330/11–2450: Telegram
The United States Representative at the United Nations (Austin) to the Secretary of State
[Received November 24—9:08 p. m.]
885. Re Chinese Communists in SC: Gross called on Bebler to discuss various tactics. Bebler indicated that he sees situation as opportunity for Yugoslavs to have useful contact with CCP representative from point of view of Yugoslav interests.
Jebb had called on him and they agreed Formosan item should be first on SC agenda, since CCP representative unwilling to discuss MacArthur report. However, when Gross suggested as alternative that two items of Formosa and Korea be bracketed for simultaneous debate, Bebler was sympathetic although he did not commit himself. He agreed that bracketing items had certain advantages in that the USSR would have difficulty in objecting, and it would avoid CCP representative being out of order in discussing Korea. He saw advantage from US point of view in having ROK representative seated at the table during entire discussion. However, he feels it likely that whatever happens there may be a sharp issue raised by CCP as a matter of prestige to establish first of all that there are no strings attached to their invitation. He seemed to indicate agreement that Tuesday afternoon1 would be good time for SC meeting.
Bebler stated in some detail what he proposed to say to CCP representative. He would point out that UN members are obligated to seek peaceful settlement of pending issues and that US as UN member is eager to do so. Also recent GA resolution obligates permanent members to confer and that extends to this issue.2 Of course someone must initiate and make arrangements for consultation and as SC President Bebler feels that he is appropriate person and that by doing so situation would be avoided after 1 December for Tsiang to control negotiations. He proposes to contact CCP representative today or Saturday3 and suggest meeting probably at Lake Success. He will point out to them that upon the way they conduct themselves depends whether tension is heightened leading toward war or an agreed settlement can be reached.
In commenting on this line, Gross emphasized that this is not a bilateral dispute between CCP and US but it is a charge by CCP against [Page 1231] UN as a whole. Therefore it would be unfortunate if any individual acting as mediator created a contrary impression. As to the US attitude as UN member Gross stated we are entirely willing to discuss any of the issues now in the UN with CCP representative but it would not be correct to say we are eager to do so. Also Bebler should know that with an important military offensive in progress we should do nothing that might hamper in any way its successful conclusion by premature decisions as to the form of consultations. Gross also observed that there will perhaps be other self-appointed mediators, mentioning in this connection the Indians. Bebler commented that he understood US position but wondered whether presence of the Seventh Fleet in the Formosa Straits is not in reality a bilateral issue since no UN action is involved.
Gross referred in passing to the Indians thinking about a resolution creating a subcommittee of six non-permanent members to negotiate with CCP representative. He thought this would be a questionable device which in any case would be vetoed by USSR and by Chinese Nationalist representative. Bebler was sympathetic but stressed importance of perhaps an informal arrangement to make possible centralizing negotiation CCP if Tsiang becomes President. He mentioned precedent of GA President in Greek case. Gross mentioned SC precedent in Berlin case and agreed that it would be desirable for Tsiang to step down as SC President not only on Formosa item but also on Korean item.
It was agreed that Bebler will call us as soon as and if he has seen CCP representative and will be on a standby basis over the week-end.
- November 28.↩
- Reference is to Iraqi-Syrian draft resolution which was incorporated as part C of U.N. General Assembly Resolution 377 (V), November 3, 1950, the “Uniting for Peace” Resolution; see Yearbook of the United Nations, 1950, pp. 189–190, 195. For related documentation, see vol. ii, pp. 303 ff.↩
- November 25.↩