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

721. Telegram 303 from Geneva¹

Geneva, September 22, 1956, 4 p.m.

303. From Johnson.

1. I opened 58th with prepared statement:

A. At last meeting I said looking forward to your reversing backward trend in talks on central subject renunciation force exemplified by your May 11 draft and to moving ahead from area agreement and broad concession to your point view exemplified my April 19 draft. As I many times pointed out that draft accepted your December 1 draft as reasonable starting point for negotiation and introduced only minimum revisions essential to demonstrate to world both our countries sincerely willing renounce use force Taiwan area and pursue objectives by peaceful means only.

B. On basis your explanations here I had taken this be intent your December 1 draft and that your concern with respect my January 12 draft arose from fear it was intent U.S. trick your government into abandoning position respect merits dispute that area. It in order remove all possible basis for such claim I successively offered my revision April 19. Have continuously and carefully reviewed that draft in light your stated objections during these meetings but still feel if your side genuinely sincerely willing renounce use force in that as well as our other disputes there can be no valid objection that draft.

C. If your side not willing in fact renounce use force it of course obvious no form of words can be devised that will meet your objections as I not willing be party to perpetrating upon world fraud of form of words that attempts give appearance having renounced force while in fact failing do so.

D. This connection I been concerned note during last few days high government and party officials your country are reiterating threat resort war if necessary to achieve objective of bringing Taiwan under its domination. I particularly noted even such authoritative spokesman as Liu Shao-chi in speech September 15, as reported by your radio, reiterates intention use any means necessary, including force, to achieve objectives this area. This deeply disturbing and if continues be policy your government, of course cannot be reconciled with professions of desire use only peaceful means settle disputes. I find that policy particularly hard reconcile with explanations of intent of your December 1 draft. However, it again explains persistent rejection through months of discussion here of all formulae that my side has proposed to make clear that use of force being renounced. Continuation of such indefensible policy would of course mean further attempts arrive at agreement on meaningful renunciation force may be foredoomed failure. However, I reluctant arrive at such pessimistic conclusion for peace of Far East and world.

E. I welcomed your statements here on sharing my desire arrive at agreement on meaningful renunciation force and steps such as your December 1 draft that appeared be in that direction. However, cannot reconcile this with statements such as that of Liu September 15 that appear only reiteration of old position of threatening force. Would be glad hear anything you able say this morning that would explain this apparent contradiction.

2. Wang replied after listening my statement on question renunciation force he could find nothing new. With regard April 19 draft which I had again referred to in statement, it already repeatedly been rejected by their side. They could not agree to unreasonable demand contained in April 19 draft. That precisely because they could not agree to any division their territory by foreign state or forces, and could not agree any intervention by any foreign power in their internal affairs. He presumed that if in his position I would also adopt same attitude this regard.

3. Wang said he very surprised to hear my references to statements of leading members his government with regard liberation Taiwan. As they had consistently announced in past it entirely matter China’s internal affair as to means by which she liberated Taiwan. They would never allow any other people interfere as to by what means China achieved liberation Taiwan as they had all along made clear it entirely within framework China’s internal affairs as to what means she used in liberating Taiwan and they had also made clear existing tension in Taiwan area was international issue between China and America. These were two entirely separate matters and there was substantive difference between them, as had consistently been made clear by them in past, and therefore confusion of two matters not permissible.

4. Wang pointed out as he had already in past, that my side had on one hand persisted in demanding an infringement of his country’s sovereignty insofar as question renunciation force concerned and this been cause failure reach agreement. On other hand my side had evaded discussion question lifting embargo so no result been achieved regard their proposal on lifting embargo. In spite this their side still willing seek appropriate amelioration insofar as existing practical issues between two countries concerned.

5. Continuing from prepared statement Wang said, it belief his side that removal now of artificial barriers hindering human contacts and cultural exchanges would contribute to removal barriers and relaxation tensions, and was thus fully in accord desires two people. They considered that desire American journalists come to China for news coverage and desires Chinese and American theatrical companies was practical feasible and justified. He therefore proposed two of us make agreed announcement this respect. His specific proposal was as follows (here he read text draft announcement telegraphed separately). He was sure text made it quite clear announcement entirely reasonable. He was ready to listen to anything I had to say with regard this proposal. He handed me text.

6. I replied was disappointed he had not this morning been in position contribute anything that would enable us move forward on what I thought we both agreed was central issue—renunciation force. Use of such words as “internal affairs”, “liberation” and other such terms did not change facts of situation Taiwan area. I had not asked him accept my interpretation those facts but nevertheless they did exist.

7. I said facts were Taiwan lawfully administered by government with which US and majority countries world had long maintained diplomatic relations. It administered by government which member UN. It administered by government with which US had defensive treaty arrangements. A treaty which registered with UN. These were all facts which must be recognized in situation there. However, I had not asked him here and we had not asked him in any our drafts accept our interpretation those facts.

8. I said Wang’s government had long threatened use force to bring Taiwan under its control. He in effect seemed to have been saying and continued say if they could not do this by negotiations they intended use force. Fact that could not be overlooked was that use force to bring Taiwan under their control would involve solemn international treaty obligations of US.

9. I continued this was factual situation with which we confronted. In order make certain this did not lead to hostilities between us I had made my proposal last October that both of us without in any way prejudicing views on merits situation simply say we would not use force. This had been and must remain central issue. US had offered state this principle in unconditional and clear form. His government still unwilling do so. Until this resolved too difficult to see how other problems existing between us could be resolved. If this central issue resolved, other issues should be capable resolution. From beginning these discussions on second part our terms reference, I had striven to do utmost to resolve central issue. However, It difficult to see how could be resolved as long as his government threatened go war about it if it not otherwise able gain objectives.

10. I still earnestly hoped his government would see that its interests and interests peace could only be served by clearly and unequivocally saying it would not go war about this issue. For his government to state this in no way prejudiced its position with regard merits whole matter. I had never said that they do so and nothing I had said here nor any draft I had presented could be so interpreted. To attempt so to interpret it misrepresented situation and was attempt to obscure real responsibility for our not having reached agreement this subject.

11. I said as preliminary comment on proposal he had made this morning I first wanted to note did not see how it could be divorced from continued threat of hostilities. US had consistently throughout its history welcomed free exchange information and peoples regardless any social and political differences. At time his government took control mainland China there were hundreds Americans including officials in those areas. Policies his government adopted at that time with respect those persons rendered continued presence there intolerable. They were subjected to indignities, expelled from Wang’s country, subjected to imprisonment, and in general their position rendered impossible. Ten Americans still remained in prison.

12. I said it could be said these all matters of past. It was with hope they truly could be made matters of past that my government proposed as first item business between us its resolution, by permitting Americans who there and who not been able return, to do so. I had thought and my government had thought and my people had thought this issue, impediment to exchanges between our two people was resolved over year ago. Here year later it still not resolved. I had pointed out over year ago it could only be resolved by Wang’s government. In interests our relations and suggestions he had made I hoped his government would no longer delay in removing this impediment, just as I hoped his government would no longer delay in unequivocally renouncing use forrce.

13. Wang could only regard my statement on question Taiwan as sheer sophistry. No matter how I presented this question could not make people of Taiwan into American subjects nor could I make Taiwan American territory. Had there been no American invasion of Taiwan there would have been no pressing situation in Taiwan. US aggression on Taiwan not only violated spirit UN Charter but also violated solemn international pledges entered into by US with respect Taiwan. Present armed occupation Taiwan by US was indisputable fact and was act which all people of world opposed. US treaty with Chiang Kai-shek was not worth single cent, was unlawful, and Chinese people never recognized it. Present situation was that no resolution Sino-American dispute Taiwan area could be achieved solely on basis US interests.

15. Wang said present obstacle in way our making renunciation force declaration caused unreasonable demand which US persistently clung to. Failure reach agreement this respect not their responsibility at all. Efforts promote progress on this must be forthcoming from US and not from their side. Our deliberation here should be directed at seeking all sorts of formulae for improvement relations between two countries. We must strive bring about gradual resolution existing disputes between us and he thought this purpose could be served by no other attitude. To condition resolution all other questions on resolution one particular question meant there no desire or intention resolve issues at all.

16. Wang said since we had now met roadblock in one of main issues we should without delay try find outlet as far as other issues concerned. In this sense their proposal on lifting embargo was step towards betterment relations. He very much regretted we had as yet made no progress on that. In order that talks might not waste time meaninglessly he had again this morning put forward proposal on mutual contacts and cultural exchange between two cuntries.

17. Wang said it their consistent conviction that uninterrupted human contacts and cultural exchanges would contribute to better understanding between peoples and to relaxation international tensions. His government not only maintained this conviction but had actually carried out policy along these lines. In 1955 his country had received more than 4,000 visitors from some 66 countries of world. This represented increase of 60 percent over previous year. Number of visitors expected to double this year. Most foreign visitors who had come to their country during past year had come from countries which had as yet no diplomatic relations with his government. It their belief that presence or absence diplomatic relations should not be obstacle to human contacts with peoples these countries. Many people had prejudices and doubts before contact made but after such contacts such prejudices and doubts in most cases been eliminated or reduced.

18. Wang said his people entertained friendly feelings towards people US. People our two countries had traditional friendship. It consistent policy his country protect all foreign nationals—including Americans—residing in his country who abided by laws. There were still number American nationals who desired remain his country to carry on normal livelihood and work. They had never felt any prejudice or mistreatment on part of Chinese Government. However, any law-breaking foreign nationals, no matter what country they came from, would be dealt with in accordance Chinese law. This was normal practice any sovereign state.

19. Wang acknowledged at present relationship between China-US subject to interruption and broken. Nevertheless, any dispute between two countries should be settled peacefully. However, such disputes as exist between China US should not be made pretext for hindering free contacts and cultural exchanges between two peoples. Artificial barriers would not contribute any ordinary improvement relations between two countries. To put up artificial barriers was against interests both peoples and against desires. Today it up to US to remove artificial barriers in contacts of people. It US which now adopting extremely unfriendly policy towards Chinese people. This policy of US was in complete contrast to policy of China towards American people.

20. Wang said present situation was that US occupying portion Chinese territory and not China occupying part US territory. Present situation was US carrying on policy embargo against China and not China carrying on policy embargo against US. It US which putting up artificial barriers preventing mutual contacts and not Chinese Government which doing so. They would look forward to removal by US of such barriers so that peoples our two countries could contact each other freely and benefit from such contacts by learning from each other, and thus finally promote relations between two countries.

21. I just wanted to say it difficult to persuade me or my government that experiences of hundreds Americans who had lived under jurisdiction his government were brought about by friendly feelings on part his government toward US or Americans or to persuade US these respectable Americans who never encountered difficulty elsewhere were criminals.

22. I said with regard resolving disputes between us it US that proposed as first step we make it clear there would be no hostilities between us. It US which proposed it be made unconditionally clear this covered most serious dispute between us. It his government that still refused this simple basic proposition. It his government which still threatened use force. These were facts that could not be obscured and which readily understandable by all.

23. Wang denied that they had in course these negotiations rejected any reasonable proposals I had made. They did not judge proposals on their appearance but on substance and content. They could not accept proposal such as I had made that seemed say what is mine is mine and what is yours is mine. Any such proposal could not be considered by his side. He hoped my side would give favorable consideration to proposal he had made this morning for removing barriers to mutual contact and cultural exchange—as well as to lifting of embargo—and he looked forward to any result of such consideration. At time when peoples of different countries were exchanging more and more visits for US arbitrarily to set up artificial barriers to such exchange simply not reasonable. They regretted that up to now peoples of China and US could not have normal uninterrupted exchanges.

24. Wang recalled some time ago commemorative conference held in Peking in honor American poet Whitman and they had extended invitation to number outstanding representatives American literature and arts but regrettably these persons had been denied passports to come China take part that conference. Despite opposition American Government against visits of American journalists to China there still great number journalists who desired come their country and who making every effort break through barriers. Wang recalled that Peking Opera Company had already signed contract with American theatrical company for exchange visits but due US Government intervention contract could not be realized. During performance Chinese acrobatical troupe here in Switzerland acrobatic company received inquiries from US and requests for tickets so that American tourists who came here might have opportunity seeing their performance. All this indicated fervent desire among people for cultural exchange. As Wang knew we here had seen performances Peking Opera and acrobatic troupe. Could any of US gentlemen say these performances contained any political propaganda? They were sorry they had not had opportunity see American theater but were sure they would look forward to seeing American theater. This showed that feeling and desire of two people were same.

25. Wang understood Lt. Col. Ekvall very much interested in studies of Chinese national minorities and had actually written some works in that respect. They would welcome Lt. Col. Ekvall sometime visiting their country so he could continue work and achieve desires. Or could there be any harm done to US if Lt. Col. Ekvall were to come to China and complete work? As Wang had said such exchanges were in interest both countries and they would hope US would give favorable consideration their proposal this respect.

26. I said if Wang’s country really interested in improving relations I could not too strongly stress that it fundamental it abandon its policy of hostility and threats of force involving US and agree our differences would be settled only by peaceful means, and demonstrate its willingness carry out first agreement we reached. I and my government continued hope this could come quickly.

27. Wang hoped I would be in position give favorable consideration to proposal they had made at next meeting.

28. Wang said he had nothing further and suggested next meeting be held Thursday, October 4. I agreed.

Popper

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 611.93/9–2256. Confidential; Limit Distribution.