119. Telegram 571 from Geneva1
571. From Johnson.
1. Subject following comments concur text draft “agreed announcement” Deptel 599:
- (A)
- Note that word “nationals” has been dropped following “Chinese” and “American” where appeared all previous texts including those we introduced. Not clear on reason and desire authority restore if question raised by Wang.
- (B)
- Assume omission phrase “and the Government UK may also do so” in numbered paragraph 3 (last sentence Deptel 598) inadvertent. Probably little value under conditions in PRC but do not see why we do not obtain for what it may be worth exactly same privilege for UK in PRC as we give India in US.
In any event as phrased is discretionary rather than obligatory for UK.
2. Believe it will not be possible avoid question “jurisdiction”. As I have previously said they obviously concerned we are attempting in some way reestablish extraterritorial principle for Americans in PRC. Rightly or wrongly I have said in informal give and take substantially what Wang quotes in paragraph 2 my telegram 563 and he will insist I either reaffirm, deny or amend the statement. It still seems to me that my statement is unexceptional and is consistent with language latter part paragraph 3 my telegram 564. My thought would be simply set [Typeset Page 151] forth in “understanding” that “nothing in agreed announcement is intended raise any question of sovereignty, or jurisdiction over nationals of one country in territory of other and that it is assumed that measures referred to in numbered paragraph 1 of statement by Ambassador Wang contained in ‘agreed announcement’ and measures referred to in paragraph 1 of statement by Ambassador Johnson in ‘agreed announcement’ are taken within the framework of the laws and legal procedures of their respective countries.”
3. It seems to me this is not inconsistent with first sentence [Facsimile Page 2] paragraph 3 Deptel 598. My thought is that such an “understanding” including language latter part paragraph 3 my telegram 564 would in substance simply be oral statements exchanged between Wang and myself in meeting, although we would, in accordance with our arrangement at opening talks, give to other copy of any remarks we had made which we desired other side have exact words.
4. Believe my ability do this would materially strengthen my negotiating position in attempting extract from him “understanding” on timing release Americans.
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 611.93/8–2255. Secret; Niact.↩