893.00/6–2749: Telegram
The Chargé in the Soviet Union (Kohler) to the Secretary of State
[Received 6:54 p. m.]
1620. Not surprising to Embassy are reports from Chinese Communist sources of elements “veering toward US” and of Communist [Page 400] anxiety for US aid (Department info[rmation] airgrams, June 15, 8:05 and 8:35 a. m.44). Chinese Communists intelligent, hardheaded realists who can be expected exert selves utmost wangle trade concessions from west.
Chief Nanking Alien Affairs Office, Huang Hua, can be depended do particularly good job trying convince US “liberal” CCP attitude. Notable he and Chen Chia-kan (vice-president WFDY,45 delegate Paris peace conference, etc.) seem be playing important role CCP regime. Training and experience as interpreters US observers section Yenan prepared them for present important diplomatic duties. However, whether either is more “liberal” than other Chinese may be open to doubt.
Embassy believes axiomatic that CCP unlikely be weaned away from Communist orthodoxy by west eagerness trade now. Communists may try for time get best of two possible worlds: Soviets and ours. Economic recovery can come quickest through US aid. Their willingness try US first does not however carry offer to change Communist principles. Real attitude clearly expressed Liu Shao-chi his November 1948 treatise “Nationalism and Internationalism” recently published Pravda (Embtel June 746). According Pravda version, he said “No oppressed people can receive real liberation and independence as result so-called ‘aid’ of imperialist countries. Therefore very mistaken and harmful cherish illusions to effect American imperialism sincerely wishes help Chinese people achieve real independence, peace and democracy.”
Kremlin cannot afford lose China and, if CCP strategy get help from west fails, Soviets will certainly strain to aid China. Such effort, whether successful or not, would impose drain on Soviet economy perhaps serious enough weaken its activities among satellites. If unsuccessful, CCP may then take stock to consider how industrialization China is to be accomplished. Only at that moment, if we have previously maintained our firmness and have refrained from encouraging Chinese Communist regime, is there hope that Mao and company may toy with idea following independent path from Soviet teachers.
If this interpretation correct, China policy of west must be based not on China alone but upon our relationship with entire Soviet-dominated Communist world. Policy must be firm, patient and impervious to temptation. Above all valiant missionary effort will be required convince our west friends that long view is only view and that Mao is not for sale now.
Sent Department 1620; repeated Nanking 70, Paris 265, Canton 35, Canberra 11, London 156.