Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume XXX, China

214. Circular Telegram From the Department of State to Certain Posts¹

Washington, November 23, 1966, 8:40 p.m.

90629. Subj: ChiRep. Ref: Depcirtel 88129.²

1. Study Committee res submitted this year by Italians and others offers opportunity to improve votes in favor IQ res and against Albanian res since this new proposition may appeal to some countries which have in past either voted affirmatively or abstained on Albanian res in absence other alternatives before Assembly. Dept considers it important that we exploit this opportunity to maximum extent that is appropriate.

2. Apart from local problems there is especially delicate aspect of any representations which posts may make to host govts. We have informed GRC that while we will vote for study committee res, we will not lobby for it. GRC is strongly opposed to proposal, and any discussions which posts undertake must in no way appear to host govts as direct or indirect effort to influence them toward favorable vote on study committee res. Our purpose is strictly limited to maximizing margin of votes in favor of IQ res and against Albanian res, in order to show that GA is opposed to extremist solutions.

3. Department strongly recommends, unless objection perceived, that representations be made urgently and at high level. Arguments given below may be drawn on selectively depending on attitude of host governments. While we desire maximum number of affirmative votes for IQ res and negative votes for Albanian res, posts authorized as final fallback in both instances to suggest possibility of abstention or absence if effect would be net improvement from our viewpoint.

4. Posts requested to report priority results of representations to Dept repeating info for USUN.

5. Following are suggested arguments:

(a) Host govt has in past supported (or abstained on) Albanian res because it favored admission of ChiComs and not because it wished to expel GRC. USG has made it clear that it has not and will not lobby for study committee res, but availability this res provides host government with an alternative that avoids extreme of Albanian res which would produce irrevocable decision to expel GRC contrary to host govt’s policy. Thus we urge host govt not support (or abstain on) Albanian res.

(b) Where appropriate, also urge for same reasons that host govt re-examine its vote on important question res. Charter explicitly provides that important question must be decided by a two-thirds majority. Change in representation of China obviously important question. Aside from Charter provisions, however, there is also additional political consideration that failure to uphold important question procedure could at some future time result in expulsion of GRC, a situation both USG and host govt wish to avoid.

Rusk

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, UN 6 CHICOM. Confidential; Priority. Drafted by Gleysteen; cleared by Berger and by the advisers for United Nations affairs in NEA, ARA, AF, and EUR; and approved by Sisco. Sent to 30 Embassies and repeated to Kingston, Port-of-Spain, Santiago, Taipei, and USUN.
2. Circular telegram 88129, November 19, sent to 79 Embassies, stated that the United States would support the study committee resolution but would not lobby for it; it instructed the recipient Embassies to explain to their host governments that the principal U.S. aim was to ensure reaffirmation of the important question resolution and defeat of the Albanian resolution. (Ibid.)