The Minister-Counselor of Embassy in China (Clark) to the Secretary of State
[Received 9:36 p. m.]
Cantel 635. Have just received telCan 358, June 20 re Shanghai. Department will have by now received Cantel 624, June 2110 re Chinese notification intention bomb Shanghai and Cantel 628, June 2111 re Chinese intention in effect blockade entire coast effective midnight June 25. In informal conversation with George Yeh, Acting Foreign Minister, I pointed out that action contemplated was in effect blockade and that blockade to be legal had to be effective. Yeh said use of word “blockade” had been purposely avoided as Government did not wish give recognition Communists as insurgents. I gather Government has firm plan establish effective blockade by sea and air of Shanghai and that port of Shanghai and Shanghai installations, possibly including power plant, will be thoroughly bombed beginning June 26. I have already casually mentioned possibility such action may result in losing public sympathy US but have not made issue of subject. Government is obviously delighted with weapon it has suddenly discovered with success so-called mining approaches Shanghai and intends take advantage thereof. There is even press comment of calling contemplated action “second front”. Yen Hsi-shan told me he planned revision military tactics and this action may be first evidence thereof.
In light developments since drafting telCan 358 as outlined above, does Department wish alter or strengthen instructions contained therein?
Sent Department; repeated Nanking 425, Shanghai 363, London unnumbered, Taipei 44.