The Acting Secretary of State to the Ambassador in China ( Stuart )
754. For attention Powell. Present description US route 2 raises question re Panam’s mid-Pacific route via Manila, in view of specific mention Canton and inadequacy Hong Kong airport. Rather than depend on liberal interpretation “and beyond”, believe it essential to remove any doubt Panam’s right to carry traffic between Shanghai–Canton and mid-Pacific points including Manila. Therefore request third para Chinese letter include proviso to effect that right of carrier on route 2 to serve Canton instead of Hong Kong (or vice versa) also includes right to connect with its mid-Pacific service at Canton, at least until Hong Kong airport becomes operable for larger planes.
Also request that first sentence third para Chinese letter be changed to read “…32 US carriers designated to serve routes 2 and 3 serving Hong Kong instead of Canton at option of US Govt; provided, however, etc.”
Apart from above, Dept and CAB approve contents your 1471 Sept 12. Confirm what is finally decided re Articles 3, 7 and 11. Believe revisions Art 11 suggested Deptel 732 Sept 9 particularly desirable. You may make drafting amendments Chinese letter provided principles not violated.
Full Power has been requested for Ambassador to sign, but unnecessary await Depts notification on this if signature imminent.
No news yet re conclusion bilateral with Philippines,33 but on assumption Embassy Manila can conclude it without difficulty, what about proceeding Shanghai to Bangkok for Siamese bilateral?34 Advise if this feasible, so telegraphic instructions can be sent Bangkok.
Sent to Nanking; repeated to Shanghai as Deptel 1647.
- Omission indicated in the original.↩
- An air transport agreement relating to the establishment of international civil air routes and services was signed at Manila on November 16, 1946; T.I.A.S. No. 1577, or 61 Stat. (pt. 3) 2479.↩
- An air transport agreement was signed at Bangkok on February 26, 1947; T.I.A.S. No. 1607, or 61 Stat. (pt. 3) 2789.↩