Foreign Relations of the United States, 1958–1960, China, Volume XIX

170. Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in Poland⁰

Washington, October 8, 1958, 9:18 p.m.

414. Beam–Wang Talks. Following is guidance for 80th meeting:

Communists’ temporary suspension hostilities and statement¹ that GRC “fully free” to resupply offshore islands for seven days provided no US escort has changed negotiating picture for time being at least. Your emphasis next meeting should be on effort to get Chinese Communists extend ceasefire indefinitely. While unlikely Wang will give explicit agreement such extension, we might gain de facto extension by stressing themes: (a) US escort of GRC shipping has in fact been suspended and (b) opprobrium of world will descend on Chinese Communists if they renew attacks.

Begin your presentation as follows: There is one encouraging development since last meeting. We understand that there is de facto ceasefire in the Taiwan area. At the last meeting we pointed out Chinese Communists refusal negotiate by reason unyielding demand for unconditional surrender our side, involving giving up faithful ally to conquest by force of arms.

Now appears failure to negotiate attributable to fact Wang not communicating here real position his own government. To what end do we talk here if ceasefire which US has demanded from beginning, even if only a temporary one, is accomplished through newspapers or radio from Peiping. How can we now be assured that positions Wang takes here really reflect views his side. At last meeting he said: “I am authorized state Chinese side completely and categorically rejects your proposals.” Now we understand that firing has in fact ceased. Cessation of firing was a primary objective of US proposal and was stated in US agreed announcement. Would appreciate Wang’s answer to plain question: Is he now prepared to negotiate? We are interested in various aspects of Peng’s statement. Has Wang been advised of its meaning? For example, when Peng demands that US quit Western Pacific does that mean also abandoning our other allies in Asia such as the Philippines? Does Wang wish postponement in order to obtain information and accurate instructions?

Pass on to reference in Peng’s statement to “humanitarian considerations” and ask him what humanitarian considerations motivated murderous August 23 attack and those that followed. What humanitarian considerations led Chinese Communists to drop over half million rounds on Quemoy Islands with multiple civilian casualties. Beginning next Monday² must more innocent lives be sacrificed for purposes territorial aggrandizement Chinese Communists.

We hope that “humanitarian” considerations will lead Chinese side to continue ceasefire beyond week so that meaningful negotiations can be carried on. Unless tranquillity assured on more than week to week or day to day basic adjustment to peaceful conditions cannot realistically be made. Whole world cheered by ceasefire and consequent relaxing tensions and will expect continuance in interest world peace. All peace loving peoples believe it will be better for his side to begin genuine negotiations rather than to threaten the peace of the world. We sincerely hope announced suspension attacks foreshadows intention his side begin genuine negotiations. Whole civilized world joins us in this hope.

US position on providing escort illustrates its peaceful intentions, which have continued despite provocations. From beginning US has ordered escort only when that action necessary by reason Chinese Communist aggressive activities. Upon announcement suspension such aggressive activity, escort of GRC shipping suspended because no longer necessary. Must be emphasized that if ceasefire terminated and Chinese Communists aggression renewed, US escort of GRC shipping will also be renewed. Although US of course has full right send forces anywhere within international and friendly waters, US orders do not contemplate escort GRC supply ships so long as Communists continue to desist from attacks.

Best way Wang’s side could show sincere purpose to seek peaceful solution our differences would be for him begin serious discussion our draft agreed announcement.³ At last meeting he simply reiterated demand that US surrender to his demands and abandon its ally to his side’s unprovoked attacks. Ask him whether he now prepared say just what unacceptable to his side in each paragraph.

Agree you should challenge Wang’s sweeping statements as noted (A), (B) and (C) paragraph 3 your 527.⁴ Also believe you should bear down hard on Wang’s claim that August 23 shelling provoked by concentration of GRC forces offshores and buildup US force Taiwan area.

Actually there has been no recent buildup of GRC forces on Quemoy and the US increase of forces occurred only after the Communist attack. (FYI. There have been on Quemoy 6 Infantry Divisions since September 1954. On that date the total strength was 79,000. As a result of reorganization and increase of support elements the number was 85,000 on October 1956, 87,000 September 1957 and 86,000 in August 1958. End FYI.) As against this there has been a steady and major progressive buildup of Chinese Communist strength opposite Quemoy. (Particularly important that facts unprovoked and calculated nature Chinese Communists attacks be firmly fixed in record.) Simple fact Communist military and propaganda buildup during weeks preceding August 23 give lie his statements. As in Korea world cannot be deceived by claiming victim of aggression guilty of aggression because he defends himself.

Note fact that Wang in 77th meeting⁵ referred to “sabotage” and “harassment” against mainland. Ask for a specification of particular activities to which he referred. We have indicated that when ceasefire attained meaningful negotiations could be undertaken with the view of eliminating provocative activities both sides. Let us identify the activities that create tension in the area.

In case Chinese Communists accuse US of continuing escort of GRC shipping after Chinese Communists ceased fire you may note US escorted one GRC resupply mission after suspension hostilities. This operation was mounted and nearly completed even before Peng announcement.

Dulles

0. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 611.93/10–858. Secret; Priority; Limit Distribution. Drafted by Martin and Becker; cleared in draft by Dulles, Becker, Reinhardt, Parsons, and with OSD; and approved by Robertson. Repeated to USUN for Lodge and to Taipei.
1. Of October 5; see footnote 2, Document 156.
2. October 13.
3. Presented at the September 30 meeting; see Document 139.
4. Telegram 527 from Taipei, October 5, transmitted Beam’s comments on the October 4 meeting and recommendations for the next meeting. Paragraph 3 suggested challenging such statements as “(A) US proposal demands PRC agree to seizure Chinese territory, (B) US proposal constitutes preparation for war, (C) US proposal demands PRC recognition legality GRC.” (Department of State, Central Files, 611.93/10–558; see Supplement)
5. On September 25. According to telegram 477 from Warsaw (see footnote 1, Document 125), Wang said in his opening statement: “Over many years you have constantly been conniving and instigating Chiang Kai-shek clique under your control to use our inland waters to carry out sabotage and harassment against mainland.”