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

570. Telegram 1746 from Geneva¹

Geneva, April 10, 1956, 10 p.m.

1746. From Johnson.

1. Wang opened 43rd meeting, consulting notes to say he recalled at last meeting having said in order advance our talks he had hoped I would at present meeting be in position make new suggestions on subject issuance declaration and so he ready listen anything I had to say this subject.

2. I replied from prepared statement that it was I that hoped that he would have some new suggestions this morning. At our last meeting he took position that it up to me to offer suggestions meet objections he had voiced to amendments I offered January 12 to his draft December 1. As I explained him at time I found his position inexplicable if he really shared my desire arrive at agreement this subject. It obviously unreasonable expect me offer suggestions meet objections which I did not consider well-founded. As I had consistently stated I entirely willing cooperate finding language that would meet both our points view. I had consistently stated I would be willing listen any suggestions he had that were consistent those principles which I considered essential. I had long hoped careful detailed explanations I had made of our January 12 amendments would lead him perceive his objections thereto did not have real validity. Failing that I had hoped he would offer concrete suggestions for alternative language. If he did not have such concrete suggestions this morning I hoped he would at least this morning have some thoughts that would enable me give further detailed consideration this matter prior our next meeting.

3. Wang said he believed he had already made his points very clear at our last meeting. Therefore, he rather disappointed I had failed again offer fresh suggestions this morning this subject. It sincere hope his part that at next meeting I would be able do so by offering new suggestions. If I had no new suggestions put forth this morning he would like bring up another matter.

4. Wang said their attention been again called cases three Chinese in U.S. whose return being obstructed. He would now hand me names these three persons and would appreciate if I would make investigation their cases. Particularly case of Chou, even after agreement on civilians which reached last year between us was announced his return still been obstructed.
(Handed list—names following telegram). This seemed inexplicable his side.

5. Wang said to date he had made representations on nearly 50 persons, including names three persons he given me today. Almost three months had passed since he handed me first batch persons in his letter January 5 to me. So far I had not given any account or information regarding these persons nor had any one these come back China.

6. Wang said his side very dissatisfied with obstructions offered them in their return. Fact these people had not yet been able come back could hardly be reconciled with pledge for expeditious return in our agreement. All these people have desired return their motherland, but been prevented doing so up to now. Fact they been prevented from returning cannot be disputed. My side cannot escape or evade responsibility for unjustified obstructions against their return. His side will keep pressing this matter as long these people not being permitted return.

7. I said in this list names he given me this morning here I noticed that under name Chou statement made that after our agreement September 10 last year Mr. Chou “again applied return”. I did not know upon what information he based these continued references these persons applying to return but I satisfied it not correct.

8. I said I had told him in past he need not accept my word that there no such thing in U.S. as aliens applying leave country. Indian Embassy or anyone else familiar my country could confirm this fact for him. I just did not know how make this clear him.

9. I said situation regarding aliens departing my country was just as clear, straightforward and simple as it is with regard aliens here in Switzerland, with which we both familiar. Or for that matter in any other country here in Western Europe, with which I sure he also familiar. He and I both knew that ourselves or any other foreigner here in Switzerland if he wants leave gets in his auto and drives to Annemasse or anywhere else without any exit permit, exit visa or any other procedures. Or he goes down to airport, buys ticket, gets on plane and goes anywhere he wants go. Situation very similar in U.S.

10. I said these people did not apply anybody to leave. They free go any time they desire. I just could not be any clearer or any more categorical in saying that they certainly not been obstructed by any authority in U.S.

11. I said it incredible that, in more than six months that had now passed since we made agreed announcement, if in fact any them being obstructed that at least one case would not have been brought our attention by third power arrangement established for just this purpose. To say that just because somebody does not return his country he being obstructed by my government simply does not bear light of facts.

12. I said in only one of cases he mentioned me here was there specific allegation of obstruction—that was case Yuan Jui-hsiang. I went into that case but information he gave me was not sufficient, as I told him sometime ago, enable me identify him. Some weeks ago I asked him for further information that would enable me go into case further. But I not yet received such information.

13. I said I might also mention that some weeks ago he asked me for medical records on Mr. Liu and I was pleased be able very promptly reply his request. I had also asked him for similar information and records regarding Mrs. Bradshaw and Kanady but had not received his reply.

14. I said facts were clearly that Chinese desiring return his country free do so. They steadily arriving his country from U.S.

15. I said situation regarding Americans still remains vastly different. It now approaching four months since last American released from his country to return U.S. I had pointed out many times here and would not go into details this morning that my people and my government increasingly feel these specific Americans who were clearly subject our agreed announcement were being held in expectation and hope of extracting political concessions from my government in exchange their return.

16. I said I had said over and over again and I again said this morning that no policy could be more mistaken. I found it very difficult understand why his government did not even in its own interest carry out agreement with regard these specific Americans. Whole situation certainly does not establish very sound or hopeful basis to consider entering into new agreements.

17. I said facts of matter were that neither my government nor anyone else could consider that our agreement September 10 was really being carried out by his authorities with respect these specific Americans. I again renewed my request that this agreement be implemented and these Americans be permitted return.

18. Wang said my statement with regard ability of foreign nationals to depart freely sounded very good. He would very much like take my words here for granted. However, fact that nearly 50 persons, whose names given me, had not been able make departure and still under obstructions from doing so made it very hard accept my statement.

19. Wang said he entirely prepared accept information given by me regarding exit procedures currently being practiced in European countries including Switzerland. However, in Switzerland their Chinese nationals had never been subject obstructions their departure by Swiss authorities and he had never heard of such setup as immigration service in Switzerland. If situation was indeed similar to practice in Switzerland in which foreign nationals including Chinese nationals could freely make their departure, then it would have been entirely superfluous for both us to make agreement which we did last September.

20. Wang said specific persons whose names he had given me and whose number about 50 persons had in fact encountered obstructions and difficulties in departure. It a matter for steps to be taken to look into cases all these nearly 50 people and is not matter of one or two persons encountering obstructions.

21. Wang said in speaking about implementation our agreement last September, first of all they expect American side to implement or carry out agreement between us. For since agreement reached between us U.S. Government not known to have taken any necessary measures to help Chinese in U.S. make free departure. U.S. Government also has not taken measures to permit expeditious return of Chinese nationals. Any excuses with regard this matter cannot explain matter of return of Chinese. I had said I found it very difficult make this matter clear to them. Best method in which I could make this clear them was to allow these Chinese return.

22. I said if these people he had mentioned or any others really desire return and really felt they being obstructed, why was it that at least one them has not brought his case to attention Indian Embassy and if Indian Embassy felt there any substance his allegations it has not brought case attention my government?

23. Wang said he had told me reasons in this regard many times in past. Chinese nationals in U.S. were constantly under unreasonable oppression of U.S. INS and fact was that many people were not able make known their free will. This quite sufficient explain existing situation with regard Chinese.

24. I said I recalled as long ago as last December seeing public statement by Indian Embassy to effect it in communication with many Chinese in U.S. Certainly if any them alleging any obstructions by my government and Indian Embassy felt there any foundation for it, it would have said something us about it.

25. Wang said I had said Indian Embassy in communication with many Chinese in U.S. Did I mean that U.S. Government has already handed Indian Embassy lists Chinese in U.S.?

26. I said I only referring what Indian Embassy said. On December 20 Indian Embassy issued statement first paragraph of which reads: “Since Embassy India announced details repatriation procedure for Chinese in U.S. wishing return Chinese mainland, Embassy at Washington, D.C. and Consulates General of India New York and San Francisco have received inquiries and applications from Chinese seeking advice and assistance.” Only citing this shows that as long ago as last December Indian Embassy said it in communication Chinese in U.S. Certainly if any real obstruction any these people, Indian Embassy would certainly called it our attention.

27. Wang said his information indicates Indian Embassy willing inform Chinese in U.S. of agreed announcement between us last year but Indian Embassy had found this job be very difficult because failure U.S. Government provide list Chinese in U.S. They continue hope U.S. Government would cooperate this matter by submitting such lists Indian Embassy so as help Embassy in fact communicate with Chinese. However all that only one aspect of solving this matter.

28. Wang said essential thing was what attitude U.S. Government was adopting with regard expeditious return Chinese. If U.S. Government would not openly abolish such unreasonable requirements as entry permits Taiwan and requirement application permanent residence U.S.—if U.S. Government fails take these steps, pressure hitherto exerted minds Chinese would not be relieved.

29. I said essential thing was whether U.S. in fact obstructing departure any Chinese in U.S. who in fact desires return his country. Fact was that not single fact showing any obstruction in any case has yet been demonstrated and I satisfied none would be. I wished it were same situation with regard 213 Americans his country.

30. Wang said greatest fact was that about 50 specific persons had not been able return. I had not yet given account about these about 50 persons. So long as every last one these people had not yet been able return, they would continue press this matter these meetings. They would continue do so until these people had in fact returned.

31. I said if he had nothing more I proposed next meeting Thursday April 19. Wang inquired whether I would consider April 16 Monday? I said that would be very difficult for me, and would much prefer Thursday April 19. Wang said he would not insist.

Gowen

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 611.93/4–1056. Confidential; Limit Distribution.