Foreign Relations of the United States, 1951, The United Nations; The Western Hemisphere, Volume II

310.2/8–1051

The Firs Secretary of Embassy in the United Kingdom (Ringwalt) to the Department of State

confidential
No. 797

London, August 10, 1951.

Ref: Embassy’s Telegram No. 410, July 20 to Department, Repeated USUN as No.3.¹

Subject: British Attitude Toward Admission of Communist China to the United Nations.

The Embassy’s telegram under reference reported the substance of a conversation with the Head of the United Nations (Political) Department² of the Foreign Office in which it was stated that the conversations at Kaesong³ might require a “very slight verbal change” in the position of the United Kingdom with respect to the admission of Communist China into the United Nations.

It is now understood that, shortly after the above-mentioned conversation took place, the Foreign Office asked the British Embassy in Washington and the British delegation to the United Nations for their views as to a desirable change in the British formula for Communist China, and that the British Embassy has communicated its views to the Foreign Office about as follows:

• For the past few months, whenever the question of the admission of China to the United Nations or any of its specialized agencies has been considered, British representatives have been instructed to be guided by the following: Once the United States representative has suggested that the question of which government of China should be represented in the United Nations be postponed, the British representative will state (a) the United Kingdom recognizes the Central People’s Government, and the CPG should be represented in the United Nations and in the United Nations specialized agencies; (b) however, during the past few months the Chinese Communists have repeatedly attacked UN forces in Korea and have been pronounced by the United Nations as an aggressor; (c) therefore the United Kingdom reluctantly believes it appropriate to postpone consideration of which Chinese government will be seated in the United Nations.
• British instructions on the above subject are in a process of modification as follows: (a) In addition to (a), (b), and (c) above, the British representative would now state that whereas the United Kingdom once more supports postponement of the representation issue, it welcomes present indications that considerations which impelled the United Kingdom to take this course will soon be dispelled; and (b) if the United States motion for postponement, seconded by the United Kingdom, is defeated, the United Kingdom will have no recourse but to vote in favor of seating the representative of the Central People’s Government.

It is further understood that the above position has the approval of the British Government. It is gathered that the British Embassy has been in close touch with the Department on this question and probably therefore the Department is well aware of this modification of the British position.

The Department’s comments would be most useful as background for future discussions with the Foreign Office.

Arthur R. Ringwalt

1. Not printed.
2. C. C. Parrott.
3. This is a reference to the newly-initiated Korean armistice talks, being held at Kaesong, Korea. For documentation on the Kaesong talks, see volume vii.