Marshall Mission Files, Lot 54–D270
Notes on Conference of Three (Meeting No. 1)—General Marshall, Governor Chang Chun, Central Government Representative, and General Chou En-lai, Communist Party Representative—at General Marshall’s Residence, Chungking, January 7, 1946, 10 a.m.48
M[arshall]: If it is agreeable with you gentlemen we will proceed to the meeting. I would suggest that we have a record in English kept and that I have two stenographers to do it who will take turns. In that way we can keep abreast of the proceedings, and then as quickly as possible after each meeting I will furnish each of you gentlemen an English record and you can arrange your own translation. I have thought that we might manage the translation here, but it seemed rather difficult to do and we had had a very unfortunate experience with the previous translation. If we should have any special agreements for the minutes we could do that separately and immediately, so that there will be no delay in having the paper ready for signature in English and in Chinese. Now if that is entirely agreeable, we will proceed on that basis. As both of you gentlemen are intimately familiar with the various proposals, I think it the best to start the meeting by calling on Governor Chang, the Governor can make his proposal.
G[overnor Chang]: Governor Chang is referring to the proposed measures discussed between the representatives of the Central Government and the representatives of the Communist party on the 5th of January. We agreed that the measures concerning the cessation of hostilities and the restoration of communications should be agreed upon immediately by reference to General Marshall, and therefore we now propose to submit the question to this conference for discussion. Governor Chang asks if the chairman agrees to this proposal.
M: That is agreeable with all of us.
G: Is it agreeable to you to proceed to discussion of the concrete proposals.
M: That is agreeable. So agreed.[Page 44]
G: Now let us start to discuss an agreement for cessation of hostilities and restoration of communications. The first point to be discussed is that the agreement when complete will be submitted to the National Government and the Communist Party for execution. So we propose that the agreement when concluded will be sent to the National Government and the Communist Party, both of which will issue orders for the implementation of the details of the agreement. The first point to be contained in the proposed order will be the cessation of hostilities in the country. The second point is the restoration of communications and the removal of all obstructions to communications. The third point is that after the cessation of hostilities, all troops should maintain their present positions. For the moment, I propose these three points.
M: Has General Chou any comments to make.
C: With regard to the three points referred to by Governor Chang, General Chou wants to point out that as to the first point, cessation of hostilities should cover the entire country. With regard to the second point, the removal of all obstructions to communications, General Chou proposes that it should imply the restoration of everything that has been destroyed, and all barriers and fortifications should be removed. As to the definition of communications, it should include railways, highways, steamers, telegrams, and post service, that is, all kinds of communications. With regard to the third point he has nothing more to comment. Generally speaking, he agrees in principle with the three points. But he wants to make one addition, that is in the order of the cessation of hostilities, the date of its enforcement should be fixed. Is this called a conference or a committee or a group.
M: I leave it to you two gentlemen. You proposed it, what would you like to call it.
G: Special meeting. Just a conference.
C: Conference of three. As to supervising the implemention of this order of cessation of hostilities, General Chou suggests that a certain agency must be created from this conference for this purpose.
M: What is it, first the date, then to supervise.
G: We agree to the cessation of hostilities throughout the country, subject to certain exceptions. I mean, that although hostilities should cease in the whole country, certain military operations must be reserved in certain regions.
G: The first exception is in regard to Manchuria as the National Government troops must take over all those regions in Manchuria. The second exception covers those regions in North China outside of [Page 45]Manchuria which should be taken over in accordance with the agreement with Soviet Russia. In those cases mentioned in these two exceptions, that is Manchuria and other places in North China, which should according to the Sino-Soviet agreement be taken over by the Government, in those regions hostilities should cease, but nevertheless military operations should continue. As regards communications, it is of course understood that all communications should be restored, but the most important thing in this connection is the restoration of railroads. As regards the proposal to fix a date for the cessation of hostilities, we agree; and the proposal that an agency should be established for the supervision of the implement[at]ion of whatever decisions we may agree upon, we also accept.
C: General Chou would like to express his opinion on the explanations made by Governor Chang. With regard to the first point that the taking over of the nine provinces in Manchuria by the National Government should form an exception, General Chou suggests that it should be recorded in the minute instead of in the order. If this is agreeable to all sides then it can be discussed later on, how the wording should be formed. With regard to the second exception he thinks the claim is without foundation because in North China whatever should be taken over has already been taken over either by National Government or by the Communist Party and the right of receiving surrender was a point of hot controversy between the National Government and the Communist Party in North China resulting in the present armed hostilities in North China including Chahar and Jehol. As to the restoration of communications we agree that railway communications should first of all be restored, but at the same time, the conference of three should consider the restoration of all kinds of communications.
M: Do you wish to make any more comments.
G: The exception of the nine provinces in N. E. in my opinion should be put into the order and not into the minutes. The second exception as stated refers to those regions which according to our agreement with Soviet Russia should be taken over. For example, Chihfeng and Tolun. Chihfeng in Jehol and Tolun in Chahar on the border of Jehol. According to our agreement with Russia all these places should be taken over, therefore, after the signing of the agreement we will proceed to take over these places.
M: What does “these” mean?
G: Meaning, Chihfeng in Jehol and Tolun in Chahar and possibly other places, if any, for according to our agreement with Soviet Russia they should be all taken over by the National Government.
I think both sides are in general agreed on both sides on communications, [Page 46]that is to say, while we agree that in principle all kinds of communications should be restored, we lay special emphasis on the restoration of railway traffic.
C: Now the problem has (been) reduced to only two problems from what Governor Chang has just said. The first one refers to the nine provinces in Manchuria and the second one refers to those places which Governor Chang just mentioned and which he supposed to have some connection with the Sino-Soviet agreement. With regard to the nine provinces in Manchuria, if this should be included in the order, then General Chou suggests that it should be stated as follows: “All troop movement in the nine provinces of Manchuria should be fixed by consultation.” The reason for such a stipulation is because during the past negotiations between the National Government and the Communist Party, this problem has been brought up and secondly the problem of Manchuria involves American assistance in transporting troops of the National Government to Manchuria and also the problem of taking over Manchuria by the National Government from Soviet Russia. With regard to the second point raised by Governor Chang, General Chou says it has not been mentioned in the Sino-Soviet pact, hence it is a new problem which should be solved by direct negotiations between China and Soviet Russia. Since it involves Soviet Russia, he thinks that Russia should be included in discussing this problem or some other form of discussion should be suggested and it is not necessary to include it in this order. What actually happened in those places was that during the anti-Japanese war, troops of the Outer Mongolian Republic have gone into those towns, but later on they evacuated and the 8th Route Army has taken over those places and so actually it is rather different from what Governor Chang has stated regarding Tolun in Chahar and Chihfeng in province of Jehol.
G: As regards the first point raised by General Chou, that is the exception concerning the Northeast, that it may be contained in the order that military operations in the Northeast could only be effected by consulation as regards that point, I agree to the inclusion of the exception in the order which was originally my own proposal, but as regards consultation for military movements in the Northeast, I cannot agree. I refer to our discussions, the discussions between myself and the representatives of the Communist Party in the past; the leaders of the Communist Party in those discussions agreed that the Northeast should be an exception to the military operations; that is the air lifting of troops and the transportation of troops by sea were always understood to be military operations to be ordered and controlled by the National Government exclusively. Then as regards [Page 47]transportation of troops by land, we discussed the question of railway transportation and the Communist leaders proposed that no troops should be moved by eight railways, but it was understood (by our side)? that the western section of the Peiping–Liaoning Railway should be an exception—the section from Tientsin to Shanhaikuan. Therefore, we have always understood it to be that the transportation of troops from Tientsin to Shanhaikuan to the Northeast should be controlled by the National Government exclusively. In view of these understandings, we cannot agree to the exception of military movements in the Northeast which could only be effected by consultation. We couldn’t agree to the point of consultation, but we agree to the proposal that no troops, after the cessation of hostilities, should be transported by the eight railways with the exception of the Peiping–Liaoning Railroad. That’s one point.
M: Would you spell the names of the two towns?
G: Tientsin and Shanhaikuan. As regards the point made by General Chou that discussions should first be had with the representatives of Soviet Russia with regard to Chihfeng and Tolun, it is my understanding that Chihfeng and Tolun, according to our agreement with Soviet Russia, should be evacuated by Soviet troops. They are as a matter of fact at present still occupied by Soviet troops. According to our arrangements with Soviet Russia we should take over these places. Therefore, there is no necessity of discussing this point with Soviet Russia.
C: First of all, General Chou wants to point out that he is not very sure whether there are still Soviet troops in Chihfeng and Tolun. According to reports he has received, he only knows that those two places have been taken over by troops of the Communist Party, and the reports which Governor Chang have received apparently come from another source. Now these two problems—Manchuria and those two places outside of Manchuria—are places which the National Government has taken over or is going to take over from the hands of Soviet Russia. Since such is the case, I suggest that these two problems should be combined together and such a principle should be recognized and put in the order, namely: Places which the National Government is to take over from the hands of the Soviet troops are not affected by these orders. In that case all of these places can be taken into consideration and the taking over by China from Soviet Russia will not be restricted.
G: I propose that Manchuria, that is the nine provinces in the Northeast, should be expressly mentioned as an exception while the principle as proposed by General Chou should apply to other places outside of Manchuria, that is, those places in the provinces of Chahar [Page 48]and Jehol. In those provinces military operations may continue because in those provinces there are regions which according to our agreement with Soviet Russia should be taken over by us. Therefore, we limit the application of the proposed principle to places outside of Manchuria while Manchuria itself should be (expressly) specifically mentioned.
M: I understood General Chou to refer in his proposal to places occupied by the Russians. Was the Governor referring to places occupied by the Russians or otherwise?
G: The Governor has especially in mind Tolun and Chihfeng, which were occupied by Soviet troops and which may possibly still be occupied by Soviet troops and Communist troops at the same time—there are also some Communist troops in those places. What Governor Chang has referred to is those places outside of Manchuria, which according to our agreement with Soviet Russia we are to take over. In those places there may already be Communist troops.
C: General Chou has a suggestion to compose the difference of opinions. He suggests, as a compromise, just to have something in the record which may serve as a basis for later discussions so that both sides understand how problems related to the negotiations between China and Soviet Russia can be dealt with later irrespective (of) whether it refers to inside Manchuria or outside, and if it has been agreed by the National Government and Soviet Russia that certain places outside Manchuria will be taken over by the Chinese National Government of which we are not informed up to now then it would also find a point of reference in this order and if such an insertion is made it will show at least that today we have recognized in principle how such problems may be dealt with later.
G: In regard to the principle proposed by General Chou that there should only be one statement intended to cover both Manchuria and certain places in Jehol and Chahar, I am still of the opinion and I insist that Manchuria should be an express exception. It should be expressly mentioned as an exception to the cessation of military operations, while the proposed principle may apply to those places in Jehol and Chahar which according to our arrangements with Soviet Russia we should take over. Therefore, the principle as stated by General Chou should only be limited to Tolun and Chihfeng and possibly other places, but should not be extended to cover Manchuria, which should be expressly stated as an exception. That is to say, Manchuria should be set aside as a class by itself.
M: Is this correct as to the Governor’s meaning? That Manchuria should be an exception without limitations. Is that what that means, that Manchuria should be an exception without limitations? In [Page 49]other words, that limitations referring to the proposals that we should have further agreements and things of that sort?
G: Yes, that’s right.
M: That the limitations should refer only to those places in North China where the Soviet Government has had an agreement with the Central Government of China. (To interpreter: Translate that for General Chou and explain it to him so that he understands me correctly.)
G: Governor Chang says that Manchuria should be a complete exception without limitations. As regards those places in Chahar and Jehol which I have stated they should also be an exception. What I mean is that the Central Government troops should, after the cessation of hostilities, move into those places according to our arrangements with the Soviets, and that is all.
M: I understand. Did I understand General Chou correctly that with regard to Jehol and Chahar he stated that the exception as stated in the paper should refer only to those places actually occupied by Russian troops?
C: Not exactly. First, he is not well informed about the actual conditions there and so he is not in a position to give a concrete answer to this question right now Secondly, he is not informed about such a negotiation between the National Government and Soviet Russia, since no such document is contained in the Sino-Soviet pact and he is not informed of any such negotiation or any other negotiation on this matter. Therefore, at the present time he is not in a position to recognize separately such a clause that any place which is now occupied by the Soviet troops should be taken over by the National Government and, therefore, in his proposal he endeavored to establish a principle which also includes Manchuria and if the representative of the National Government takes exception to this principle, he can withdraw this proposal.
M: “He” being General Chou?
C: Yes. And, therefore, I cannot agree with the second point raised by Governor Chang; that is, to form a separate clause regarding places outside Manchuria.
G: I think we can state the problem in this way. We can very well dispense with the general principle as proposed by General Chou. We can simply say that Manchuria should be an exception completely. In regard to Chifeng and Tolun we can simply stipulate that Central Government troops may move into those places to take over. That is all. We don’t have to bother with general principles.
C: I think this is more unacceptable because the more concrete the order is the more is it hard to accept because I may first ask why [Page 50]the Government’s right to take over those two towns should be recognized. Then the Government representative answers “This is based upon the negotiations between China and Soviet Russia,” but as a matter of fact, I am not informed in whose hands those two towns are at the present time. As far as I am informed sovereignty of those two towns are now in the hands of the Communist troops and I am not informed whether there are still remaining some Soviet troops, and secondly, I am not informed of the contents of the negotiations which have been or are now being conducted between the Government and the Soviet Russians.
M: Gentlemen. If it meets your agreement, I suggest that we leave for the moment the question of exceptions regarding Jehol and Chahar and the statement to be made formally regarding Manchuria, and that for the time being we consider the form of the proposal which I had already made for an order for the cessation of hostilities, the two disputed points to be discussed later.
M: Is that proposal agreeable to you gentlemen.
G: Yes, and we will talk about other portions later on.
M: I would suggest that we three submit for the approval of the Generalissimo and of Mao Tse-tung a paper proposing the actual terms for an order to be issued terminating hostilities. Two identical memoranda are proposed. One addressed to the Generalissimo and one addressed to Mao Tse-tung. The subject, the cessation of hostilities. The first paragraph now reads as follows: “In conformance with the agreements entered into by the National Government of China and the Chinese Communist Party it is desirable that cease firing orders be issued at once and simultaneously by yourself (this being the Generalissimo) and by Chairman Mao Tse-tung.” Is this first sentence acceptable.
G & C: Yes that is agreed.
M: “If this suggestion meets with your approval it is recommended that identical orders along the lines of the draft which follows should be issued by you (the Generalissimo) and by Chairman Mao Tse-tung at an agreed time and agreed date”. Is that acceptable?
G & C: Yes.
M: Then the first paragraph entirely is acceptable. “The text of the proposed draft follows: All units, regular, militia, irregular and guerrilla of the National Armies of the Republic of China are ordered to carry out the following directive, as of . . . . . hours, on . . . . . day . . . . . . . month of the . . . . . year of the Republic”. The similar draft reads all units, regular, militia, irregular and guerrilla of the Communist Party of the Republic of China so and so. Is that acceptable?[Page 51]
G & C: Yes.
M: Then that is formally accepted.
“a. All hostilities will cease immediately.” Is that acceptable?
G: Of course it is understood that all hostilities should cease on the same date on which the order is issued.
M: You mean you would prefer it to read: “All hostilities will cease at . . . . . hour and . . . . . . . date.[”]
G: Yes, that is our understanding. In the preceding paragraph we say that the units are ordered to carry out the following directive and immediately following hostilities will cease as of that date and that time.
M: Should we word it differently. “All hostilities will cease in accordance with the foregoing.” Is that preferable?
Byroade: I don’t think so. You are giving an order to be effective for the hour for hostilities to cease immediately.
M: Suppose we scratch out the word immediately. Just say all hostilities will cease. Omit the word immediately. What does General Chou think.
C: He thinks this is OK. The original text.
G: Of course the order will eventually be issued in Chinese and the Chinese interpretation will make that clear.
M: Then that is acceptable.
M: Paragraph a is therefore accepted. In paragraph b, we will omit reference to the first sentence.
G: Reserved for further discussion.
M: I haven’t mentioned the second. That is understood.
M: The second sentence reads, “There also may be the purely local movements necessary for supply, administration and housekeeping.” The last word was improperly translated, I believe, to security and I propose that the last word housekeeping be changed to read “and local security”. The sentence would therefore read, “There also would be the purely local movements necessary for supply, administration and local security”.
G: You have two “locals” in the sentence.
M: I don’t know how to avoid that. Is that acceptable.
G: Governor Chang says that he can’t express a definite opinion in regard to this part separately without referring to other parts in the paragraph.
M: It was intended to mean everywhere. I suggest that we omit any reference to that sentence for the present. Is that agreeable?
G: Agree.[Page 52]
M: Paragraph c. “Destruction and interference with lines of communications will cease and you will clear at once blocks placed against movement along land lines of communications.” The proposal was made “blocks and fortifications”. May I ask General Chou just what he means by fortifications.
C: Because he thinks that Japanese have established many fortifications along the railway lines to protect themselves from attack and also in the territories controlled by the National Government, the National Government has set up many fortifications to block the travel and movement of civilians and he thinks that all these should be expressly stated so that there can be no misunderstanding in the interpretation of the word block in implementing this order.
M: Would he prefer that we omit the word “block” and substitute “fortifications”?
C: He thinks that blocks and fortifications are two distinct matters because you may remove the block to restore communications but the fortifications are still there which form a constant menace to communications. So he would like to use both of them.
G: Governor Chang states that since none of us have made any inspection of all the railways, we had better state a principle, that we had better limit ourselves to the discussion of a principle; that is, anything that obstructs communications should be removed, but anything which is intended for the protection of the railway should be retained. Therefore, I propose that we had better let the original paragraph stand as it is without adding anything, but we understand that the idea is to remove any obstruction to railway communications, but to retain anything that is intended to protect the railway communications. When we proceed to execute this article we bear that principle in mind. It will be left to the executive headquarters to decide. For the moment we will leave it as it is.
M: Do I understand that you mean that the sentence should stand as now written and that a minute should state the understanding that everything that obstructs the railway operations should be removed, but those structures which are for the defense of the railway should be left intact.
C: Very good.
M: That is agreed.
C: I suggest you strike out “lines” in the first line. Just interference with all kinds of communications.
G: In the first place, I feel you need the preposition “of” after “destruction”; “destruction of and interference with”. That is what was intended.[Page 53]
M: Would this review of the sentence be acceptable, “c. Destruction of and interference with all kinds of communications will cease and you will clear at once obstructions placed against or interfering with such communications.”
G: Governor Chang thinks that the phrase “all kinds of communications” is too inclusive—too wide in scope. It may be that it would have different kinds of interpretation. While he agrees in principle with the restoration of all kinds of communication, he thinks we should lay special emphasis on the restoration of railway traffic and as regards other kinds of communications we may discuss them later. If we say all kinds of communications, the expression will include, as already proposed by General Chou, such things as communication by boats, air, telegraph, which cannot be carried out by troops and this order is supposed to be issued to military men—to troops. This would be beyond the authority of the military people. We would retain the original proposal.
M: With regard to troops this refers to a prohibition against destruction or interference with communications.
G: We propose to substitute the word “lines” for “kinds” so the sentence would read: “Destruction of and interference with lines of communications will cease and you will clear at once obstacles placed against, or interfering with such lines of communications.”
M: You substitute “all lines” for “all kinds.”
C: General Chou thinks that all kinds is more inclusive than all lines. To the Chinese “the lines” refers only to railway lines, highways and telegram lines, but it would not include posts, but in that case the Communist party would have to reestablish all the destruction, but they would not enjoy all kinds of their service facilities.
M: The issue then from the point of view of General Chou the question of involving in this the reestablishment of post communication, by post.
C: Governor Chang has just explained to him the lines would also include post service and in that case there is no more dispute there and he now will change the word “kinds” to “lines”.
M: The sentence now reads: “Destruction of and interference with all lines of communications will cease and you will clear at once obstructions placed against or interfering with such communications.[”]
G: Such lines of communications. I think it would be better to say lines of communication.
M: That is all right. It being understood that lines of communication includes post communications.
G: Yes.[Page 54]
M: That sentence is then agreed upon.
M: “d. For the time being all units will maintain their present positions.”
G: May I seek some elucidation of this paragraph? I take it that this paragraph only refers to those units which are in areas of conflict. It doesn’t refer to those units which are far far behind the front line, and in my opinion, this doesn’t seem to apply to units which have never been related to the areas of conflict. This paragraph is not intended to freeze all military operations in the whole country. Is this understanding correct?
M: It was written with the idea that certain exceptions had already been made. Now we have concluded our discussion of those exceptions.
C: My understanding is that with certain exceptions agreed upon, this should be applied to all troops within the country, because it is very difficult to demarcate to which troops it should be applied and to which not.
M: The officer who drafted the paragraph had in mind that for the moment all movements should cease, but that the instructions for the Executive Headquarters would specify the details for the resumption of certain movements. I mean by that that the instructions for the Executive Headquarters agreed upon here; for example, I understood from Governor Chang that it would be the desire of the Central Government that the movements of Government troops into Manchuria and that south of the Yangtze there would be no movements or concentrations to the northward without the agreement of the parties to this document. Meaning that reorganization of divisions and the various movements of that character could proceed to the south of the Yangtze, with the reservation that there would be no northward concentration.
C: What does the General mean by “reorganization of troops”?
M: The National Army is being reorganized—divisions being demobilized.
G: Were you stating what General Chou said to you?
M: I was stating just a rough idea of it.
G: He did not catch what was said.
M: He would rather I made no further mention of it?
G: Would you repeat it please?
M: I will go back to the beginning of the discussion. Paragraph d. was drafted by the Officer, Colonel Byroade, having in mind that for the moment all movements should cease, but that there would follow detailed instructions for movements of the character of troops going to Manchuria. There would also be probably other movements not [Page 55]involved in the Manchurian exception. The authority for these would be covered in the document to be agreed upon here for the establishment of the Executive Headquarters. This order going to the troops has to be brief and concise. Therefore, the details would be included in the lengthy instructions to the Executive Headquarters. In other words, for the time being in China proper all movements would cease, but the moment the Executive Headquarters was established the detailed exceptions agreed upon here would be put into effect. One of these I discussed with the Governor. South of the Yangtze there would be a number of movements incident to the reorganization of divisions of the Chinese Army and, though this was a mere discussion, that might be carried out without involving any concentration to the north.
G: You mean south of the Yangtze?
M: It would be essential to the continuation of the orders now in effect for the reorganization of units of the Central Government to continue; that so long as they did not constitute a deployment south of the Yangtze to the northward, it would seem there could be no objection. That was the impression I received of the discussion in regard to prohibition of movements. It is not in any form an agreement and it may not be even a correct presentation of the views of the Governor, but it illustrates a complication that must be met. Now it may be that this brief paragraph is too all-inclusive. I would appreciate hearing your views.
G: Governor Chang would like to supplement what you said. He would like to put forth some views concerning the first sentence of the second paragraph, Paragraph b, which is reserved for further discussion but unfortunately the topic that is now under discussion has close relations to this provision. Governor Chang inquires whether it would be in order to proceed to the discussion of this sentence, or just exchange our views freely without any restriction?
M: Does he mean to go back to the discussion of b?
M: Just a moment. My suggestion is, in answer to the Governor’s proposition, that the purpose of paragraph d is so confused with paragraph b that, in my opinion, it is of such small importance from the viewpoint of those who proposed it, that I think the whole paragraph should go out. I am assuming that whatever we agree upon for paragraph b will include the statement, “All movements of forces within China proper will cease.” That there may be exceptions, but the broad statement would be there. Therefore, I do not think paragraph d is of sufficient importance to include and would confuse the recipients.[Page 56]
G: The Governor agrees to the suppression of paragraph d and the discussion of paragraph b.
C: I would suggest that we first have free discussion on b and after we have agreed on b, we will consider whether it is still necessary to retain d or we should strike it out.
M: That is agreeable to me, but we might add that we strike out d on the understanding that a statement of the prohibition of movements will be included in paragraph b.
C: I understand that when all parties agree that the sentence, “All movements of forces within China proper will cease,” shall include the meaning of d, then we can omit d.
M: What I said was, we might agree that whatever order is to be given to prohibit movements will be included in paragraph b. Therefore, under those circumstances there could be no purpose in paragraph d. If it will simplify things, I will drop d until later. Do you prefer that?
M: Will you accept that?
M: Paragraph e: Additional instructions and orders will be issued to you later.
G: The Governor says that this is quite unnecessary for the Government has the right to issue orders at any time.
M: It is very common in our Army, and we had some eight million men, but I am going to do this the Chinese way. Now, on thinking it over, I came to the conclusion last night that this order is quite incomplete, in that it does not give any intimation of what is to happen next in the way of control. Therefore, I have made this draft to substitute for paragraph e. It should include these four additional words, “through this Executive Headquarters.” The last sentence would then read: “The necessary instructions and orders unanimously agreed upon by the three Commissioners, will be issued in the name of the President of the Republic of China through this Executive Headquarters.” And that would be my proposal for paragraph e, and I might say now that the details for the organization and for the operation of the Executive Headquarters can be decided upon here later. This merely establishes the principle and notifies all concerned of the method of procedure to be expected. My purpose in submitting this proposed paragraph e was to inform all the troop commanders of the source from which they would receive their future orders and the source from which inspection groups would go forth, so that those inspection groups would be honored with the proper courtesies and respect. It is essential, of course, that all the troops know that there [Page 57]is such a Headquarters duly authorized because they have to have heard of such a thing. For example, we probably will have to have a particular armband to identify all these officers from that Headquarters, or no one would pay any attention to them. I was assuming that there would be an agreement to such an Executive Headquarters whatever the detailed instructions might yet be. This merely says there will be such a Headquarters, it will be established immediately and through it will come the detailed orders.
G: We have just been discussing the term “Executive Headquarters” and what the Chinese translation would be.
M: You have an Executive Yuan; this is a military one. Any term that your people will understand. I got tired of calling them a group as there are too many groups.
C: Executive Commission.
C: General Chou requests that the word “Government” from the “Chinese Communist Party Government,” be omitted.
M: What about the Executive Headquarters? What about Commission?
G: Executive Headquarters is all right but it is very difficult. Commission is all right, but what kind of commission? There are so many commissions.
C: Headquarters is good, it gives a very good explanation and is much better than the English word “Commission.” In English it is perfectly all right now, but what we want is a proper Chinese translation.
M: Governor, may I ask what your view is to this proposal?
G: This is quite agreeable to the Governor, except that there appears to be a little redundancy in the first sentence and the last sentence: “Additional instructions and orders will be issued later through an Executive Headquarters,” and then towards the end there is, “The necessary instructions and orders unanimously agreed upon by the three Commissioners, will be issued in the name of the President of the Republic of China through this Executive Headquarters.” These could very well be combined to read, “Additional instructions and orders will be issued in the name of the President of the Republic of China through an Executive Headquarters to be established” and so on, and change the last sentence that all actions of the Executive Headquarters should be taken by unanimous vote or unanimous agreement of the three Commissioners, or something like that. Or we can omit the first part of the first sentence and just say: “An Executive Headquarters will be established in Peiping,” etc.[Page 58]
M: “An Executive Headquarters will be established immediately in Peiping for the purpose of carrying out the agreements for cessation of hostilities. This Headquarters will consist of three Commissioners; one representing the Chinese National Government, one representing the Chinese Communist Party, and one to represent the United States of America. The necessary instructions and orders unanimously agreed upon by the three Commissioners, will be issued in the name of the President of the Republic of China through the Executive Headquarters.” Did you follow those changes?
M: “Additional instructions and orders will be issued later through”—all of that to be struck out. The sentence will start, “An Executive Headquarters will.” Where it says “to” it will be “will.” The word “Government” is stricken out down below, and the last four words will read, “through the Executive Headquarters.” With those corrections, is that acceptable to the Governor?
M: With those corrections, is that acceptable to you?
M: Then that is agreed upon. Now, as I understand it, we have agreed with minor amendments to all of this document except paragraph b and paragraph d, including a complete re-write of paragraph e. Then it appears to me that the next order of business is to resume the discussion of paragraph b. It is now about 1:00 o’clock. What is your pleasure?
G: Let’s eat.
M: Do you wish to continue this meeting this afternoon, do you wish to go on now without any lunch, or do you want to wait until tomorrow morning? What is your pleasure?
C: There will be a tea party at 3:00 o’clock this afternoon for the PCC delegates. What do you think, maybe after dinner there will still be some time, or else tomorrow morning.
G: Governor Chang prefers to continue the discussions tomorrow morning.
M: What hour?
G: Any hour you designate.
M: Any hour from 6:00 o’clock in the morning on? Whatever the Governor thinks.
G: The same time then—10:00 o’clock tomorrow morning?
M: 10:00 o’clock tomorrow morning.
C: 10:00 o’clock.
M: May I make one suggestion. Mr. Shepley tells me that the Press is waiting outside the door. I am not going out but—[Page 59]
G: I would like to stay here with you.
M: I make the request that we have nothing to say until we reach a complete agreement. My advisor, he knows the Press here better than I do, suggests that it might be easier for you if we state that we have made good progress and that we will meet again tomorrow morning. That we are making good progress, have nothing to report at present, but will meet again tomorrow.
- These notes and minutes of other meetings held January 7–10 are the corrected record; copies were forwarded to the Department under cover of General Marshall’s memorandum OSE 201 of June 20, not printed.↩