893.00/11–648: Telegram
The Acting Secretary of State to the Secretary of State, at Paris
Telmar 139. I assume that since you despatched Martel 111 Nov 6 you have seen Nanking tels 2116 Nov 6 (rptd Paris), 2117 Nov 639 [Page 194] (rptd Paris Telmar 136) and 2119 Nov 640 (rptd Paris as 8). Nanking’s 2003 Oct 2641 (rptd Paris Telmar 115) also pertinent.
Following suggested reply to Amb Stuart has been formulated but before taking it up with Secretary Forrestal and White House, I should like know whether has your approval:
“Urtel 2117 November 6 shows why visit high-ranking US officer to China would be undesirable and unproductive. Even if record of repeated failure Chi Govt in past to accept US advice did not exist, it would be foolhardy for US at this stage of disintegration Chi Govt authority in civil as well as mil sphere to embark upon such a quixotic venture. We are doing everything possible expedite shipment military matériel under $125 million grants. Pattern defections and other accompaniments fall Tsinan, Chmchow and Manchurian debacle although Chi Govt troops had adequate arms indicate will to fight lacking. With respect Chi Govt appeal to UN re Soviet treaty violations, this is matter for Chinese decision but could not be expected change internal situation China.
You are authorized inform FonMin Nat Mil Establishment making every effort expedite shipments mil matériel under $125 million grants. You should point out to him inherent difficulties involved in attempt on part foreign official advise Chi Govt regarding its courses of action even in unlikely event such official could be completely conversant with all complexities situation and even greater difficulties for foreign official not familiar with China. You should state that it is not believed inspection visit high-ranking US officer would or could offer solution China’s problems. With respect Chi Govt appeal to UN you should reply in sense final sentence preceding paragraph.”
With respect Chen Li-fu’s suggestion described Embtel 2119 November 6, we suggest this be ignored. You will recall President’s statement at press conference Mar 11, 194842 that broadening base Chi Govt did not mean inclusion Chinese Communists and that he did not want Corns in Chi Govt or anywhere else. Also pertinent is urtel 1180 Aug 13 to Amb Stuart43 stating that it is not likely situation will make it possible for us at this juncture formulate any rigid plans for our future policy in China and that developments in China are obviously entering into period extreme flux and confusion in which it will be impossible with surety perceive clearly far in advance pattern things to come and in which this Govt plainly must preserve maximum freedom action. This view was repeated to Amb in Deptel 1490 Oct 26.44
WashPost today carries despatch UP Shanghai Nov 6 dateline quoting a Chinese official source Shanghai as stating Sec Marshall had [Page 195] reversed his stand on aid to China and had now decided on all-out and immediate aid to China and had so informed FonMin in Paris. It is suggested you may wish include in tel to Amb Stuart comments on FonMin allegations regarding what you told him as reported in Nanking’s 2116 of Nov 6.