893.00/8–1546: Telegram
The Ambassador in China (Stuart) to the Secretary of State
[Received August 15—9:30 a.m.]
1322. Yenan Emancipation Daily in August 14 editorial entitled “Seven Months Summary” comments on Marshall–Stuart statement and launches violent attack against Chiang Kai-shek, American policy in China, and General Marshall.
Editorial states: “In fact General Marshall’s efforts have not only failed but civil war today has grown bigger in magnitude and ruthlessness than 7½ months ago.[”] Editorial alleges that before Marshall’s arrival 45% National Government forces engaged against Communists: this force now augmented to 85% total force. Before Marshall’s arrival Chiang Kai-shek had 39 American equipped divisions but now he has 57 such divisions which have all been thrown into civil war in addition to air force and navy formed by American planes and American vessels.
Editorial refers to agreements already reached but states that after April impossible reach new agreements or maintain old agreements because of “actual daily increasing aid of all kinds to Chinese reactionary clique by American imperialistic elements. The more there was of such aid the more Chiang Kai-shek became unbridled and the more General Marshall sank in his eyes.” With regard to issue of local governments, editorial points out that question is clearly political issue and that PCC resolutions provide that “disputes should be settled through political means and local governments about which there is dispute in recovered area should preserve status for time being until reorganization of National Government when disputes can be settled through application of clauses 6, 7 and 8 of political section of administrative program”. Editorial points out flagrant violations cease-fire agreements and decisions of Moscow Conference that General Marshall [Page 47] could only declare his inability to settle matters. “It is really difficult to fathom degree which General Marshall’s position in January [apparent omission].”
Editorial states that previous agreements have been violated by five new government demands on August 552 which were “mortal blow to peace efforts”. Editorial questions, “Why did Chiang Kai-shek who is submissive to will of American dare to undermine peace efforts of General Marshall”. Editorial states in reply that “Fact however does not lie in Chiang Kai-shek’s daring to do so but in United States Government itself undermining work of General Marshall”. State Department is then accused of encouraging anti-Soviet, anti-Communist and antidemocratic movement of reactionaries Kmt and fostering transportation additional Kmt forces North China, additional naval aid even in excess of “those transported when Hurley,53 Wedemeyer54 and other reactionaries were in power.” It is stated that, although no substantial American loan has been extended to China during 5 months, materials amounting to 1.3 billion dollars gold have been supplied Kmt through State Department and Navy. Ref. erence is made to presence “two United States fleets” in North China, military aid bill and that “United States Marines have staged many provocative acts against Eighth Route Army acting as vanguards of Kmt. Editorial concludes from this that “it is clear that American imperialist elements are unscrupulously assisting Chiang Kai-shek to fight civil war to hasten degradation of China into American colony.” Editorial goes on to say that Chiang Kai-shek with active American military aid holds all peace proposals in contempt. “Sly Chiang Kai-shek cannot but discern two policies of United States; one is to assist Chiang to fight civil war which is a basic one and other is to persuade Chiang to stop fighting which is only a sight [side] show for mere window dressing.”
“General Marshall himself is not above blame for failure to cease hostilities in China. Before General Marshall’s return to United States in March, his prestige was high because he was at that time, generally speaking, impartial. He stood firmly for principles of peace and democracy and his attitude toward die-hard elements was one of censure. Unfortunately this did not go beyond one or two verbal censures while he did not mention single open word against reactionaries in American Marines who acted in unbridled manner nor contrary he did not make slightest attempt to stop actual aid to Kmt reactionaries by reactionaries in America which went on under [Page 48] his very nose. Every time Kmt reactionaries raised new demands which violated former agreements he did not fight for complementation of concluded agreements but started again to ‘mediate’. This only made Kmt and American reactionaries more unbridled in their actions while Marshall’s prestige sank the more.” General Marshall is then accused of further transport of Kmt troops to North China and Manchuria in face Communist protest and with knowledge that China “is determined to exterminate Communists”.
Editorial continues that “step by step American reactionaries have helpted Kmt reactionaries from transporting troops to equipping them, and collaboration in fighting during which Marshall gave them free hand. Step by step Kmt reactionaries have raised their demands. In this way, 7½ months of ‘mediation’ have produced large scale civil war in China. People cannot but wonder United States Government sending envoy to help during [apparent omission] about four important agreements and then helping Chinese reactionaries to treat [tear?] them up. They cannot help asking whether this is part of preconceived plan.”
It is stated that Marshall can announce failure of his mission, but Chinese people will not allow Chiang to continue civil war nor allow American reactionaries to continue aiding Chiang in civil war. “Without American ‘mediation’ on one hand and ‘aid to Chiang’ on other—that is mediation in name and aid to Chiang in essence—and if Chinese people were allowed to go their own way, China would long ago have attained independence, peace and democracy. Chinese people strong enough to solve own problems. Erroneous policy of United States has brought about largest civil war in China’s history.”
Editorial concludes that “Not only Chinese people but people of United States and whole world and the two other powers of Moscow Conference55 and all peace-loving members of the United Nations will also not allow United States Government to evade its responsibility after bringing about this civil war.” Editorial then urges cessation one-sided aid to Chiang and evacuation all naval, land and air forces from China and expresses hope that United States Government will consider this carefully and that it will receive close attention of all democratic people in United States.
Department please repeat to Moscow.
- See despatch No. 33, August 7, from the Ambassador in China, vol. ix, p. 1465.↩
- Maj. Gen. Patrick J. Hurley; for his mission to China, see Foreign Relations, 1944, vol. vi, pp. 247 ff.↩
- Lt. Gen. Albert C. Wedemeyer, Commanding General, U. S. Forces, China Theater, October 1944–April 1945.↩
- Meeting of Foreign Ministers representing the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Soviet Union, December 16–26, 1945.↩