690B.9321/9–853: Telegram
No. 94
The Ambassador in Thailand (Donovan) to the Department of State1
473. Part 1.
New evacuation plan nearing final agreement provides:
- (a)
- Evacuation on foot to Tachilek safety zone through safety corridors; mutual ceasefire in area through which latter pass. PW and refugees airlift to Chiengmai.
- (b)
- Evacuation via motor Thailand border to Lampang; air thence to Chiengmai (C4 Seeak) and thence Taiwan (C46). Note: Latter change proposed September 7 by Thailand after Cabinet meeting. Chiengmai airfield flooded, not available until early November.
- (c)
- Evacuation arms Burma to Taiwan by air or sea (Rangoon).
- (d)
- Foreign forces to move in groups of 500. Cost [garble] to be forwarded after new Thailand plan finalized. Complete new plan to be airmailed upon final agreement and signature.
Part 2.
Paragraph 5a (11) new evacuation plan states “occupation of principal areas in Shan states sector by Union of Burma troops: Union of Burma troops will march in and occupy principal areas namely Mong Ton, Mong Hsat, Mong Yawng, Mong Mao, Mong Yang and Pang Yang as soon as foreign forces march out. Union of Burma troops will advance toward such areas along routes other than those routes used by the foreign forces so as to comply strictly with paragraph 5a (6) of this plan. Time for evacuation of foreign forces and subsequent occupation by Burmese troops will be synchronized, through coordination of Joint Committee, between Burma and foreign forces so as avoid any vacuum or incidents in above mentioned areas”.
Chinese Nationalist representative proposed September 1 that names of places above be deleted from plan, stating Chinese Nationalist Government unable ascertain location foreign forces those areas. On September 7 Burma refused accept Chinese Nationalist statement and said occupation of named places by GUB troops and [Page 133] information on number of personnel to be evacuated both essential to success committee. Thailand agreed with Burma. US representative made statement in substance as follows: “Original evacuation plan specified Union of Burma troops will occupy principal areas such as Mong Ton, Mong Hsat, Mong Yawng, Mong Yang, Pang Yang and Mong Mao. In view time has elapsed, with no indication from China that specified areas should be stricken from agreement, move by Chinese representative on September 1 to remove names of these places from paragraph 5a (11) of agreement can only be viewed as another delaying tactic. This move, coupled with fact that Chinese representative has only named one figure of evacuees (namely 500), in spite of repeated requests by members this committee, who need estimate number of evacuees involved for proper staff planning, leads one have serious doubts as to Chinese intentions and indicates possibility Chinese side intending make token evacuation in attempt give lip-service UN resolution meanwhile endeavoring retain control Burmese locations named in paragraph 5a (11) of new evacuation plan agreed to in sub-committee by four nation representatives and leaders of foreign troops. Chairman again requests Chinese side inform committee approximate number foreign troops and dependents who will be evacuated, which needed for proper staff planning”.
Chinese Nationalist representative then made strong protest and denial US representative’s statement. Said allegations unfounded, would report statement his govt and request matter be taken up by govts US–China.
Immediately following above exchange, Chinese Nationalist representative asked for another meeting 4 hours later. At latter, he proposed Mong Ton and Mong Hsat remain in plan and other places be deleted. Burma took under consideration. Comment: If Burma accepts, and China gives approximate number personnel to be evacuated, anticipate early agreement, and, upon respective governments approval and allocation of funds, evacuation can begin. US representative made above statement after full consideration by Embassy in effort stir Chinese to quicker action.
- Repeated to Taipei and Rangoon.↩