894A.00/5–2549
The Ambassador in the United Kingdom (Douglas) to the Secretary of State
[Received June 3.]
No. 894
Sir: I have the honor to report that very little attention has been given in British official and unofficial circles to the various problems of Taiwan, such as the status of the island itself and the status of any [Page 342] Chinese Government which may be set up there, especially in view of the fact that much of China’s resources are reported to have been transferred to the island. There is also a report in London that Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek and his two sons have left Shanghai for Taiwan but the British Foreign Office has not been able to confirm this. In view of the above facts the Embassy has been endeavoring to obtain some indication of British thinking in regard to Taiwan and the following are the results:
Official—Foreign Office
Mr. Dening,62 of the Foreign Office, stated that neither the British Cabinet nor officials of the Foreign Office have given much consideration to the problems of Taiwan and no Foreign Office policy has been established as yet. He stated that should a refugee Chinese government or a Chinese government in exile be set up in Taiwan, which is not yet legally Chinese territory, it is probable that the British Government would simply appoint a British Consulate in Tamsui as an office of the British Embassy in China. His own opinions were that any Chinese government established in Taiwan would be in a very ambiguous position and would present difficult problems to the governments of the world and especially to the United Nations. Should we or should we not recognize any such government as being the Government of China, entitled to appoint diplomatic representatives abroad and to the United Nations? Moreover, the problem of who should control Chinese Government funds abroad would arise. However, Dening said, one thing is certain, the Communists must not be allowed by the Western nations to take Taiwan.
Communist control of Taiwan would be a direct threat to the Philippines and to South-East Asia, both by infiltration and by direct aggression. Under no circumstances should this be allowed to take place.
Parliament
During the Debate on China in the House of Commons on May 5, Mr. Walter Fletcher (Conservative) wished to discuss the problem of Taiwan. He was ruled out of order by the Deputy Chairman (Mr. Bowles) (Labor), who made the following surprising statement: “Formosa, I realize, is the seat of the present Nationalist Government of China. But it is not China. I think it was part of Japan …63 My geography may be weak, but surely Hong Kong, although ruled by the Colonial Office here, is really geographically part of China. Formosa [Page 343] is a part of Japan, and is not really China, though the Chinese Government may be there.”
On May 16, Mr. Teeling (Conservative) asked whether the British Government would “reconsider the position of Formosa under the Cairo Agreement64 in order that the surplus population and industries of Hong Kong may be transferred there.” He further asked if the Foreign Secretary65 realized that Formosa “was actually offered to Britain in 1895 before the Japanese took it over? Does he further realize that Hong Kong cannot go on absorbing the Chinese and others, and if these people want the protection of the British why not allow them to have it in Formosa?” Mr. Bevin replied: “I cannot agree with the hon. Member in the proposal which he now makes …63 I have given serious consideration to Formosa, and I think the hon. Gentleman’s Question was rather startling.”
Unofficial
The Economist, on May 21, published a short note regarding the “Ownerless Isle”, that is, Taiwan. The article described the present status of Formosa rather accurately and stated that Formosa with its sugar production is better off as regards export trade than any other comparable area of China, and its material resources have been greatly increased by the transfer to the island of much of China’s monetary reserves. However, the article stated any defense of the island over a lengthy period would require some foreign aid. “It remains to be seen whether the current State Department policy of writing off the Chinese Nationalist cause is to be applied to Formosa as well as to the mainland. If the American Government still wishes to save anything from the wreck of its China policy, the unsettled status of Formosa in international law would afford a ground for treating the island as a separate entity, even if recognition were given to a Communist regime as the Government of China …63 The problem of refugees in Hong Kong is already acute. If Formosa were to be overrun by, or handed over to, the Communists, the world would have to cope with a new wave of Displaced Persons, and they would either have to be forcibly repatriated to China, in reversal of principles hitherto accepted in the west, or accommodated in such countries as the Philippines or Malaya, which already have their local problems of Chinese immigration.”
Respectfully yours,
Counselor of Embassy
- Maberly E. Dening, British Assistant Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Far East).↩
- Omission indicated in the source text.↩
- For declaration by President Roosevelt, Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek, and British Prime Minister Winston S. Churchill, December 1, 1943, see Foreign Relations, The Conferences at Cairo and Tehran, 1943, p. 448.↩
- Ernest Bevin.↩
- Omission indicated in the source text.↩
- Omission indicated in the source text.↩