260. Letter 17 from McConaughy to Johnson1
We are pushing hard to get something out to you today for the October 5 meeting. I feel it is not fair to make you wait until the last day preceding the meeting, especially since I believe the time spread now is six hours since Washington reverted to Standard Time on September 25. We think the telegrams will give you adequate guidance and sufficient leeway. There will be considerable for you to say on the non-implementation of the Agreed Announcement. The amended statement on the use of force item will undoubtedly lead to extensive comments. The item on unaccounted for U.S. military personnel can be dropped to a spot below the embargo item if this seems advisable to you. We are now thrashing out with Defense a final version of the statement on the unaccounted for personnel. Every word is important and there is quite a bit of give-and-take with Defense on it. [Facsimile Page 2] Defense is naturally concerned at the reaction in this country, especially among the relatives and Congress. When we got the corrected copy of your recommended draft (about half of which had been omitted in the original garbled text of your message) we found much in it that was useful and telling. So we worked out a draft which represents a meld of our revised text and what we consider the best of yours. This is being cleared with Defense urgently now and we hope to be able to get it to you by the close of business today unless Defense raises further objections.
The British are doing their best to be helpful on the problem of access and assistance to the imprisoned Americans. They are being brought into the picture increasingly. I am seeing Barbara Salt of the British Embassy (who is handling Far Eastern matters until Hubert Graves gets here) every two or three days. I am giving her a pretty full rundown on your discussions with Wang on the implementation of Item One. The substance of this is being telegraphed to O’Neill in Peiping, who feels that he will be in a better position to determine what tack he should take there if he has this for his confidential background. About September 29 O’Neill had received no letter or appeal from any American. He has no confirmation of Chang Han-fu’s assertion that all remaining American prisoners have been notified of the Agreed Announcement. O’Neill doubts if representations or attempted publicity on his part would be useful at this stage. But he is [Facsimile Page 3] inclined to think that he should make a [Typeset Page 346] formal inquiry to the Chinese as to whether the imprisoned Americans will have access to him. He is awaiting our reaction to this problem. We must consider whether a formal inquiry would tend to encourage the Chinese to take a negative position. It is a difficult question for we do need to know definitely what their position on this critical issue will be. O’Neill fears that we are going to have no way of establishing that the Americans wish to return and wish to get in touch with him. He feels that we are at the mercy of the Chinese Communists on this and that we can not prove violation of the Agreed Announcement. He thinks we are dependent on Chinese Communist good faith. O’Neill feels that perhaps you can clear up these issues with Wang better than he can in Peiping. He points out that “you have some bargaining counters at Geneva,” while he has none in Peiping. I would like your reaction as to whether we should run the risk of having a show down with them at Peiping on the granting of access to O’Neill. I have reminded the British that all of the Americans except Redmond, Downey and Fecteau are known to have applied for exit permits before they were arrested. This establishes that they have expressed a desire to return to the U.S. However, it is true that this was done long before the Agreed Announcement. They have had no opportunity to reaffirm their desire since then.
The pouch is closing. Regards and may fortune favor you.
Sincerely yours,
P.S. In my letter No. 16 of September 30, on page 3, line 13, change “by way” to read “by Wang”.
- Source: Department of State, Geneva Talks Files, Lot 72D415. Secret. Printed from an unsigned copy.↩