Foreign Relations of the United States, 1949, The Far East: China, Volume VIII

125.6336/1–1249: Telegram

The Ambassador in China (Stuart) to the Secretary of State

Nanking, January 12, 1949—5 p. m.
[Received January 13—9:23 a. m.]

95. We have drafted joint statement on Chinese Communist denial of communication facilities to British, French and American Consulates General in Mukden as suggested in Deptel 1876, December 23,⁵ but have been unable to sell idea to British and French Ambassadors.⁶ British Ambassador does not wish to make joint statement and instead proposes that American Embassy give story to foreign correspondents suggesting that they apply to British and French Embassies for further details about British and French Consulates General.

French Ambassador is reluctant make joint statement and although he has agreed to request instructions from Paris, he is not recommending any action. According to French Ambassador, his reluctance is based on following reasons:

(1) He still hopes to reestablish contact with his Consulate General via Hong Kong, Saigon, or Chinese messenger.

(2) He thinks joint statement might prejudice rather than help his Consul General.

(3) French Foreign Office has issued strict instructions that diplomatic officers abroad should issue no press statements.

We have told British and French Ambassadors of Embtel 39, January 5 to Department and informed them that in our judgment CCP statement that “question of communications for Mukden Consulate General is part of larger question of US attitude toward new Government and toward Kmt Government” is little short of blackmail. While expressing sympathy and concern British and French Ambassadors still refuse cooperate in joint statement which we believe occasion warrants. It is apparent that these local representatives are quite content to ride along on coattails of US without appearing to take any positive action which might compromise future dealings themselves or their nationals in CCP-occupied China. Unless Department believes their noncooperation and opportunism are important enough to be contested in London and Paris and in order to avoid delay, we recommend as preliminary step Department approve our giving story for attribution to AP or New York Times correspondent in Nanking.

In response to this correspondent’s query we would:

(1) Express our serious concern about safety since November 18 of American personnel and interests in Mukden.⁷

(2) Point out this is ominous portent of CCP policy toward USA.

(3) State that act of holding incommunicado consular offices of sovereign countries is contrary to international usage and principles guiding relations between civilised communities.

(4) Reveal attitude of CCP authorities as reported in Embtel 39, January 5 and emphasize that we consider solution to communication blockade of our Mukden Consulate General is unrelated to broad question of American policy in China.

(5) Point out that CCP could offer American Consulate General ample outgoing communication facilities to Hong Kong, Dairen and Moscow over American transmission required during and after war and over commercial radio stations.

(6) Recall that following their capture of Tsinan, CCP North Shensi radio broadcast safety and welfare messages from missionaries in that city.

(7) Suggest correspondent inquire of British or French Embassies for detail re status their Consulates General in Mukden.

Sent Department 95, pouched Shanghai, repeated Paris 3, London 2.

Stuart

5. Foreign Relations, 1948, vol. vii, p. 849.
6. Sir Ralph Stevenson and Jacques Meyrier, respectively.
7. Mukden was occupied by Chinese Communist forces on November 2, 1948, the Consulate General’s radio was closed by Communists on November 18, and the Consulate General’s staff was placed under virtual house arrest on November 20.