223. Letter 9 from Johnson to McConaughy1
First, let me thank you and all the others concerned for the instructions contained in Deptel 745. They were a model of clarity and gave me enough latitude and alternative positions so that, on entering the meeting, I felt completely confident of being able to meet any situation that might arise.
Next, I refer to the suggestion contained in your letter of September 16 that individual letters signed by Mr. Robertson be sent to each of the remaining Americans. I have serious doubts of the wisdom of this, largely for the reason set forth in your letter. If I thought that by so doing we might advance even by a single day the release of any of the individuals, it would a somewhat different matter. However, I do not see how it would do so and the only value might be in whatever lift it would give to their morale. I intend to keep hammering at Wang on this subject and we will see what the results will be. In the meantime my alternative thought is that we suggest to each of the relatives who write to the prisoners that they send them a copy of the Agreed Announcement with one of their letters if they have not already done so. We might send to each of them a mimeographed text for the purpose, but, in order not to prejudice its delivery, would suggest that the relative not mention this was being done at the Department’s instigation.
The code clerk problem is now very satisfactorily resolved through your help as well as that of Mr. Carpenter with whom I raised the problem when he was through here last week. Please thank Bob Stufflebeam for me. I know the problem that he faces.
[Facsimile Page 2]I agree with the analysis that Wang’s unilateral public move on the 14th probably means that the Communists have made the decision that further talks at this level have little or no value to them, and it will, therefore, become increasingly difficult to keep the ball rolling unless I am in a position to introduce something that has even a slight substantive value from their standpoint. All of this, of course, is related as well to the speed with which we obtain the release of the remaining Americans.
I noted the policy information statement to USIA (Department’s CA–2241, September 16) cautioned against the use of the term “agenda”. Although this is a new thought to me, I see the Department’s point. However, at least Wang and I have talked so much about agenda item [Typeset Page 292] one and agenda item two, and have also used the term in our routine communiques of meetings, that the vocabulary has been well established and it seems to me now difficult to avoid the use of the term.
With kindest regards to all,
Sincerely,
American Ambassador
- Source: Department of State, Geneva Talks Files, Lot 72D415. Secret; Official–Informal. Johnson signed the original “Alex.” A handwritten note on the letter indicates it was received on September 26.↩