893.50 Recovery/6–1548: Telegram

The Ambassador in China (Stuart) to the Secretary of State

1084. To Dept. and ECA. Herewith Embassy comments on points raised by Foreign Office in June 14 aide-mémoire (reEmbtel 1082, June 14, 6 p.m.) reference made to same numbered paragraphs: [Page 551]

Tung Ling, director, American Affairs Dept, Foreign Office, stated to Embassy officer that Foreign Office position re first and second paragraphs of preamble reflected views of Foreign Minister. Tung questioned whether similar requirement would be insisted upon by US Govt on agreements concluded with European countries. Question of face appears paramount, possibly coupled with fear of local criticism involving charges Foreign Office being forced conclude agreement not strictly bilateral in nature. We believe Chinese object[ion] strong but not adamant. Should Dept and ECA consider forcing issue, we suggest careful consideration be given to question of Chinese sensibilities and possible desirability of insisting upon Chinese acceptance of more important and substantive provisions of agreement.
2, 3 and 4.
No special comment required.
Tung emphasized Foreign Office concern over suggested deletion, stating that it would be “almost impossible” for Chinese Govt to accept original wording this subparagraph and that Chinese Govt would undoubtedly be attacked by its local critics for signing any agreement at this time giving MFN treatment to Japan and to lesser extent in Southern Korea. Tung spoke at length on this point, adding that even if subparagraph reworded but with substance unchanged it would be most difficult for Foreign Office to obtain approval of agreement by Legislative Yuan. In view Department statement to effect language this subparagraph may be changed, Embassy reserves recommendations. In this connection current anti-US student campaign on subject US policy towards Japan should not be overlooked.
While Foreign Office drops its proposal for revision paragraph 3, article VI, it now suggests deletion entire article, Tung stating this suggestion made specifically at instance Foreign Minister who assertedly convinced nothing can be done by Chinese Govt except with assistance US Govt. As ECA position re insertion article VI presumably not subject to change, we suggest that article stand in draft as originally reported Deptel 774, May 24 and revised Deptel 814, May 29, 6 p.m.
Dept will note that previous Foreign Office proposal for provisions relating to exchange rates reported Embtels 1010 and 1015, June 5, in connection with article VII whereas now connected by Chinese with article VIII. Tung stated that provisions in cited agreement appeared workable, mutually satisfactory and subject to renegotiation if necessary. Embassy not informed of Department’s plans re article VIII. Re last sentence paragraph 2 (c), article VII, Department’s assumption correct.
As Foreign Office has no intention of insisting on deletion article XIII, Embassy recommends taking Foreign Office at its word especially as treaty not yet in force.