893.00 Tibet/67
The Ambassador in China (Gauss) to the Secretary of State
[Received December 3.]
Sir: I have the honor to refer to the Embassy’s despatch no. 1598, September 20, 1943 in regard to Sino–Tibetan relations and to enclose a copy of despatch no. 170, October 28, 1943 from the Embassy officer at Chengtu33 in regard to a proposed missionary sponsored educational [Page 644] mission to Tibet.34 The despatch contains a summary of its contents.
In spite of the alleged willingness of some Tibetans to welcome foreign educational missionary work in their country, the Embassy has received no information indicating that a relaxation may be expected of the well known Tibetan policy of exclusion (see, for example, Embassy’s despatch no. 1482, August 17, 1943). The history of missionary effort in China does not provide any basis for assuming that the proposed educational mission under reference (or the contemplated Seventh Day Adventist medical mission mentioned in Mr. Smith’s despatch) is likely to be conducted with sufficient tact to avoid arousing Tibetan opposition. The projects under reference may therefore very well develop, even if the good intentions of the initiators are taken for granted, into attempts at missionary penetration of Tibet which are likely to give rise to Tibetan opposition and result in friction and situations which cannot but be embarrassing to the American Government. It is also possible that the missionary interests concerned may find it necessary, as the price they must pay for indispensable Chinese support, to allow themselves to be used to some extent as agents of Chinese political penetration of Tibet.
The usual Chinese approach to the Tibetan problem is well illustrated by the incident reported in the enclosure to the Embassy’s despatch no. 1793, November 9, 1943.35 Chinese authorities in Kansu, wishing to discourage Tibetan assistance to rebels operating in areas adjacent to those inhabited by Tibetans, dropped leaflets in which the Tibetans were addressed as “barbarians” and threatened with bombing if they sheltered rebels.
It is the Embassy’s opinion that under present conditions American interests would not benefit from the missionary projects under reference but on the contrary the projects might result in serious embarrassment to the Government. Therefore, if and when the Embassy is approached by the missionary interests concerned, we will expect to offer them no encouragement in regard to the projects.
Respectfully yours,