893.00/10–1344
Memorandum of Conversation, by Mr. Willys R. Peck of the Division of Cultural Cooperation
Mr. Peck called upon Dr. T. F. Tsiang, Director of Political Affairs of the Executive Yuan, Chinese Delegate to UNRRA,26a etc., in order to discuss with him cultural cooperation with China. Dr. Tsiang will leave the United States in a few days to return to China.
The following is the gist of the conversation:
Mr. Peck raised the question whether joint cultural cooperation between the United States, China and the Soviet Union would be possible. Dr. Tsiang did not think it would be possible.
Dr. Tsiang remarked that international cooperation between nations was possible, even if methods were different, provided the nations started with the same premises and the same objectives. He did not think that the Soviet Union started with the same international political premises or had the same objectives as the other nations in the “Big Four”, i. e. United Kingdom, United States, and China.
Mr. Peck remarked that he had no participation whatsoever in the political work of the Department of State, but merely as a reader of the American press, he thought it was evident that the United States was trying to promote friendly relations between China and the Soviet Union; likewise, as a reader, he felt it was evident that the Chinese Government, also, was trying to promote friendly relations with the Soviet Union. The recent removal of General Sheng Shih-tsai, Governor of Sinkiang, for the admitted reason that this would please the Soviet Union, was a case in point.
Dr. Tsiang admitted the general truth of these deductions. He was formerly Chinese Ambassador to the Soviet Union. From this background he observed that he would like to engage in pure speculation. He conjectured whether it was possible that the Soviet Union, observing that the United States was determined to put China in the first rank as one of the “Big Four”, felt that the American objective was to obtain an adherent in this group. The Soviet Government observes that Great Britain has, in addition to the members of the British Commonwealth, a number of friendly governments in Western Europe and elsewhere. The United States has a similar group of friendly nations in the Western-Hemisphere; the Soviet Government wishes to acquire a similar group.
Dr. Tsiang remarked that when it came to matters under discussion by the four powers in UNRRA, for example, he had not thought it desirable invariably to side openly with Great Britain and the United States, with the Soviet Government standing alone. In [Page 642] such cases he had felt that it would be better not to press for a vote. Granting that the American Government wished to increase intimacy between the Soviet Union and China, he wondered whether this aspect of relations between the four powers had been “thought through”.
Turning to internal conditions in China as they might affect cultural cooperation between the United States and China, Mr. Peck asked about the so-called “Communist” question, hoping to elicit some observations.
Dr. Tsiang said that Chinese opinion had been considerably irked by the many articles published in the American press which indicated an idealistic conception of the motives and activities of the Communist regime and guerrilla forces. He said that the Communists themselves claimed to have only some 400,000 troops and it was well known that these troops are very badly equipped. He said that it is a military axiom that guerrilla forces cannot produce any decisive effect against well-equipped organized troops. The detriment of these forces to united action in China had been demonstrated by the circumstance that in any region in which the Communist forces outnumbered the forces of the national government, they had taken forceful action and assumed control of territory. For example, at one stage, the Communist Fourth Army has asserted itself in the province of Kiangsu, an area that had not been assigned to them as a sphere of operations.
Mr. Peck inquired what part the so-called “minority parties” want to take in China. Dr. Tsiang said that he saw no objection to the existence and recognition of the minority parties; they would not affect matters materially in any way. Mr. Peck remarked that the admission in China that minority parties existed was something that was very pleasing to the American public, which believed in free opinion and free speech. He said that when there was a complete absence of any public opinion critical of the government or regime in power, the American public was apt to deduce that it was due to suppression of free speech.
Dr. Tsiang observed, in regard to this, that the American people seemed to regard the Soviet Union as a democracy. In 1937 when he was Ambassador to Russia, he, as well as the British and American Ambassador, had attended the meeting at which was adopted the constitution of the Soviet Union. Each article, as he recollected numbering over forty, was read aloud and a voice vote was called for. There was no negative vote in regard to any of the articles. In China, on the other hand, there has been free discussion in the People’s Political Council, even by Communist members.
Questioned in regard to the general attitude of the Chinese people toward the war, Dr. Tsiang said that undoubtedly the Chinese people [Page 643] were dissatisfied with the conduct of the war. He thought China was prepared to accept the thesis that the defeat of Germany must be the primary objective, but they felt in consideration of the small amount of material equipment that had been supplied to China under Lend-Lease, as compared with supplies to the Soviet Union, it was unjust that the Chinese Army should be so criticized in the American press for failure to win victories over the Japanese.
Note: This conversation had the background of many years’ association between Dr. Tsiang and Mr. Peck in China.
- United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration.↩