893.00/5–345: Telegram

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

719. While all Chungking papers carried accounts of my press conference on April 29 [28],27 only two have commented thereon. Summaries of these comments are as follows:

1.
Kuo Min Kung Pao utilized occasion to urge increased freedom of speech and press and early recognition of other political parties. DSP [?] also urged that more detailed preparations be made for meeting of National Congress on November 12 “after which we shall be citizens of a democratic country”. Editorial stated that China must have suffered incalculable losses simply because of [apparent omission] news reporting and expression of public opinion which has put the Chinese people in “a half blind and half deaf style with regard to the shape and form of their own country, even in this age of telegraph and radio communication”. Paper further stated that China urgently needs democracy and unity and will even more so after war; “unless a democratic and united China emerges, our war of resistance will have been fought in vain and our ambitious hopes for national reconstruction will be crushed.”
2.
Hsin Hua Jih Pao published item in translation of OWI28 English version of press conference instead of using brief Central News Agency translation as did all other papers. Accompanying editorial declared that my statement with regard to armed political parties [Page 368] was at variance with facts; that Chou En-lai had telegraphed me requesting Communist representation at the San Francisco Conference only after I had suggested to Chou that Communist [apparent omission] on the Chinese delegation would have a beneficial effect and that Chou approached [apparent omission] mediate with the Central Government. Editorial also stated that when I came to China “under orders of the late President Roosevelt to advance democratic union of all anti-Japanese military forces in China and to mediate in the relations between the Kuomintang and the Communist Party”, I approached the Communists first rather than vice versa. (This assertion is apparently false as I received several telegrams from General Chu Teh inviting me to visit Yenan before I finally acceded to his request. This fact, however, may not necessarily be known to the local Communist paper.) Paper stated further that I “once approved of a democratic coalition government in order to obtain true unification of China. For this we should be deeply thankful.” (This statement is true.) However, editorial continued in view of important part played in war of resistance by the Communist Party, one delegate and two attachés out of Chinese delegation numbering 75 persons to the San Francisco Conference are “wholly insufficient”. (With this I also agree but I am, of course, not in a position to criticize National Government. The fact remains however that I did obtain for the Communists representation at San Franciso.)

Notwithstanding the above references, the general tone of the editorial is not unfriendly.

Sent to Department, repeated to London and Moscow.

Hurley
  1. See telegram No. 722, May 4, from the Ambassador in China, p. 374.
  2. Office of War Information.