Foreign Relations of the United States, 1949, The Far East and Australasia, Volume VII, Part 2

793.96/7–1449: Telegram

The Chargé in the Philippines (Lockett) to the Secretary of State

Manila, July 14, 1949—10 p. m.

1737. I saw President Quirino July 14 and summarize below my conversation with him which related principally Sino-Philippine conversation Baguio. (As Department will observe, it largely, but not entirely, confirms information supplied Embtel 1730, July 13, by Netherlands Minister.)

President opened conversation by asking whether I had received any word in regard to his US trip. When I replied I had not, President, without stating he no longer wishes be invited, said he does not need go US make propaganda in order be reelected. He stated that while he was grateful for past US aid, it has been embarrassing [to] be in position beggar on knees with outstretched hand; he added US might find it well to talk with the man who is now to head a new union of states. He added he realizes US greatly occupied elsewhere, especially Western Europe, but feels we are making mistake in neglecting real friends in Far East, while even the USSR is helping the nations associated with it. These friends now feel abandoned, result [of] US troop withdrawals [from] South Korea, against which Philippine representative UNCOK had made energetic representations, and of US abandonment of policy aiding Chinese Government.

Quirino quoted Chiang as stating that (1) China was exhausted by war she fought from 1931 to 1945 against Japan; (2) US during much that period sold scrap [to] Japan [to be] used forge weapons employ against China (Quirino added that some of it probably went into bullets used against Filipinos); and (3) Madame Chiang had gone through humiliations in US.

Italian Minister has informed officer Embassy [that] Quirino also quoted Chiang as saying US post-war aid could not be used in reconstruction North China, so Chinese Government had retained and still holds funds intended therefor. Quirino told both Italian Minister and myself Chiang says he still has 21/2 million troops or about as much as Communists, can fight 3 years more, will fight to last ditch in China, and was not seeking asylum. Quirino quoted Chiang as saying he was in general well-received Taiwan and is able draw from it assistance mostly in shape supplies. He said some of Chinese oppose him, but they are in cahoots with Communists. As for Philippine military assistance to China, Quirino told me, it is out of question as “You have not fulfilled your commitments to me under the military assistance pact”.¹

When he first mentioned the idea of a Pacific Union, Quirino told me, he had no other thought than that the US should be its rightful leader. As the US too indifferent or occupied, the Philippines, China, and Korea had gone ahead to develop cooperative measures protect themselves against advance communism. Should the US wish to participate, it would of course be welcome.

The union, he said, is primarily not military, but social and economic. Philippine economic aid to China, he thought could best be in the guise of expanded exports to that country. I asked what products China wants are produced here, and he replied shipments might be composed US goods now imported duty-free into Philippines which Philippines could then reexport China. (Comment: I doubt the President has thought this through.)

When I asked about plans for further meetings, Quirino said at first meeting, which purely preliminary, it was decided he should take lead, and he wanted Romulo come home latter part next week, work out further details. He added he wants show that he considers this task more important than that Romulo doing in US [UN]. Romulo is to sound out other Pacific nations, including Indonesia and Australia. Quirino said he told Netherlands Minister that Indonesian Republicans would have be included Indonesian representation either as separate group or with others, but that no white man should be on Indonesian delegation. He added he had contacted local Indonesian Republican representatives who will accept immediately if invited.

As will be gathered from above, Quirino displayed considerable resentment toward US in course discussion. At one point he specifically asked why Secretary had made statements discouraging attempts form Pacific Union. I replied that Secretary of State’s statement² doubtless intended convey view that situation Asia dissimilar from that in North Atlantic area and that similar steps Asia therefore might not be appropriate.

Sent Department 1737, repeated Canton 3.

Lockett

1. Signed at Washington, March 21, 1947; Department of State, Treaties and Other International Acts Series (TIAS) No. 1662, or 61 Stat. (pt. 3) 3283.
2. For statement of May 18 on subject of “Pacific Pact corresponding to North Atlantic Treaty untimely”, see Department of State Bulletin, May 29, 1949, p. 696. On July 13 at his press conference Secretary of State Acheson said: “I think the attitude as stated by me in May still stands”.