342. Letter from Sebald to Johnson1
I have been wanting to write to you for some considerable time, but as Walter McConaughy has been doing the corresponding, I thought it best to keep all the “official informals” in his hands. Furthermore, I feel sure that, as an old hand on this job, you have some idea of the harassment under which the occupant of my seat usually operates.
However, I do wish to tell you that I feel you are doing a beautiful job in handling the negotiations with Wang. Having had some experience with the Soviets in Japan, I know what it means to face up to the difficult problems such as you have week after week, never knowing when the end will come or, in fact, just what the negotiations will lead up to. In any event, I hope you know that you have our complete confidence and full support.
Now down to business. On the question of the Agreed Announcement concerning renunciation of force, I have carefully gone over the proposed text which you sent along in your 1048 and the following are my preliminary remarks. We will send the Department’s comments by telegram.
As a matter of form, I believe that this draft too closely presents the two “governments” as determining or recognizing, jointly, certain policies or principles. It seems to me that this results in giving greater stature to the PRC than is desirable. It also brings the Announcement close to an agreement.
The draft also seems to place emphasis upon the divergence between the U.S. and PRC views as the source of tension. It would [Facsimile Page 2] seem preferable to shift the emphasis simply to a desire to remove tensions. It also appears to accept the theory that the problem is international, thereby affording some leeway to the PRC to claim that the civil strife between them and the GRC is not comprehended within the Announcement.
I am also concerned with the apparent wordiness of the draft which I believe should be as brief and direct as possible. I agree that it might be preferable to have some bargaining points built into any draft which we present, but we should bear in mind that it will come [Typeset Page 481] into comparison with Wang’s draft which is ostensibly simple and direct.
While you have already mentioned the point (in your 1056) that the UN Charter does comprehend domestic matters if they affect international peace and security, I think we must be extremely careful in our draft not to give the PRC the slightest peg on which to hang the argument that the renunciation of force applies only to international matters. You have noted, I am sure, that the UN Charter provisions quoted by Wang are designed to place this problem on an international plane. For this reason I would prefer relating the renunciation of force to the Taiwan area rather than to a renunciation between the two parties.
Paragraph 3 of your draft is difficult to understand and would seem to give a good ground for argument that Taiwan is entirely excluded and hence that force could be used against it with impunity.
In paragraph 4 the phrase “if it constitutes a threat, etc.” raises the question, who decides? And what about domestic affairs if they should constitute a threat to peace?
Paragraph 5 seems to limit the declaration to the two parties and again seems not to preclude the use of force against the GRC. In paragraph 6 the clause “when this would threaten international peace” seems to provide an escape clause in the Taiwan situation. Paragraph 6 also appears to be inconsistent and in conflict with paragraphs 2 and 5.
Entirely informally and without the slightest pride of authorship, I am sending along a draft which incorporates my views as to a possible “Agreed Announcement”. If you think the approach of this draft has merit, you might wish to discuss it with Herman Phleger and possibly the Secretary. Alternatively, it may be that some of the language of this draft could be used to overcome some of the apparent objections mentioned above.
This letter is written in a great rush and late in the day, [Facsimile Page 3] so I hope you will pardon any shortcomings.
With all best wishes,
Sincerely yours,
Enclosure:
Draft Agreed Announcement (3 copies)
- Source: Department of State, Geneva Talks Files, Lot 72D415. Secret; Official–Informal.↩