124. Letter From Secretary of State Rusk to the Ambassador to Poland (Gronouski)1
Dear John:
I was very interested in your initial impressions of the Chinese Communists at your first meeting with them.2 I agree the Chinese seem to believe that the U.S. is hostile to Communist China. It is also clear they are inflexible in their outlook. Their experience over the past forty years, their deep-seated beliefs, their dispute with the Soviets and their projection of Viet-Nam as a test-case, their vision of the future, and their nationalistic aspirations have combined to convince them that their current policies are right regardless of the consequences. It is highly unlikely that the present leadership will alter its views.
Given these circumstances I believe that our present course of action—firm resistance to Chinese Communist expansionism while at the same time searching for means to establish more contacts and a reduction of tensions—is the best course that we can pursue. Your role in this search for more meaningful contact is most important. At your last meeting with Wang I think you scored several points—particularly in telling him of the removal of the travel ban on doctors, our willingness to admit their journalists without reciprocity, our willingness to meet with them in an exploratory committee to discuss the World Disarmament Conference and finally our proposal to jointly investigate their claims of attacks on the high seas. We hope to propose more of these small steps for the next meeting. We realize that Peking will reject them as well. Nevertheless, [Page 255] when these moves gradually become known they will reflect our own reasonableness and our desire to move towards some lessening of tensions. The Chinese rejections will prove they are intransigent and their unreasonableness will cause them to become more and more isolated.
I think you will be interested in the following recent observations from Hopson, the British Chargé in Peking.
“It is supposed to be axiomatic that China does not listen to reason. Certainly that has been my humble experience at this post so far. The arguments of power and bitter experience are more likely to move her. Nor shall we tame her by just giving her what she wants. It would be folly for the Americans to dismantle the defensive system which is at present their only means of deterring China from adventures outside her frontiers. She must be taught that her present policies will not pay. At the same time real efforts must be made to lead China back into the international community and to show her the advantage of peaceful co-existence. There is no magic formula for this. It will require strength, patience and understanding, particularly from the United States and from the Soviet Union; and it will be a long business. There is not much prospect of changing the attitudes of the present Chinese leadership. We may even have to wait for a new generation. Meanwhile we would be wise to keep our powder dry.”
Your report on the eavesdropping of the last session of the talks raises the question whether we should consider suggesting to the Chinese that we hold the talks alternatively in each other’s Embassy rather than at the Museum. I should appreciate your views on making such a move. On the other hand, there may be some benefit in letting the Poles and Russians know about the contents of our talks at the present time.
In view of the present situation in the Far East I think it would be best not to have Sir George discuss our long term plans in that area with Michalowski at this time.
With warm regards,
Sincerely,
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, POL 1 CHICOM-US. Secret. Drafted by Dean on January 29. Cleared by Stoessel, Thompson, Berger, U. Alexis Johnson, and Assist-ant Legal Adviser for Far Eastern Affairs George H. Aldrich.↩
- A note on the source text refers to an incoming letter from Gronouski in the Exdis file. The letter has not been found.↩
- Printed from a copy that indicates Rusk signed the original.↩