Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, China and Japan, Volume XIV, Part 1

611.93/10–1654

No. 347
Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs (Key) to the Secretary of State¹

top secret

[Washington,] October 16, 1954.

Subject:

• New Soviet Item Concerning Formosa

The Soviet delegation yesterday afternoon requested the inclusion of a new item on the General Assembly agenda entitled “Acts of aggression against the Peoples Republic of China and responsibility of the United States Navy for those acts”. (Tab A)²

In a meeting this morning with Messrs. Hoover, Robertson, Phleger, MacArthur, Bowie, Wainhouse, McConaughy, Bond and myself the bearing of the new Soviet item to the New Zealand initiative regarding Quemoy was discussed.

The sense of the meeting was that we should proceed with the New Zealand initiative. We do not at this moment know the views of the United Kingdom and New Zealand Governments on this latest Soviet move although we have discussed this problem in general terms with their representatives here this morning.³

The parallel between the new Soviet item and that which the Chinese Communists submitted in the Security Council in August of 1950 (Tab B, pages 27 to 36)⁴ regarding Formosa and the item of the Soviet Union in the General Assembly in 1950 (Tab C, pages 73 to 75)⁵ is striking. You will recall that these moves by the Chinese Communists and the Soviet Union were a prelude to the Chinese Communists’ military intervention in North Korea. The question arises whether this latest Soviet move in the General Assembly, coming once again on the heels of the Chou En-lai letter of October 11 (Tab D, pages AAA 1 through AAA 7)⁶ does not presage a military move by the Chinese Communists on Quemoy or other islands held by the Chinese Nationalists. It was the sense of the meeting that this striking parallel gives a new relevance to the New Zealand initiative and underscores the urgency of moving ahead.

We discussed what our position should be in the General Committee which will probably meet on Tuesday on the question of inscription.⁷ The consensus was that we should not object to the inscription, and perhaps even vote to inscribe.

Ambassador Lodge yesterday told the press that the Soviet complaint was a plain lie. The consensus of the meeting this morning was not to concur in Ambassador Lodge’s desire to issue a further statement at this time. This I communicated to Ambassador Lodge.

The United Kingdom and New Zealand representatives here are still without instructions regarding their Governments’ attitudes toward our intention to go forward with a Mutual Defense Treaty with Nationalist China, and the implications of that intention in terms of the New Zealand initiative.

Mr. Robertson, at our meeting this morning with the representatives of the United Kingdom and New Zealand, gave them a summary of his conversation with President Chiang Kai-shek.

1. A notation on the source text indicates that it was seen by Secretary Dulles.
2. The attachments are not filed with the source text. For text of the Soviet request of Oct. 15, see UN document A/2756.
3. The discussion was recorded in a memorandum of conversation by Bond, dated Oct. 16. (793.00/10–1654)
4. A letter of Aug. 24, 1950, from Chou En-lai to the President of the UN Security Council charged the United States with armed invasion of Chinese territory; for text, see UN document S/1715. For documentation pertaining to the Chou letter and to subsequent discussion in the Security Council of the Chinese complaint, see Foreign Relations, 1950, vol. vi, pp. 450–581 passim., and ibid., vol. vii, pp. 1235 ff.
5. On Sept. 20, 1950, the Soviet Union proposed the discussion of U.S. “aggression” against China by the General Assembly; for text of the Soviet letter and an explanatory memorandum of Sept. 21, 1950, see UN documents A/1375 and A/1382. For documentation pertaining to the Soviet complaint and to subsequent discussion of it in the General Assembly, see Foreign Relations, 1950, vol. vi, pp. 515–581 passim, and ibid., 1951, vol. vii, Part 2, pp. 1554–1569 passim.
6. The text of Chou En-lai’s cable of Oct. 10, to the UN Secretary-General, charging the United States with “armed aggression against China’s territory of Taiwan,” is printed in a supplement to People’s China, Nov. 1, 1954.
7. On Tuesday, Oct. 19, at the suggestion of the United Kingdom, the General Committee decided to postpone consideration of inscription of the item for 2 weeks in order to avoid increasing tension during disarmament discussions then going on in the General Assembly. It was placed on the agenda 2 weeks later without U.S. opposition.