Office of the Historian

42. Telegram From the Secretary of State to Ambassador U. Alexis Johnson, at Geneva1

August 25, 1955—6:40 p.m.

633. Comparison Wang redraft (your 617)2 with text our 5993 indicates following substantial changes: 1) In first paragraph “repatriation [Page 67] of civilians” changed to “return of nationals.” 2) Unilateral announcements are couched in terms of an agreement. 3) India is “entrusted” to assist return, and in paying expenses Indian Government is to act “on behalf of the Government of the PRC,” thus connoting idea of a protecting power instead of third party designated by US primarily to confirm that its statement regarding freedom to return is in fact true. 4) Indian Government is authorized to “make investigation of the facts,” the words “in any such ease” being dropped. Effect of this would be permit Indian Government investigate entire matter, presumably all Chinese in US, and not merely those requesting assistance.

These changes appear to indicate 1) intent to convert announcements into an agreement, 2) to have it apply to all Chinese in US and to describe them as nationals of PRC, 3) to give India right to investigate generally and not simply those Chinese who appeal to it, and 4) to establish India as a protecting power.4 Above objections are in addition to unresolved question of time limit for release of Americans.

Amendments proposed by Wang make his draft entirely unacceptable for reasons indicated above. We believe it preferable that Saturday5 meeting be postponed until some time next week so as to give us further opportunity study our tactics. You should inform Wang such postponement requested, assigning no reasons.

Dulles
  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 611.93/8–2555. Secret; Priority. Although the source text bears Dulles’ name, the Secretary was in New York from the morning of August 25 until the evening of August 27. The telegram was drafted by Phleger and Sebald, cleared by McConaughy, and approved by Sebald. McConaughy wrote in letter No. 9 to Johnson, August 26, that Phleger returned to duty on August 22 and that the Secretary asked him to coordinate and take responsibility for instructions to Johnson. (Ibid., Geneva Talks Files: Lot 72 D 415, Geneva—Correspondence Re US–PRC, 1955–1956)↩
  2. See footnote 3, Document 40.↩
  3. Document 34.↩
  4. McConaughy wrote in an August 26 letter to Johnson, “Phleger believes that the changes which Wang introduced or reverted to at the August 25 meeting (your 617) are all significant, although the significance may be cleverly disguised. Our 633 may seem to represent something of a hardening of the line, and this indeed may be the case.”↩
  5. August 27.↩