893.00/11–848: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Acting Secretary of State
[Received November 8—6:36 p.m.]
Martel 115. Reference your Telmar 139. I have seen all the reference messages, but it does not appear that Stuart has seen my Martel 111. Please have it repeated to Stuart, plus whatever additional views Department may have, repeating the latter to me. This will answer his 2116 in part, and following redraft your Telmar 139 should complete the matter. As to Chen Li-fu’s suggestion, I agree with you that it should be ignored. Also ignore obviously false Washington Post story. Follows now redraft of proposed message to Stuart:
“Urtel 2117, November 6,45 indicates why visit high-ranking US officer to China would be undesirable and unproductive. It would be [Page 196] most unwise for us at this stage of disintegration Chinese Government authority in civil, as well as military, sphere to embark upon such a quixotic venture.
We are doing everything possible expedite shipment military material under $125 million grant. Material was quite evidently not reason for fall of Tsinan, Chinchow, and Manchurian debacle. Government troops had adequate arms but evidently lacked will to fight. With respect Chinese Government appeal to UN re Soviet treaty violations, this must be a matter for Chinese decision. It could not be expected change internal situation China, and might well involve actual Soviet participation in solution on the ground under possible UN procedure. Inform Foreign Minister national military establishment making every effort expedite shipments military material under $125 million grant. Point out inherent difficulties involved in attempt on part newly appointed foreign official to advise Chinese Government regarding its courses of action in present dilemma, even if such official would be completely conversant with all numerous complexities of situation, and point out even greater difficulties for foreign official not familiar with China.
With respect Chinese Government appeal to UN, you should reply in sense foregoing third paragraph.”