241. Telegram 789 to Geneva1
789. Verbatim text. For Johnson.
New York’s 4, paragraph 5. Following is text of statement on renunciation use of force:
“One of the practical matters for discussion between us is that we should reciprocally renounce the use of force to achieve our policies when they conflict. The U.S. and the PRC confront each other with policies which are in certain respects incompatible. This fact need not, however, mean armed conflict, and the most important single thing we can do is first of all to be sure that it will not lead to armed conflict.
Then and only then can other matters causing tension between the parties in the Taiwan area and the Far East be hopefully discussed.
It is not suggested that either of us should renounce any policy objectives which we consider we are legitimately entitled to achieve, but only that we renounce the use of force to implement these policies.
Neither of us wants to negotiate under the threat of force. The free discussion of differences, and their fair and equitable solution, become impossible under the overhanging threat that force may be resorted to when one party does not agree with the other.
The United States as a member of the United Nations has agreed to [Facsimile Page 2] refrain in its international relations from the threat or use of force. This has been its policy for many years and is its guiding principle of conduct in the Far East, as throughout the world.
The use of force to achieve national objectives does not accord with accepted standards of conduct under international law.
The Government of the League of Nations, the Kellogg-Briand Treaties, and the Charter of the United Nations reflect the universal view of the civilized community of nations that the use of force as an instrument of national policy violates international law, constitutes a threat to international peace, and prejudices the interests of the entire world community.
There are in the world today many situations which tempt those who have force to use it to achieve what they believe to be legitimate policy objectives. Many countries are abnormally divided or contain what some consider to be abnormal intrusions. Nevertheless, the responsible governments of the world have in each of these cases [Typeset Page 317] renounced the use of force to achieve what they believe to be legitimate and even urgent goals.
It is an essential foundation and preliminary to the success of the discussions under Item 2 that it first be made clear that the parties to these discussions renounce the use of force to make the policies of either prevail over those of the other. That particularly applies to the Taiwan area.
The acceptance of this principle does not involve third parties, or the justice or injustice of conflicting claims. It only involves recognizing and agreeing to abide by accepted standards of international conduct.
[Facsimile Page 3]We ask, therefore, as a first matter for discussion under Agenda Item 2, assurance that your side will not resort to the use of force in the Taiwan area except defensively. The U.S. would be prepared to give a corresponding assurance. These reciprocal assurances will make it appropriate for us to pass on to the discussion of other matters with a better hope of coming to constructive conclusions.”
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 611.93/9–2755. Secret; Niact. Drafted by Phleger and McConaughy; statement revised and approved by Dulles.↩