670. Letter 39 from Johnson to McConaughy1
I am not sending any comment telegram this week as I do not have much to add to my summary message, and, in any event you will receive this long before you have to get out the guidance for the next meeting.
Things went about as expected this morning. I had not intended to say much on renunciation but listening to his opening statement the mood seized me and I let myself go. It is the type of act that loses its usefulness if put on too often, but after arriving there this morning it seemed to me a good idea. It is also, I feel, much more effective when I do it obviously extemporaneous rather than reading a prepared statement. I tried again to go as far as I felt I could in holding out the “pot of gold” if they would behave themselves. It seems to me this is now and again necessary if I am to do everything possible to assume that we keep going along the present lines. However, it is hard to find new ways to say the same old thing. My present feeling is that with careful handling we can expect to be able to plow this same furrow until November but, depending on what happens then not much beyond [Typeset Page 1087] that. It is not too early to consider how we will handle the various contingencies that might be expected at about that time, but I leave that in your good hands.
There is no question but that we really have them on the ropes with regard to the prisoners. I am still hoping it will accomplish something other than giving me some fun in the meetings. However, as I said previously, I think the greatest pressure on them will come if and when some prisoners actually [Facsimile Page 2] leave. Until then they will try to dismiss it as a stunt on our part. I do hope that some prisoners can be gotten on their way shortly and then I can really turn on the heat here. Tell Ralph that I have much confidence in him. It does not affect my conscience in the slightest to have a few dope peddlers and murderers go back, and I am surprised the GRC is still making such a point over competing with Peiping for the affections of such persons. If the Indians continue to turn us down I would not be inclined to try to bring in the ICRC but believe the ARC has considerable merit. As you can sense my main interest is in getting some under way as quickly as that is possible. Incidentally, I thought your reply to the Indian letter was excellent. It said exactly the right things in the right way. You will note that in this morning’s meeting I avoided saying that the Indians had refused to act so as to leave the door open for them to change their minds but sought to leave an impression that the PRC attitude was holding up everything. I thought it better not to press him today beyond the point that I did.
With respect to para 5 of Deptel 2217, I could not think of any way to obtain a reaction to the postponement of Nehru’s visit. However, if I happen to run into him again on the plane I may be able to turn the conversation in that direction and see what reaction I get. I regret that such conversations are so very limited in their possible scope by the language problem.
Incidentally his failure in any way to mention the matter this morning leads me to believe that, as I hoped, the Indians have not passed on to them the text of our letter to the prisoners.
With respect to the last para of Deptel 2217 I had, of course, intended that Wang would share the responsibility for any postponement, and that was the reason for our suggestion that the UN call Wang and simply say the same thing to him that they had said to us. This would then have provided a basis for my raising the matter with him. However, it subsequently developed that the UN did not do so but scrambled around and decided they could with some difficulty accommodate us even during the week of July 9. However, they thereafter called Wang saying that there would be some difficulties in accommodating us through the ECOSOC session and did he have in mind any vacation in the talks during July or August. His [Facsimile Page 3] reply was that he did not. I pass [Typeset Page 1088] this on as an added indication of the lack of any present intention to break off. Thus, my carefully laid plans for a week’s vacation have again gone astray. Because of the work in Prague and my Nurenberg speech my plans for the week of June 11 fell through, and this next week I, of course, have the big July 4 show in Prague. Am expecting about 500 this year and am giving them a buffet and a dance. Do not misunderstand that I am complaining, but just letting you know what I have been trying to do in a personal way.
Thanks for the Drew Pearson item which I have not seen here. I certainly agree that it is not very helpful.
Thanks for taking care of Ekvall’s orders. He has now received them and is set for another six months. I think Erskine’s office was giving you a little line on Paris being the block. Everything I know is to the contrary, but in any event it is cleared up.
I think it significant Menon did not raise the Chicoms with Sherman Adams. I have a general feeling that the Indians have somewhat cooled on Peiping and are not tooting their horn as vigorously as they once were. I hope this prisoner business assists in the process.
They have just brought in the FBIS on Chou’s June 28 speech renewing the offer to negotiate with Taiwan. There was some excitement among the correspondents at the Palais this morning about it but they did not have the full text and I have of course refused to make any comment. While it is a repetition of what has been the theme for some time there is a difference in emphasis and I believe for the first time it is couched in formal terms. It is a much more adroit piece of work than their previous statements on the subject and undoubtedly sets the tone for their future propaganda line. However USIA really ought to be able to get in some real licks on the last paragraph.
We have experimented in today’s full report of meeting with putting it into direct discourse. Let us know how you like it compared with former indirect discourse form. Neither of them read too well after being put into “telegraphese” but we get bawled out by someone back there (I believe it was the telegraph people) for using unnecessary words so we are complying. However, with something like this it seems to me to make very hard reading.
- Source: Department of State, Geneva Talks Files, Lot 72D415. Secret; Official–Informal. A handwritten note indicates the letter was received on July 5. The last page of the letter is missing.↩