893.00/9–1449
The Consul General at Peiping (Clubb) to the Secretary of State
[Received November 21]
No. 129
The Consul General has the honor to refer to his telegram No. 1429 of August 2779 and to transmit herewith a copy (in translation) of an article as published in the Kuang Ming Jih Pao (Brilliant Daily, Peiping) of August 24, 1949, containing the text of a condemnatory statement issued by the China Democratic League in regard to the White Paper. The statement declares that the White Paper is merely an attempt to conceal the American Government’s present plans for [Page 1408] further aggression toward China and endeavors to refute the principal arguments of the White Paper.
Summary of Article:
The fact that the White Paper’s principal aim is to conceal the Truman Government’s further aggressive designs toward China can best be proved by reference to the points raised by the statement itself.
The White Paper attempts to substantiate its claim regarding the long history of Sino-American friendship by referring to such examples of American magnanimity toward China as the “Open Door Policy,” “Most Favored Nation Clause,” etcetera. In point of fact, these were little more than attempts on the part of the United States to compensate for its late start in the imperialistic struggle for colonies and to convert China into a colony of its own. During the past five years American encroachment upon China has become intensified. President Truman, the representative of the American capitalistic class, believes that in order to oppose the Soviet Union and Communism, he must control China in the Pacific. The White Paper’s descriptions of the Hurley, Marshall and Wedemeyer missions to China themselves constitute the most convincing proof that America’s sole aim has been to convert China into an anti-Soviet, anti-Communist base of attack.
Of especial note is the White Paper’s passage concerning the “three roads confronting the United States when peace came.” The first road, that of nonintervention in China, was obviously ill-suited to American plans; the second, that of large-scale military intervention, was not followed merely because of the American Government’s certain knowledge that it would not enjoy the support of the American people; while the third road, the road leading to coalition government in China, was even more hypocritical than the second in that it would in time ensure Kuomintang control of all China. Both General Marshall’s efforts to assist the Kuomintang and General Wedemeyer’s recommendation regarding trusteeship for the Northeast, not to mention the vast amounts of money and military supplies afforded the Kmt Government, evince American imperialistic designs against China. The White Paper’s omission of any reference to the facts that General Marshall and Ambassador Stuart in practice supported Chiang in preventing the Communist Party from joining the Government, in unilaterally convening the National Assembly and in tearing up the resolutions of the old PPC [PCC80] attest to the deceptive nature of “mediation.” American imperialism now must adopt one of the three policies: to [Page 1409] create internal chaos in China, to support the Kmt in its spoilage of the Chinese people, or to undertake direct action against China.
The true meaning of Secretary Acheson’s letter encouraging “democratic individualists” is that America is now seeking new pawns who will carry out American imperialistic dictates in China. Genuine democratic individualists, however, will rally to the support of New China Again, such terms as “a regime serving the interests of a foreign country”, serve only to insult China’s best friend and to enrage the Chinese people. As Chairman Mao has indicated, only one path lies before China, and that is to stand on the side of the Soviet Union.
The American people should recall their own revolutionary origins when criticizing revolutionary New China. They should realize that a “Pacific Union” and collaboration with Japan repeats the old fascist pattern in the Pacific. They should know that the Chinese people now have the strength with which to defeat such brutal acts as “economic blockade.” We hope that progressive Americans will ally themselves with progressive Chinese in order to oppose the reactionary intrigues of President Truman and Secretary Acheson and to support world peace and progress.
End of Summary.
This statement contains little that is new to those who have followed recent publicity on the subject; but it categorically defines the Democratic League’s political position.