Office of the Historian

293.0011/8–1051: Telegram

The Chargé in the United Kingdom (Holmes) to the Secretary of State

confidential
London, August 10, 1951—6 p. m.

814. Embtel 749, Aug 7.1

[Page 1775]
A.
In series of tels dated Aug 7 Lamb has reported to FonOff along fol lines:
1.
At mtg on 6 Aug between Brit, Indian and Swiss reps fol factors taken into consideration:
(a).
Panikkar had approached CPG orally on high level and fol up with aide-mémoire.
(b).
Sov Amb had likewise approached CPG on high level.
(c).
Swiss min had been given discretion make reps on behalf Swiss, Ital, PR and Spanish natls, mostly missionaries.
(d).
Swedish Amb, though sympathetic, reluctant press reps so soon after arrival.
2.
Fol conclusions reached at mtg:
(a).
Joint or identical reps undesirable.
(b).
Tactically it wld be preferable stagger approaches so as to give appearance independent action while stressing same principal points.
(c).
Prospect of success wld be prejudiced by injudicious publicity and by giving Amer interests too much prominence.
3.
Fol agreements reached:
(a).
Swiss shld proceed with oral reps in week or so.
(b).
After similar interval had elapsed, Brit wld make reps on behalf own natls and Amers and Canadians as well. UK reps shld be in writing in view practical certainty Brit rep wld be refused personal interview.
(c).
Other countries (i.e., Norway, Sweden and Denmark) shld be approached by UKG suggesting their reps in Peiping be authorized take appropriate supporting action.
4.
In view abandonment of idea of joint approach there wld seem to be no obstacle to us asking USSR intervene with CPG.
B.
FonOff has replied to Lamb approving decisions reached at mtg and asking for draft of protest which Lamb wld present CPG. On approval draft wld be communicated to govts of Nor, Sweden and Denmark with recommendation they take supporting action. FonOff suggests any publicity be withheld until, say, 3 weeks after reps made.
Holmes
  1. The reference telegram reported that, following a conversation with an Embassy officer, the Foreign Office had urged Lamb to expedite preparations for joint representations on behalf of foreigners in China. The Foreign Office had not planned to ask Roschin to participate, but Lamb reported that Roschin had told Panikkar he had spoken to Chou En-lai about the plight of foreigners; Lamb had no information about Chou’s response (601.4193/8–751).↩