893.00/2–2346: Telegram
The Counselor of Embassy in China (Smyth) to the Secretary of State45
[Received February 24—3:07 a.m.]
357. University students numbering more than 10,000 on 22 February conducted orderly public demonstration demanding return of [Page 440] Manchuria to Chinese control and immediate evacuation of Soviet troops from northeast. Following passage of parading students, offices of Communist Hsin Hua Jih Pao and Democratic League Min Chu [Jih] Pao were destroyed by group of approximately 100 rioters. Several employees of Communist paper were assaulted and three seriously injured. Headquarters of Communist Delegation forcibly entered and disturbance created by same group. Best information indicates students not responsible for violence but that demonstration was publicized by disgruntled Kuomintang elements, such as CC clique, to attack supporters of PCC agreements and by injection of national security issue to divert attention from efforts to disrupt implementation of PCC program. Second student demonstration scheduled for today to coincide with Soviet Embassy celebration of Red Army Day.
Increasing Chinese concern with regard to Manchurian situation is becoming daily more evident, Chinese returning from northeast state that wartime industrial development of south Manchuria was on larger scale than was anticipated in Soviet Union and this is offered by them as partial explanation of Russian reluctance to withdraw.
Whatever the cause, however, bewilderment at and distrust of ultimate Russian intentions in Manchuria is receiving increasing nation-wide expression in all but Communist press. Press accounts are largely speculative, but express grave concern with regard to reported Mongolian autonomy movement in western Manchuria and alleged Russian demands for additional rights in northeast including inland navigation and major participation in revitalization of industries. As yet no open accusations of Russian bad faith have been made. General press attitude is that China, having paid the price exacted by Russia at Yalta, expects unmolested restoration of Manchuria conditioned only by terms of Sino-Soviet treaty.
Situation was further beclouded by Yenan statement 14 February by spokesman of Central Committee Communist Party to general effect that Central Government should recognize 300,000 troops of [apparent omission] Kuomintang press is making political capital thereof and even some neutral observers, normally well disposed toward Communists, tend to accept it as evidence of Communist-Soviet collusion in Manchuria. There would appear to be some justification for this attitude inasmuch as there is ample reason to believe that Communist activity and strength in Manchuria prior to Japanese collapse was negligible. On the other hand, there is no substantive proof that such collusion exists and Chou En-lai and other Communists [Page 441] here appear genuinely anxious that Russian withdrawal be effected immediately.46
With regard to Mongolian autonomy movement in Manchuria, Communists claim that Government is deliberately permitting garbled version to continue current. Communists offer explanation that Barga Mongolians have merely expressed wish to retain their own banner organization under Chinese rather than be subject to Chinese hsien district [apparent omission]. Explanation seems reasonable in view of history of past treatment of Mongolians by Chinese and autonomy movement could well exist without Chinese Communist or Soviet instigation.