441. Telegram 1362 from Geneva1

[Facsimile Page 1]

1362. From Johnson.

1. I opened 32nd meeting today with prepared statement as follows:

A.
You will recall that at our last meeting I said I would hope to be in position at this meeting to make further comments with regard to your counterproposal of December 1 for declaration by our two governments concerning renunciation of force.
B.
However, I regret to note that your government has during interval since our last meeting undertaken most violent and unfounded propaganda campaign instead of taking any constructive action with regard to our agreement September 10 which would genuinely contribute to understanding between us. These unfounded propaganda attacks against my government appear to indicate an intention on part of your government to misuse agreement of September 10 to foster misunderstanding rather than to contribute to understanding between us. In view of this, I would think it well to devote this meeting solely to purpose of clarifying this situation and pointing out facts with regard to which side has thus far really failed to carry out September 10 agreement. Nevertheless, in light statements which I made at our last meeting, I will first discuss this morning your December 1 counterproposal with regard to renunciation of force.
C.
I think it well to recall it was my government which initiated suggestion for clear understanding between us and public announcement on basic and fundamental question of whether our differences would be permitted to lead to war. You will recall I introduced this question first at September 28 meeting and again at meeting of October 5. Then more than three months ago at meeting of October 8 I made very carefully drawn statement fully setting forth position of my government in this [Typeset Page 635] regard. I think it well to recall exactly what I said at that time. (I then repeated my introductory statement October 8 on renunciation of force and continued with prepared statement as follows:)
D.
That statement took full account of issues between us and positions of your government with regard thereto. I was hopeful we would be able promptly to reach full understanding on substance thereof which would permit us to draft and issue suggested declarations. It was only three weeks later on October 27 you introduced draft which not only fell far short of specific proposal I had made October 8 but also introduced extraneous elements. I discussed this matter in detail with you at subsequent meetings and only two weeks later at meeting November 10 introduced draft which incorporated essential points which I had hoped in light of our discussions we were agreed upon. (I then went over my November 10 draft point by point.)
If there were genuine substantive agreement on part of your government with views of my government concerning vital importance of not permitting differences between us, including those in Taiwan area, to lead to war, I cannot understand why my draft Nov. 10 should not have been acceptable. However, your side not only refused to agree to this draft but took extreme position of rejecting it even as basis for discussion.
E.
After another three week interval, on Dec. 1, you presented your counterdraft. As I indicated at the time, I felt this counterdraft represented some improvement over first proposal of your side. However, as I also pointed out at the time, your counterproposal failed to make it clear that announcement applied to Taiwan area as well as elsewhere. [Facsimile Page 3] In light of statements you had made here, as well as public position of your government, it thus appeared your counterdraft might carry concealed reservation with respect to Taiwan area under which your government could, it it later so chose to do, initiate hostilities in Taiwan area on grounds situation there was purely domestic matter. Your draft also failed to provide for legitimate self-defense.
F.
However, in further effort to reach agreement on this fundamental subject, (see attached) agreement we are willing to accept your counterproposal December 1 as basis for discussion. Subject to slight amendment to bring English text of second paragraph more fully into conformity with our understanding of Chinese text and an addition to cover question of self-defense, as well as question of whether declaration is considered to be applicable to Taiwan area, we are also prepared to accept all of language as well as form your December 1 counterdraft. In order make our suggestions clear I have prepared draft incorporating our amendments and additions to second paragraph. You will note that first and third paragraphs are identical with your December 1 counterdraft.
G.
In making these suggested amendments I have taken full account of our discussion and believe I have entirely met your objections to my November 10 draft. (I then handed draft Deptel 1466 to Wang.)
H.
As soon as you have had opportunity to study it, I will be glad to explain any points that may not be clear or discuss with you in greater detail changes we have suggested.
I.
I desire subsequently to discuss with you today questions raised in your letters December 28 and January 5, as well as other matters related to September 10 announcement.

Gowen

Note: Advance copies to FE & SS 1/12/56, 12:55 pm FMH (CWO)

  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 611.93/1–1256. Confidential; Niact; Limited Distribution.