrawal continue and that every effort be made to oppose the return of persons who have withdrawn.
In comment on Mr. Langdon’s suggestion that Americans should not expect special protection of any kind or protection different from that available to the Chinese, I have to point out that Americans, Britons and other Occidentals of the United Nations, in areas in China occupied by the Japanese forces, have not been treated by the occupying [Page 138] forces simply as members of the local population, more or less free to carry on their daily life and occupations as usual, subject only to such general military restrictions as the occupying commander may direct. Without reference to their callings, or their activities, they are singled out as Occidentals for special, harsh treatment at the hands of the Japanese, being detained, frequently mistreated and subjected to indignities, and generally interned in special concentration camps for Occidentals under conditions which have given the American and other Governments and their authorities in China considerable anxiety.
This differentiation by the Japanese between Chinese and Occidentals justifies the special concern and consideration of the American authorities in reference to the safety of our nationals likely to come under Japanese occupation; and it justifies our warnings to our nationals to withdraw. It also justifies the special consideration given by the American authorities in affording such assistance for withdrawal as can be extended by our military air detachments and others without detriment to the war effort.
Respectfully yours,
- Not printed.↩