344. Telegram 1136 to Geneva1
1136. For Johnson. Your 1048.
Consider redraft too wordy, opening door to variety of undesirable possible interpretations and implications. Also question wisdom of abandoning original concept of separate, unilateral declarations in favor joint declaration. Specific comments by paragraph follow:
2) Undesirable because places U.S. in position of publicly acquiescing in PRC’s right to hold any policy objective, even though we might consider such objective inimical to survival of free world. It seems to us we cannot, even implicitly, accept the PRC’s right to hold such policy objectives as, for example, subversion of free governments.
3) Statement that renunciation of force does not involve interests of third parties could be construed as leaving Communists free to attack offshore islands, which not specifically covered by Mutual Defense Treaty.
4) Provides loophole for Communists to insist this does not apply to Taiwan, which domestic matter.
5) Contains too strong an implication that U.S. willing enter upon far-reaching negotiations if Communists renounce force.
6) and 7) Inclusion phrase “when this would threaten international peace” again provides loophole for Communists to argue Taiwan domestic matter and only [Facsimile Page 2] threat to international peace arises from U.S. “use of armed force” against it.
Believe we should strive for simple wording which pins Communists down clearly and unmistakably not to use force in Taiwan area. They obviously seeking meaningless wording which would not tie their hands. We would rather, if necessary, face up to Communist refusal to agree to clearcut statement, provided latter appeared reasonable to most of world, than get their agreement to ambiguous document which they would then proceed to evade.
For reasons set forth paragraph 3 Tedul 42 as well as above considerations believe draft contained Deptel 915 most satisfactory produced to date. If considered too bare, it might be prefaced by reference to general principles to which all civilized nations subscribe, without using exact UN Charter language in Wang’s draft. Would be interested in Phleger’s comments this telegram.
Repeat to Secretary.
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 611.93/11–355. Secret; Priority; Limited Distribution. Drafted by Clough; cleared by Sebald in draft and by McConaughy.↩