701. Telegram 167 from Geneva1
167. From Johnson.
One hour fifty minute meeting today. I opened with statement along lines para one Deptel 176. Wang replied stating “did not deny declaration force one of central issues” failure reach agreement due US persistence “unreasonable demands” and “deliberately creating obstacles.” Merely saying should not abandon search for declaration and “not offering concrete changes” did not contribute progress. Should not entangle ourselves any longer this regard. Pleased note that I willing listen to his concrete opinions on trade and proposed draft agreed announcement (text by separate telegram).
In reply I rebutted his statements on responsibility lack progress renunciation force and reiterated inherent relationship to subject trade avoiding any direct comment on his proposal. During considerable give and take he then tried hard tie me down to either flat refusal or commitment discuss his proposal. I avoided both. From amount conferring his assistants over my replies and other signs, gained definite impression his intent was to set stage for at least public statement if I flatly refused, or in event could obtain commitment discuss to propose so informing press.
During subsequent give and take I picked up his statement that “reasonable resolution” trade problem “would contribute to resolution other disputes” as occasion for reviewing [Facsimile Page 2] quesions US had thus far presented here, that is, detained Americans, renunciation force, and missing UNC personnel, asking him whether implication his statement these problems would be resolved if US agreed with them on trade matters. He avoided trap. In reply my review concessions we had made in agreed announcement to obtain resolution problem detained Americans and our disappointment at results he replied that if US had “faithfully abided by announcement situation would be much more satisfactory.” I of course rejected this. In reply my review concessions we had made on renunciation force he said if US had accepted principle of mutual respect in May 11 draft agreement could have been reached. He rejected missing personnel as not in terms of reference. Agreed his proposal next meeting Thursday Sept 6. Returning Prague Wednesday morning.
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 611.93/8–2156. Confidential; Priority; Limit Distribution.↩