310.393/2–2151: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Embassy in the United Kingdom
priority
3874. Pls deliver fol msg from Sec to FonMin. “I have been informed of your views in the ques of Chi representation in the UN as explained to the Dept by the Brit Emb here. I had hoped that you might share our position concerning the weight to be given in this connection to the GA Res of Dec 14 on recognition by the UN of representation of a Memb state and to the Res of Feb 1 on Chi Commie aggression in Korea. In my opinion for the Chi Commies to be seated in UN organs while their forces are engaged against UN forces wld tend to vitiate the good effects which it is hoped that the Feb 1 Res may accomplish and to confuse public opinion in this country and thru out the FE.
I am hopeful, however, that whatever differences we may have on the substance of the issues involved we may be able to find means of avoiding a further and needless public evidence of disunity between the US and UK on this ques.
I am bringing this matter to ur attn personally at this time because ECAFE is about to meet at Lahore. The voting situation in this organ on the Chi representation ques is close and the Brit vote will be crucial. We had intended to support or initiate proposals which wld avoid a conflict on the substantive issue by postponing action on any motion on Chi representation until the GA has acted. If, as it appears, such a procedural proposal wld cause difficulty for ur Del, I am confident that the US and UK Dels can work out some other approach which wld be mutually acceptable. It is my understanding that on two occasions recently the US and UK Dels in NY have been able to find solutions to the Chi representation ques in UN bodies there which both Dels were able to support. Last year, the problem was solved in ECAFE when it expressed its wish and desire that the ques of Chi representation be resolved by a higher body. The UK [Page 232] Del abstained on this Res at the time. Wld it not be possible for the UK Del to abstain on if not support a similar proposal this year?
I do not wish to suggest the precise nature which the solution might take because details can be more easily worked out by the Dels themselves. It is my hope, however, that you may see ur way clear to give latitude to the UK Del in Lahore to work out some procedural solution to the US Del. With good will on both sides I am sure that our two Dels can find means of preventing our differences on this ques from becoming unfortunately, and I believe unnecessarily, exaggerated at this time.
The problem here presented is, of course, not limited to ECAFE but will arise repeatedly in other bodies in the near future. For this reason, I am venturing to ask your help in laying a basis for a rapprochement between UK and US Dels on this issue and can assure you that I also will work toward this end.”