Foreign Relations of the United States, 1955–1957, Volume III, China, Microfiche Supplement

416. Telegram 1288 from Geneva¹

Geneva, December 15, 1955, 6 p.m.

1288. From Johnson.

1. We do not know what contents will be of CHICOM statement referred to by Wang today and how much impact it may have. Fact is of course Peiping propaganda has by interviews with returning students etc. been maintaining steady line of vague charges U.S. non-compliance with announcement, and dependent on content and context, new statement may not attract much notice. I avoided getting into their previous propaganda line with Wang today in order not get led down side road of statements made by returning Americans and to accentuate seriousness with which we viewed present action. I of course made it clear that, while we regretted their step, we did not shrink from propaganda battle if that was their purpose and that we would probably issue statement in reply although I did not commit ourselves to doing so.

2. If CHICOMS actually issue statement from Peiping and reply is considered desirable, believe it should be issued by Department.

3. Believe Wang’s statements last few meetings give clue to probable content of statement, and amount of attention it attracts will be dependent on whether and to what degree it reiterates charges U.S. deliberately “stalling and entangling”. I did not receive impression statement would contain text their last draft proposal on renunciation of force and therefore made no effort to introduce our amendments for which the negotiating situation in the meeting was in any event by that time entirely unsuitable.

4. Statement will at least probably reiterate vague charges of “fears” Chinese students “apply” to return, contrast our refusal give list Chinese in U.S. including those who may be in jail to Indians with list Americans given us by CHICOMS, proportionately small number of Chinese in U.S. who have “returned” compared with proportion Americans who have returned from China, INS “intimidation” Chinese to apply for Taiwan entry permits, etc.

5. I have no suggestions concerning public reply except to reiterate as appropriate positions that have been taken in meetings while avoiding specific reference to contents of meetings. With respect numbers who have returned, suggest use one line in opening statement today, that is, in 6 weeks between August 1 and September 10 thirty-three of 52 previously detained given permission depart and in 14 weeks since September 10 only 5. Thus results of agreed announcement largely negative with respect Americans and certainly not “expeditious” either in absolute numbers or proportion.

6. In considering any statement we make in reply, I desire reiterate my conviction that whatever points we may be able score in propaganda battle this subject will not be reflected, at least at any time soon, in increased releases of imprisoned Americans. To accomplish this objective our efforts should be directed to maximum extent consistent with our public position to restoring former basis of negotiation.

7. Going Prague Friday evening returning Tuesday if there is meeting December 22.

Gowen

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 611.93/12–1555. Secret; Priority; Limited Distribution. Repeated to Paris for the Secretary only as telegram 288.