694.001/6–2151: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Embassy in the Republic of China 1
1385. For Rankin from Rusk. Reurtel 1749, June 21.2 For info, formula in multilateral treaty giving non-signing states at war right to similar bilateral treaty was not a formula upon which Brit insisted. On contrary it was formula which Brit Cabinet initially rejected and which they finally accepted only after Dulles had made it unmistakably clear to Attlee that US wld end negotiations rather than accept proposed Brit formula which wld in effect have given UK veto power over right of Jap to make bilateral treaty with Natl Govt. The result is in Brit generally regarded by the left-wing press as grave defeat for Brit Govt. US made this proposal because it was maximum which could be obtained for Natl Govt consistently with getting a Jap peace treaty, a result just as vital to Natl Govt as to US. With possible exception Phil which may not sign anyway on account reparations waiver there is not a single nation represented on FEC which wld be co-signer of a multilateral peace treaty with Natl Govt. This position is shared by govts which continue to recognize the Natl Govt but which are not prepared to recognize its power to bind China to a permanent treaty of peace. Without the concurrence of a majority of FEC members to Jap peace treaty the US wld probably feel it cld not safely make a treaty of its own with Jap as [Page 1136] this might leave FEC in position to claim right to exercise occupation controls over Jap without US participation since we wld be at peace. It is not to interest of Formosa or Natl Govt that prospective Jap peace settlement shld collapse. This wld undoubtedly greatly increase Commie strength in Jap and wld make problematic the continuing adherence of Jap to free world. We do not doubt that the actual working of our formula will both secure indispensable peace for Jap and at same time in its operation lead to even stronger position for Natl Govt than at present. If, as is generally assumed, Jap decides to recognize and resume dip relations with Natl Govt that Govt wld automatically have right to conclude bilateral peace treaty substantially identical with multilateral treaty except for certain variations in China’s favor notably as to the date of beginning of war. The end result we seek and which formula makes possible is strengthening of all anti-Commie ranks in Western Pacific. [Rusk.]
- Telegram drafted by Mr. Dulles.↩
- In this telegram Karl Lott Rankin, Chargé in the Republic of China, had stated in part: “Unclear in Taipei why Brit insist on and we accept ostensibly neutral formula which wld favor Chi Commies (who have no intention participate present Japanese treaty) shld it prevent Chi Govt doing so despite fact it shares our earnest desire conclude early treaty. This seems raise old question ‘against whom are we neutral?’” (694.001/6–2151)↩