Office of the Historian

230. Telegram From the Chief of Naval Operations (Burke) to the Commander in Chief, Pacific (Felt)0

Washington, October 30, 1958, 8:21[?] p.m.1

300121Z. Your 282336Z2 is both timely and welcome. Whatever may be ChiCom purpose in restricting OSI bombardment, our actions now should support U.S. objective of reducing tensions in Taiwan area without losing our current advantageous position.

Concur your recommendation Alfa.3 Gimo should make decision on when and how he resupplies. Should he choose resupply on odd days and his ships get damaged he should understand of course that that does not mean that U.S. will escort because of attack since by supplying on even days there would be no military necessity of having convoys on odd days at all, let alone U.S. escorting them. Your Bravo concur unreservedly.

Although I agree with your Charlie, State Department feels that because the situation appears to be gradually subsiding, it would not now be desirable to resume patrols which come within the falsely claimed Communist twelve mile limit. This will insure the Communists have no excuse whatever for charging provocative acts on our part. Sooner or later though we will have to take actions to dispel any Communist ideas that we are actually accepting their twelve mile limit as a practical measure even though we protest. We don’t want a twelve mile limit to become a de facto situation.

By separate dispatch we will later authorize reduction in Naval forces on station so that two carriers and supporting ships can remain on station and the others in Subic or Yokosuka. Your point on doing this without announcement and after informing Gimo is important.

Understand State is sending similar dispatch to Amb Taipei.4

  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 793.5/10-3058. Top Secret; Priority. Drafted by Burke. Repeated to JCS, CINCUSARPAC, CINCPACFLT, CINCPACAF, and COMUSTDC.↩
  2. The date/time group is evidently incorrect; it presumably should read 310121Z.↩
  3. See footnote 4, Document 227.↩
  4. The alphabetically-listed recommendations correspond to the alphabetically-listed subparagraphs in Document 227.↩
  5. Telegram 398, October 30. (Department of State, Central Files, 793.00/10–3058; see Supplement)↩