501.BB/9–1649: Telegram
The United States Representative at the United Nations (Austin) to the Secretary of State
priority
1155. For Hickerson from Ross. Tsiang was not at Lake Success today and I was unable, therefore, to have casual conversation with him re China item as discussed in telecon with Hickerson this morning. I did, however, call on Tsiang this afternoon on my initiative. Said since this last working day before USDel arrives here Monday and since we had not discussed for several days item he is thinking of, might be well for me find out if he had any further information or views on this subject.
Tsiang said he had telegraphed his Government putting up to them for decision three alternatives as follows:
- 1.
- Maximum position with objectives of (a) finding Soviets guilty of treaty violations, (b) non-recognition Communists, (c) support Nationalist Government.
- 2.
- Minimum position which would include finding Soviet violation and recommendation no support of Communists.
- 3.
- Alternative position; Tsiang would cover Chinese case thoroughly in his plenary speech but would not put item on agenda.
Tsiang said he had not yet received reply from his Government. He guessed his instructions would give him discretion to choose between alternatives one and two above. Tsiang went on to say his present intention is to deal with subject in his plenary speech which he anticipates he will make on afternoon next Wednesday or Thursday without disclosing at that time whether or not he intends to propose item for agenda.
I recalled briefly to Tsiang that we considered his maximum objectives (b and c, non-recognition Communists and support Nationalist Government) as inappropriate and probably not possible of acceptance by GA. With reference first objective (finding Soviets guilty treaty violation), I reminded him degree and nature US support would [Page 186] depend on degree and nature of evidence he had to present in support of his case. I said I had received no further information or comments to pass on to him, adding that our people would of course be glad to consider any information he might care give us on nature his case.
Tsiang said he had just received from China this morning “whole suitcase full” documentary evidence. He showed me and leafed over for my benefit thick album of pictures with captions in English and Chinese indicating Russian rifles, machine guns, etc., etc., captured from Communists, also such items as pictures of Communist ceremonies with Russian soldiers participating, photostat of pledge required to be signed by adherents to Chinese Communist Party with pictures Marx, Engels, Lenin,1 Stalin2 and Mao. I made no comment on this “evidence” which impressed me as quite amateurish and certainly not in form readily useable in GA. Tsiang, however, seemed to be impressed by it, saying he “had no idea such material existed”.
After we had discussed various other GA matters (reported separately), which I had used as partial excuse for calling on him, Tsiang returned to China item and said he would like my opinion on idea he had been thinking of. He said if it were decided to present item he would, of course, speak on the subject in First Committee. He then asked whether US would propose or possibly join with others in sponsoring resolution in accordance with precedents in similar cases in GA in past. He had in mind, I gathered, resolution covering their minimum position. I said I had no personal view but would report question to Department. I assumed Department would consider question in light our view that degree and nature our support would depend on effectiveness of his case. I thought Department might not wish to give him definite answer this question before it had opportunity to judge this factor. [Ross.]