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

307. Letter From Chairman Khrushchev to President Eisenhower⁰

Moscow, October 12, 1959.

Dear Mr. President: I thank you for your letter transmitted through the Embassy of the United States at Moscow on September 30.¹ I have studied it carefully. First of all, I should like to say that I fully agree with you that in the future, too, a strictly personal exchange of opinion between us on questions which either side might have will be desirable and useful. As I see it, it will be a good continuation of those frank conversations which you and I had at Camp David.

As to the substance of the question raised in your letter, I must say the following. I well remember our conversation of September 27, during which the question of China was touched upon. We both expressed at that time our points of view, and each of us retained his own opinion. However, I should like to emphasize at the outset that, according to my firm conviction, the essence of our divergent views concerning the problems touched upon in your letter does not at all consist in the different attitudes toward the question of the use of force in international relations. On this score we have no disagreement. We both unanimously agreed that all international disputes should be settled not by the use of force or by fanning the “cold war” but rather by peaceful means, through negotiation. I note with satisfaction and fully share the desire expressed in your letter that the foreign policies of our countries be directed toward the preservation of peace. The tenor of our conversation and the contents of your letter lead to the definite conclusion that the substance of our differences lies in different attitudes toward the question of whether or not any foreign states have the right to interfere in the affairs of China.

The so-called Taiwan question is one of relations between Chinese and Chinese, a purely internal affair of China. The extension to Taiwan of the system of government which now exists on all remaining territory of China will in effect be the concluding phase of the revolutionary liberation process which has been going on in China for many years. No international complications whatsoever would have arisen in connection with Taiwan but for the foreign interference in the civil war in China, but for the situation artificially created on Taiwan, a situation caused by the military support and protection of Chiang Kai-shek by the United States of America. Taiwan and the Pescadores Islands would have been liberated long ago and reunited with China if it had not been for the position taken by the United States, which has armed forces on the Island of Taiwan and in the Taiwan Straits. History tells us that revolutionary liberation processes lead to deep, radical changes in the lives of peoples and states. Many contemporary states, including the United States of America, owe their existence to such changes. This was true before and it is true today. The radical socio-political changes which in our own time have brought about the regeneration of China, the new birth of that great power, represent an expression of the supreme will of the Chinese people. To support artificially despotic regimes that have long outlived their time means only to bring upon oneself the wrath of peoples. The great Chinese nation has definitively rejected the regime of Chiang Kai-shek. This is an unalterable fact which it is impossible to ignore.

The experience of our Soviet country, as well as of many other countries including the United States of America, indicates convincingly enough what dire consequences are caused by the interference of foreign powers in a civil war that takes place in any state. You know, Mr. President, that, soon after the victory of the October Revolution in Russia, insurgent generals, supporters of the old overthrown regime—Kolchak, Denikin, Vrangel—established themselves in different parts of the territory of our county with the direct and active support of the Entente powers. Foreign support of these former Czarist generals brought about a situation where a long and bloody civil war was imposed upon the people of Soviet Russia. Yet our people, who had just emerged from the slaughterhouse of the First World War, longed for one thing only: to restore the ruined economy, to build peacefully a new life.

We deeply regret that the United States of America continues to take the position of a country that is using its armed forces for interference in the internal affairs of China. Naturally, under such conditions we fully support and will continue to support the legitimate rights of the Chinese People’s Republic.

As is well known, the Government of the Chinese People’s Republic has repeatedly proposed to its compatriots on Taiwan to begin negotiations for a peaceful settlement of the present situation. Also, it is impossible to deny that the fact of the presence in the Taiwan area of foreign armed forces is a serious obstacle on the road to a peaceful settlement of the Taiwan question by the Chinese themselves.

As to your statement that the United States has a mutual security agreement with the Taiwan authorities, it is obvious that Chiang Kai-shek has no more basis for speaking on behalf of the Chinese people than, for instance, Kerensky has today on behalf of Russian people.

In your letter, Mr. President, you draw an analogy between China and Germany. But one cannot agree with such an analogy. It is generally known that the German question, in that part where it is really an international question, was born of the Second World War, is a result of the joint victory by the states in the anti-Hitler coalition over Fascist Germany, and derives from our joint responsibility for the conclusion of a peace treaty with Germany As to the unification of Germany, the Soviet Union as you know is of the firm opinion that this is an internal problem of the Germans which they themselves must settle and in which no foreign state has the right to interfere. The conclusion of a peace treaty, the liquidation of the occupation regime in that part of German territory where it still exists, the withdrawal of foreign troops from German territory—these are the areas in which the question of Germany is really an international one. As for the situation in China, the international problem here is, strictly speaking, only the fact of the presence of foreign armed forces on Taiwan.

China cannot be considered a divided country because it is generally known that Taiwan is an integral part—a province—of China, and the fact of the return of Taiwan to China was recognized by a good number of states, including the United States, and recorded in the Cairo and Potsdam Declarations.

I must also confess, Mr. President, that it is difficult to agree with respect to the relationship suggested in your letter between the Taiwan question and the solution of the disarmament problem. I believe that the solution of the disarmament problem, which both you and I have recognized as the most important of the problems facing mankind, should not be made contingent upon the obligatory acceptance of the viewpoint of one of the sides on certain specific questions regarding which there are differences of opinion between our governments. This is all the more so with respect to the question of Taiwan which, as I have already indicated, is an internal affair of China and only of China. If we embark upon the path of linking the disarmament problem with other problems which have no direct bearing on it, then it should be admitted that the willingness to have disarmament will remain only a verbal one. I should like to hope sincerely that the Government of the United States will not follow this path and that, as you and I have agreed, the governments of our two countries will exert every effort to the end that the disarmament problem may be successfully resolved and that the peoples may at last be liberated from the burden of armaments and from the fear of a new war.

And if mention is made of any links between the disarmament problem and questions pertaining to China, then in our opinion the discontinuance of military support of the Chiang Kai-shek regime would certainly facilitate the creation of a more favorable climate for a solution of the disarmament problem. And what, other than unnecessary difficulties in the matter of accomplishing the great task of universal and total disarmament, is created by the unrealistic policy of depriving the Chinese People’s Republic of its legitimate place in the UN, and by the hopeless attempts to isolate internationally a state with a population of six hundred and fifty million? It is now perfectly clear, I believe, that such a policy can lead nowhere.

Incidentally, since the disarmament problem is mentioned in your letter, I should like also to draw your attention to the fact that the Government of the Chinese People’s Republic has come out with full support of the general disarmament proposal presented by the Soviet Union for consideration by the United Nations.

Mr. President, I fully understand that the problem of Taiwan and of the attitude toward the Chinese People’s Republic is a complex and delicate problem for the Government of the United States. Nevertheless, I should like to express once again my hope that you will approach this problem without any prejudice, taking due account of the powerful historical factors of our times and proceeding from the sincere desire for the preservation and consolidation of peace throughout the world by which, l am convinced, you are guided.²

With sincere respect,

N. Khrushchev³

0. Source: Department of State, Presidential Correspondence: Lot 66 D 204. Secret; Presidential Handling. The source text is a copy of the official translation that was sent to the White House along with the original text in Russian. The letter was delivered to the Department of State on October 14 by Soviet Counselor of Embassy Mikhail N. Smirnovsky. (Memorandum of conversation, October 14; ibid., Central Files, 793.00/10–1459)
1. Document 303.
2. Herter recommended in a memorandum of October 28 to Eisenhower that he make no reply. (Department of State, Presidential Correspondence: Lot 66 D 204)
3. Printed from a copy that bears this typed signature.