125.3516/7–1747
The Consul General at Dairen (Benninghoff) to the Ambassador in China (Stuart)81
Sir: I have the honor to refer to the Consulate General’s despatch to the Embassy No. 21 of August 2, 1946 (copy to Department) entitled “Policy of Local Officials Respecting the American Consulate General at Dairen”,82 and to submit comments and observations on the same subject in the light of developments in the past year. In this connection, reference is made to Mukden’s telegram to the Embassy No. 177 of June 18, 2 p.m. in which Consul General Ward reported that according to Chinese Commissioner Chang Chien-fei, this Consulate General was effectively isolated from local contacts.
Summary. Local Russians and Chinese have been instructed to refrain from contact with the Consulate General, leaving only a handful of “foreigners” with whom social relations can be had. Relations with the Soviet Consulate General and the military are nevertheless cordial, and invitations are exchanged on formal occasions. Assistance regarding food, coal et cetera is readily forthcoming, especially after the incident of December 20, 1946 involving the American courier ship. Relations with the local Chinese regime are practically non-existent, while efforts to protect American property and promote American interests have been unavailing. However, direct observation has enabled the Consulate General to report information which would otherwise be unavailable. End Summary.
There is no doubt that the Russians have done everything possible to prevent the Americans attached to this office from having anything to do with either the Russians or the Chinese. This leaves, in addition to the one American citizen who has a Japanese wife, a scattered handful of Czechs, Hungarians, Austrians and Swiss with whom we can mingle socially. We have received reliable reports an occasions too numerous to mention that the Soviet citizens from Russia as well as [Page 533] former emigrants now possessing Soviet nationality have been instructed time and time again not to have anything to do with the Americans. It frequently happens that individuals who have dealt with [us?] on official or business matters refuse to recognize the Americans of the Consulate General when meeting them on the street.
The Chinese, intimidated no doubt by the Communists who probably get their cue from the Russians, are even more afraid of consorting with Americans than are the Russians. In the fifteen months the Consulate General has been established, not a single Chinese official or private individual of standing, with the courageous exception of the Catholic priest, has called at the office or at the home of the Consul General. The Mayor and Deputy Mayor have not returned official calls, although they have attended such functions as the Fourth of July and New Year receptions.
Not only are the members of the Consulate General thus estopped from having personal contact with individuals, but their movements are also restricted. Although we move about in the city with perfect liberty, and climb around the hills to the south without molestation, we must have permits to go by car to Hoshigaura, a distance of about six miles. Travel to Port Arthur has so far been prevented, and a suggestion that Vice Consul Patch visit Chinchow and the northern part of this Area was met with a refusal. There are no American interests in these districts; it would be interesting to know whether an inspection of American property would be refused.
However, relations with those officials whose business it is to deal with the Consulate General are most cordial. The most important, because it is the one most frequently dealt with, is the Soviet Consulate General. It has been possible, chiefly because of the affability of Mr. S. N. Petrov, who was Acting Consul General until recently, as well as the ability of Vice Consul Patch to speak Russian, to build up a relationship which may be unique in Soviet-American relations. It is through the Soviet Consulate General that we receive coal, gasoline, foodstuffs, and even telephone, water and electric service. Unlike other Soviet officials, Mr. Petrov was willing, during his incumbency, to discuss such political matters as the interpretation of the Sino-Soviet Treaty. His successor, Consul General I. Baranov, is more like the normal Soviet official; correct and even friendly on social occasions, but reserved and uncommunicative on political matters.
While relations with the Russian military are confined to social occasions, as all official business is transacted through the Consulate General which acts as a “foreign office”, they are nonetheless cordial. The staff of the Consulate General has been invited to attend official banquets on V–J Day, the anniversary of the October Revolution and [Page 534] May Day, while Major General Kozhanoff attended the New Year and Fourth of July receptions at the home of the Consul General. It was interesting to note that after the unfortunate incident on December 20, 1946 involving the courier ship USS LCI 1090, the General on a subsequent visit of the ship made a point of asking the ship’s officers to call on him in the morning, at which time he invited them to a special showing that evening of a Soviet film. On both occasions the hospitality was on a typically lavish Soviet scale. It is believed that the local command was censured by higher authority for permitting the incident to occur, as official cordiality and assistance increased thereafter.
Relations with the local Chinese puppet government are practically non-existent, except on formal social occasions as described above. This situation has obtained for over a year. As stated in despatch No. 21 mentioned above, the then officials strongly intimated that because of the temporary nature of their tenure they felt that their relations with the Consulate General should be friendly but by no means close. Subsequently, and especially after the collapse of the Sino-Soviet negotiations concerning Dairen, the new Kwantung Government has been established on a much more permanent basis. Nevertheless, it has not been possible, nor even advisable, to attempt a rapprochement with that organization. The chief reason for this situation lies in the fact that the present regime is strongly communist, while American consular officers are accredited to Nanking. In this connection, when a successor to the Consul for Denmark was recently appointed, the Chinese refused to recognize him as such although the Russians did. The result of this situation is that it is not possible for the Consulate General to obtain information and statistics concerning local matters which it would otherwise obtain.
The efforts of the Consulate General to protect American property and to assist the representative of The Texas Company (China) Ltd. to repossess the company’s property have been unavailing. This problem is discussed in detail in the Consulate General’s despatch to the Embassy No. 68 (No. 60 to the Department) of February 13, 1947 entitled “Protection of American Interests: The Texas Company (China) Ltd.”83 The result of this situation has been the withdrawal by the company of its representative. It is fortunate that, with the exception of the two oil installations, there are no important American properties in this Area.
It will thus be seen that because of Soviet obstructionism and Chinese communist unfriendliness, the Consulate General has not been able to perform many of its normal functions. Nevertheless, the [Page 535] opportunities for first hand observation and evaluation of local attitudes has resulted, it is hoped, in a series of despatches, reports and telegrams which have been of interest and value. Although contacts are indeed few, the very fact of being able to talk with local Soviet officials, as well as foreign business men and a few Chinese (through the office’s interpreter), has enabled the Consulate General to present a picture of the situation in Dairen which would otherwise not be available to the Embassy or the Department.
Respectfully yours,
- Copy transmitted to the Department by the Consul General in his despatch No. 101, July 17; received August 15.↩
- Foreign Relations, 1946, vol. x, p. 1179.↩
- Not printed.↩