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

359. Telegram From the Embassy in Poland to the Department of State⁰

Warsaw, December 1, 1960, 6 p.m.

834. Beam–Wang Talks. 102nd meeting one hour fifty-five minutes.¹ I opened with statement along lines paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 Deptel 603.² Wang responded in familiar fashion charging US with aggressive activities throughout the world. Pointing out that Department spokesman had rejected Chou En-lai’s proposal of nuclear-free zone,³ he questioned US motive in bringing up matter at these talks. He also referred to questions he has asked at last meeting, declared I had made no serious attempt to answer them, and then elaborated them in effort prove US had invaded and occupied Taiwan.

I rejected Wang’s charges of US aggressive intent, pointing out he had blandly slid over basic cause of tension which was his side’s advocacy of violent struggle against all non-Communist governments. I then quoted Mao, Liu and Khrushchev as suggested paragraph 4 reference telegram and expressed regret Chou nuclear-free zone proposal appeared to be just propaganda.

Wang replied with some routine remarks on US aggressiveness, then alleged US “propaganda” on horrors of nuclear war was simply atomic blackmail intended to frighten people. He said Mao’s statement on atomic weapons was correct. (He made no reference to my quotation of Khrushchev.) After brief further exchange along established lines, Wang proposed next meeting January 31 and we agreed on Thursday February 2, 2 p.m.

Beam

0. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 611.93/12–160. Confidential; Priority; Limit Distribution. Also sent to Taipei, Hong Kong, and Moscow.
1. Beam sent his comments and recommendations in telegram 838 from Warsaw, December 2, and a transcript of the meeting in airgram G–212, December 6. (Ibid., 611.93/12–260 and 611.93/12–660, respectively; see Supplement)
2. Telegram 603 to Warsaw, November 29, conveyed Beam’s instructions for the meeting. The reference paragraphs instructed Beam to point out that Wang’s statements on peaceful coexistence were contradicted by editorials in Chinese publications, to rebut his charges of U.S. aggression, and to urge that his side demonstrate its sincerity by responding affirmatively to U.S. proposals for the renunciation of force, by releasing detained Americans, and by accounting for all missing U.S. servicemen. (Department of State, Central Files, 611.93/11–2960; see Supplement)
3. The proposal cited in footnote 6, Document 355. An August 1 comment by Lincoln White, Director of the Office of News, is quoted in Documents on Disarmament, 1960, p. 181, footnote 1.