Foreign Relations of the United States, 1950, East Asia and the Pacific, Volume VI

793.51/7–750

The Acting Secretary of State to the Secretary of Defense (Marshall)¹

top secret

Washington, September 28, 1950.

My Dear Mr. Secretary: There is attached for the concurrence of the Department of Defense a redraft of the proposed reply to the Chinese Embassy’s aide-mémoire of July 7, 1950 regarding certain problems affecting the Chinese Government which arise in connection with the President’s statements of June 27 and July 19.²

You will note that the remarks regarding the fourth point mentioned in the Embassy’s aide-mémoire follow the wording which Secretary Johnson accepted in his letter dated August 2. The Embassy at Taipei has already conveyed to the Chinese Foreign Office responses cleared with the Department of Defense regarding points (1), (2), and (3) of the Embassy’s aide-mémoire.

After further consideration, this Department now proposes that no response be made to point (3) regarding the exercise by the Chinese Navy of the right of “visit and search” since there is no indication that comment is desired. It is the Department’s view that the Chinese Government’s interpretation of the right of “visit and search” as expressed in this paragraph is not objectionable, in view of the fact that it is proposed to “visit and search” Chinese vessels only. The Chinese Foreign Office has recently informed our Embassy that Chinese naval patrols have been instructed not to interfere with foreign flag merchant shipping on the high seas or in mainland territorial waters. With reference to Secretary Johnson’s letter dated August 2, 1950, this Department believes that the United States Government would assume a dangerous responsibility if it suggested on its own initiative to the Chinese Government that “visit and search” be applied to all vessels on the high seas regardless of nationality. The Chinese Government has generally termed its action with respect to the Communist-held mainland ports a “port closure order”, and no blockade has been proclaimed. The United States Government has not recognized the legality of the “port closure order”. If this Government informed the Chinese that the right of “visit and search” could be extended to all vessels, regardless of nationality, the United States would be in the position of having recognized a state of belligerency in the Chinese conflict and thus might be estopped from denying a similar right to the Chinese Communists.

I believe there are even more important political grounds for avoiding any encouragement to the Chinese Government to attempt “visit and search” on the high seas of non-Chinese vessels. Were the Chinese Navy to exercise unrestricted “visit and search”, the British and other concerned Governments might feel obliged to withdraw some of their naval units participating in the Korean campaign in order to provide escort protection for shipping in the neighborhood of China. Furthermore, as you are aware, the United States Government is at this time endeavoring to obtain support from the British and other United Nations members for its policy of neutralizing Formosa, as outlined by the President in his statements of June 27 and July 19. This task would be made considerably more difficult if the United States took the initiative in suggesting to the Chinese Government that “visit and search” be applied to non-Chinese vessels.

This thinking seems to be in accord with the aide-mémoire of June 27 to Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek, sent to give effect to the President’s announcement of the same date, stating inter alia that “a continuation of air and sea operations by forces under your Excellency’s command against the Chinese mainland or against shipping in Chinese waters or on the high seas would not be compatible with the discharge by the Seventh Fleet of the mission assigned to it”.³

Sincerely yours,

James E. Webb

1. George C. Marshall had became Secretary of Defense on September 21, succeeding Louis Johnson.

2. Concerning the Chinese Embassy’s aide-mémoire, see telegram 15, July 7, to Taipei, p. 371. The text of the draft proposed reply read as follows:

   “Reference is made to the Chinese Embassy’s aide-mémoire dated July 7, 1950, setting forth the views of the Chinese Government on certain matters related to President Truman’s statement of June 27, 1950, and the mission of the United States Seventh Fleet.

   “The United States Embassy at Taipei has already conveyed to the Foreign Office this Government’s response, where response seemed required, to the individual questions raised in the Embassy’s aide-mémoire.

   “With regard to numbered paragraph four of the aide-mémoire, the United States Government has taken note of and shares the concern of the Chinese Government regarding the export of military supplies to Communist-controlled areas of China.”

3. The Department of Defense concurred in the proposed aide-mémoire to the Chinese Embassy in a brief note, dated November 15 (not printed), from Secretary of Defense Marshall to Mr. Acheson (793.51/11–1550). On December 13, the Department of State sent an aide-mémoire to the Chinese Embassy, presumably identical with or along the lines of the draft quoted in footnote 2, but the record copy is missing from Department of State files. No further exchanges of correspondence on this subject took place during this period between the Secretaries of State and Defense.