123 Gleysteen, Culver: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Consul at Dairen ( Paddock )
11. Urtel 12 Jan 11 rptd Nanking 10, Shanghai 14, Moscow 9. Following Dept views. Status Soviets Port Arthur naval base area and Dairen determined by agreement accompanying Sino-Soviet Treaty 1945.7 Soviets contend Dairen subject military supervision or control established Port Arthur naval base areas pending formal termination war with Japan. Nat Govt of China does not agree that such is meaning intent of agreement and it is palpably absurd to maintain that other than a fictitious state of war exists after unconditional surrender and occupation of Japan. US of course not party to this agreement. This Govt has taken formal cognizance undesirable situation [Page 862] Dairen in notes to Sov and Chi Govts in Jan 19478 urging prompt consideration by those Govts current unsatisfactory situation Dairen with view implementing pertinent provisions Sino-Soviet agreements re Dairen and adding US Govt perceives no reason further delay reopening port international commerce under Chinese administration as contemplated in agreements. In Note Aug 14, 1947 to Sov Govt9 US reiterated these views, expressed hope Sov and Chi Govts would soon be able reconcile differing views and added in interim Sov Govt would be held responsible treatment accorded American interests Dairen. Latter responsibility Sovs categorically rejected. Basis approaching Chinese and Sovs each case US responsibility to American interests in area. From standpoint practical operating procedure it recognized Sov exercise de facto control Dairen and you will have to deal with them. In such dealings you should endeavor treat them as military authority exercising de facto control in area without attempting pass on legality control.
Notwithstanding special concessions to Sovs in area, sovereignty Kwantung remains Chinese. Kwantung civil administration has existed in defiance Govt of China recognized by US and should be treated as unrecognized authority. Continued functioning of consulate in area under control unrecognized authorities or dispatch of consular officers such territory does not itself imply recognition but in any course of action it most important leave no doubt recognition by this Govt not implied and Consul acting entirely in consular capacity. Relations with unrecognized local officials should be maintained insofar as possible on informal and personal basis. Social invitations of private nature may be accepted in discretion principal officer but acceptance should be in personal not official capacity. In general invitations to social functions of official nature should be filed without formal acknowledgement and such functions should not be attended. Foregoing applies to Kwantung govt or any successor which not established by Govt of China recognized by US.
American policy with respect Dairen has been directed toward establishment of Chinese civil administration responsible to Nat Govt China and free port open to commerce and shipping all nations, as provided Sino-Soviet agreements. While it unrealistic expect Nat Govt can under present circumstances establish civil administration Dairen, implementation free port provision agreement remains US objective. Furthermore Dept considers continued maintenance Consulate Dairen highly desirable standpoint American interests in area and believes importance office will increase with cessation hostilities [Page 863] Manchuria, reestablishment communications and general reconstruction. It may be possible work out arrangement whereby personnel Dairen and Mukden interchangeable. Whatever may be the legal basis present control and administration Dairen, Dept realizes control by Sovs and Kwantung civil administration is reality and must be accepted as such in working out practical operating procedure Dairen.
- Signed at Moscow, August 14, 1945, United Nations Treaty Series, vol. 10, p. 300.↩
- See telegram No. 18, January 3, 1947, 6 p. m., from the Ambassador in the Soviet Union and telegram No. 28, January 6, 1947, 5 p. m., from the Ambassador in China, Foreign Relations, 1947, vol. vii, p. 482; and telegram No. 1252, December 31, 1946, to the Ambassador in China, ibid., 1946, vol. x, p. 1200.↩
- See telegram No. 1588, August 12, 1947, 5 p. m., to the Ambassador in the Soviet Union, ibid., 1947, vol. vii, p. 535.↩