501.A Summaries/11–2349: Telegram
The United States Representative at the United Nations (Austin) to the Secretary of State
1364
. . . . . . .
Chinese Case
After examining the US-suggested resolution on China, Tsiang (China) remarked it was disappointing to him and he had hoped the US could at least include his last para, which called upon the states not to give political or economic aid to the Communists. It was pointed out that inclusion of such a para would immediately eliminate the co-sponsors. After further discussion of the likely effect if Tsiang also tabled a resolution, he agreed to consider including in his statement some reference to what he hoped the GA would do without actually tabling his planned draft.
In reference to Russian tactics, Tsiang believed the Soviets would not refuse to participate in the debate but admitted the possibility that they might try some preliminary maneuver to bar him. He doubted the Soviets would try to seat a delegation of the Communist regime although he did not exclude this possibility. Tsiang thought it possible that the Soviets would take the matter up with President Romulo before the debate begins in Committee 1 and request action in the GC or in the Credentials Committee.
Lange (Norway) said he “doubted very much” that his delegation could join in sponsoring the US draft. He added that his Government is identifying itself with British policy on the matter of recognizing the Communist Government of China, and that Norway had very large shipping interests in China.
Final word about the possibility of the Philippines agreeing to be a co-sponsor of the US draft had not been received from his government, Lopez (Philippines) told USGADel.
Plimsoll (Australia) said that while his delegation accepted the substance of paras 3 (a) and (b), he reserved the right to suggest changes in phraseology.
India will support the US-suggested resolution but cannot co-sponsor it, Rau (India) told USGADel. He added that apparently there had been some change in his Government’s views because it had now decided to recognize the Chinese Communist regime sometime between the 15th and the end of December. Told of the understanding that the UK did not now expect to recognize this regime until about [Page 216] the first of the year, Rau indicated surprise and gave the impression he thought the Indian position was probably responsive to a parallel British attitude.
Following a study of the US draft, Broustra (France) questioned the advisability of the last para of the preamble and of point 3 of the operative portion, stating the latter seemed to him to apply to British tenure of Hong Kong.
. . . . . . .