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

450. Telegram 1387 from Geneva¹

Geneva, January 17, 1956, 5 p.m.

1387. From Johnson.

1. Appreciate and entirely concur guidance Deptel 1496 re renunciation force.

2. Believe CHICOM failure thus far make public statement in spite Wang’s statement last meeting indicates they appreciate weakness their public position and greatly strengthens my hand.

3. In view their failure make public statement, believe I should be prepared for unlikely but possible contingency Wang may attempt force my hand at next meeting by eventually agreeing to our amended draft and pressing for prompt issuance. I would, of course, utilize every possibility of delaying any decision to at least next following meeting including necessity referring to Dept any changes whatever in text. However, if he should fully accept my text would appreciate Department’s instructions regarding issuance statement. Would suggest that same pattern be followed as with September 10 agreed announcement, that is, would agree with Wang on release time by both us here, text to be made available press by Department shortly thereafter, together with such further comment as Department considered desirable.

4. For following reasons question suggested reply on Liu An-hua: (A) I have in past consistently deprecated Wang’s attempts use US or other press sources as reliable foundation for discussion in our talks. If I cite press source as official answer his inquiry re Liu An-hua I open door for him throw back at me my previous statements this regard and confront me with press stories that may in whole or part be favorable CHICOM position. (B) If I reply concerning Liu An-hua even by reference news story difficult avoid implication acceptance obligation reply other cases. Failure do so might then carry implication facts other cases not favorable to us.

5. Wang has thus far carefully avoided specifically charging any individuals named are being denied rights under agreed announcement and is cleverly couching request more on whereabouts and welfare grounds. As by-product to major objective of offsetting weakness their public position arising from failure release imprisoned Americans they hope thereby also lay “humanitarian” basis for justifying enlargement Indian Embassy functions into this field. Another by-product would be utilize our failure reply in meetings to expand precedent of Red Cross channel established Liu Yung-ming’s case.

6. This exercise also partially fishing expedition in hope finding case some Chinese who is imprisoned with which belabor us for another Liu Yung-ming case.

7. Believe position we adopt should be consistent with position we have thus far taken with respect O’Neill taking initiative in visiting imprisoned Americans as well as whereabouts and welfare inquiries concerning Americans we may in future desire to make either directly here or through UK repeat UK.

8. Therefore, with respect this aspect for next meeting suggest I avoid direct reply concerning any individuals named by Wang keeping discussion as at last meeting strictly to US performance under agreed announcement and CHICOM failure produce any specific evidence of failure fully implement announcement. Believe I can make more effective presentation exposing hollowness Wang’s charges and cynical nature CHICOM attempt throw up smokescreen without specifically mentioning Liu An-hua case. Would, of course, continue avoid any implication US has obligation investigate individual cases in absence such evidence.

9. In meanwhile suggest VOA make full world-wide use excellent material on Liu An-hua contained Baltimore Sun article as refutation Peiping broadcasts.

Gowen

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 611.93/1–1756. Confidential; Priority; Limited Distribution.