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

893.00/4–2349: Telegram

The Minister-Counselor of Embassy in China (Clark) to the Secretary of State

Canton, April 23, 1949.
[Received April 23—7:39 a. m.]

Cantel 258. Kmt CC³⁹ statement April 20 declaring stand Communist peace terms, full text released local press April 21. English translation supplied Central News. Gist: Rejects Communist terms as demand unconditional surrender. Move [to] enslave people, install Communist dictatorship, make China another Czechoslovakia. Calls upon Communists issue cease-fire, allow negotiations continue. Emphasizes Communist unjustified attempt pin full responsibility civil war on Kmt, reviews history Communist-Kmt relations, placing full blame on Communists.

“If CCP⁴⁰ had not unreasonably pinned war guilt on Central Government, this party for sake of bringing hostilities to end quite willing let by-gones be by-gones. However, since CCP had so twisted facts in order blind entire world, this party …⁴¹ cannot possibly accept Communist charges …”

Communist terms

“no more than tyrannical judgment imposed on people and nation. Their ultimate aim [to] set up one-party dictatorship under CCP. They not only seek wipe out from record this party’s effort at propagating democratic constitutionalism, but they also give not slightest consideration to people’s present demand for peace and for their personal liberty and security. … CCP virtually seeks knock entire Chinese nation and Chinese people behind iron curtain, making them counterpart of Poland and Czechoslovakia,”

Then says peace agreement must be based on principles enunciated by Kmt April 18 (see ourtel April 19⁴²). In calling for Communist cease-fire order, cites government compliance with Communist request January 1946 for immediate truce before convening of PCC.⁴³

First part statement devoted lengthy review history Nationalist-Communist relations since 1928, stating party’s case, CCP not Kmt responsible civil war, “For past 20 years damage sustained by our people as result Communist rebellion and betrayal in no wise less than that sustained by people as result of Jap invasion. In fact it might exceed latter in severity.” Contends that “since government first proposed restoration of peace to nation” (Generalissimo’s New Year statement) has been willing ignore question responsibility civil war.

Contends that during period 1928 (after “national unity” was effected) to 1937 national “rehabilitation” not achieved because “Communist Party repeatedly initiated rebellious activities and destroyed this unity. …”

Then quotes in full CCP statement 1937⁴⁴ (after Marco Polo, bridge⁴⁵), stating CCP agreed (1) adhere Sun’s Three People’s Principles, (2) abandon “terroristic activities and communication movements to overthrow political power of Kmt and suspend policy of forcibly confiscating private land”, (3) “abolish Soviet regime and put into effect democratic rule”, (4) abolish designation “Red Army” to be “renamed people’s revolutionary army, placed directly under command national military council of National Government.”

Then alleges during anti-Jap war Communists “broke their promise”, “created disturbances everywhere” and “launched military offensives”. “If it had not been for government’s utmost patience and broadmindedness military situation. … would have almost been rendered untenable and very life of nation terminated”.

In post-war period, states Kmt “took lead proposing peaceful settlement,” convened PCC, National Assembly, drafted constitution. “However, CCP. … continued seize power through military means. … brought about widespread unrest throughout nation”, destroyed fruits of victory over Japanese.

Sent Department 258, repeated Nanking unnumbered, Shanghai 165.

Clark

39. Kuomintang Central Executive Committee.
40. Chinese Communist Party.
41. Omissions indicated in the source text.
42. Not printed.
43. Political Consultative Conference.
44. For Communist “Manifesto on Unity” of September 22, 1937, see Department of State, United States Relations With China (Washington, Government Printing office, 1949), p. 523.
45. For documentation on clash of July 7, 1937, see Foreign Relations, 1937, vol. iii, pp. 128 ff.