Memorandum by the Director of the Office of Far Eastern Affairs (Vincent) to the Under Secretary of State (Acheson)8
Subject: Post UNRRA Relief for China
I talked about this with Will Clayton last week and thought the “play” then was whether I had any objection to the inclusion of China to the tune of 40 million. I told him I did not. There was some question as to whether China would be “insulted” by the small size of the sum, since they could probably make a case for a much larger amount. I said that it would take a lot less than $40 million to insult the Chinese.
In spite of the memorandum about the balance of payments,9 et cetera, I still think the Chinese should be included in the figure for relief. As a matter of fact, I think the balance of payment statement gives too rosy a picture from the Chinese point of view. They are [Page 1297] going to need relief in greater amount than they are going to be able to pay for. As a matter of fact, more Chinese are liable to die in the next year from need of relief than will die in all the other countries put together. But I suppose this can be called “normal.”
Another thought. If China is not included and the over-all figure is reduced by 40 million, my guess would be that a pro-China lobby in Congress would probably be effective in getting China a slice of the reduced figure. I am quite sure that the question will be raised by Judd10 and others as to why China is excluded while Italy, Greece, Austria and (Lord help us!) Poland are included.
As you know I do not indulge in special pleading for my area, and I am not doing it here. But I think the Chinese deserve at least 40 million, and I think the betting average would favor their getting it out of Congress even if we did not think they deserved it.11