123 Gleysteen, Culver: Telegram
The Consul at Dairen (Paddock) to the Secretary of State
[Received January 13—10:45 p. m.]
12. Soviet refusal issue Gleysteen2 pass (re immediate preceding telegram3) highlights Consulate difficulties arising from peculiar international status Dairen.
On one hand is Soviet interpretation their rights here and US compliance with that interpretation—for example, acquiescence to Soviet refusal allow US ship come here with couriers. On other hand is fact Kwantung government has dual nature by being both a Soviet puppet and an extension of Chinese Communist government at Harbin.
Until recently Soviets and Chinese Communists sensitive about Sino-Soviet agreement on Dairen4 which provided for Chinese civil administration of this port. They implied this fulfilled by “people’s democratic government” organized after “refusal” of Chinese National Government take over civil administration of Dairen 1946. However, dating from fall Mukden this sensitivity rapidly disappeared. When Chinese Communist government is formally established and given Soviet recognition, their present collaboration in Dairen probably will be conducted publicly.
It pointed out that even should US recognize Chinese Communist government it still not certain Soviet would then allow Consulate personnel or couriers enter Port Arthur naval base area [to] commute Mukden. Although value of Dairen Consulate as possible link with Mukden, as emphasized in previous telegrams, still remains, Embassy and Department should note Soviet disinclination allow Consulate personnel have slightest contact with naval base area. All requests [Page 861] of present Consulate officers for passes to leave Dairen city for picnics into nearby country not even answered by Soviet Kommandatura.
It believed Embassy or Department have never given Consulate directive on how to regard Soviet occupation authorities and Kwantung government. Although Consulate obviously not able to dispute legality of Soviet-Chinese composition and although every effort made comply quietly with many irritating restrictions, there is still a sphere where Consulate doubtful how to act. Pattern of Soviet and Chinese Communist behavior in relation to Consulate emphasizes their enmity and lack of cooperation. Examples are Contels 84 to Nanking November 4, repeated Department 192,5 Moscow 71; 104 to Nanking November 22, repeated Department 219,6 Moscow 88.
In previous cases I have noted Department’s custom to draw up periodically a concise description of its overall policy for each country of [or] area. If no objection, it would be appreciated if Department would telegraph Consulate review of its policy re Dairen and Port Arthur naval base area. Such a guide will help Consulate during present changing times here. Consulate anxious to act correctly in accepting or protesting Soviet interpretation their rights, in recognizing or not recognizing jurisdiction of Kwantung government in various fields, and in doing nothing which might become unfortunate precedent for time when Chinese Communists may take over Kwantung government openly.
Sent Nanking 10, Department 12, repeated Shanghai 14, Moscow 9.