Foreign Relations of the United States, 1955–1957, Volume III, China, Microfiche Supplement

726. Telegram 359 from Geneva¹

Geneva, October 4, 1956, 2 p.m.

359. From Johnson.

Two hour ten minute meeting this morning. Wang opened with long prepared statement “reviewing ground” at beginning fifteenth month going over familiar ground renewing charge US attempting obtain PRC abandonment territory and sovereignty and as result US intransigence “talks have become deadlocked,” “US purposefully procrastinating meetings.” It is up to US stop using force and threat of force against PRC. Charge of September 24 statement PRC holding Americans political hostages is “slander.” PRC list of 55, 52 Chinese not yet returned, and of US list of 103, 26 not yet returned. US still holding Chinese in prison and should “adopt measures on own initiative in same manner as PRC enable them exercise right to return.” US using charges on civilians as pretext to cover up procrastination in meetings. In order break deadlock PRC had made embargo and cultural exchange proposals. Failure make progress on main issue renunciation should not stop effort make progress on minor issues. In view President Eisenhower’s Geneva proposal on cultural exchange and contacts, no reason for US refuse PRC proposal this field.

I made long extemporaneous statement in reply incorporating first three paras Deptel 374 (as I had previously sent him copy September 24 statement and he referred to it in opening statement, I did not read out full text at meeting but wove in substantive language at appropriate points). Charged them with procrastinating on renunciation pointing out that whenever agreement seemed near they retreated to pleas of internal affairs sovereignty, etc. Made long charge on mistreatment Americans in China including numbers of those imprisoned, numbers those who died, etc., leading up to charge that PRC is one who had cut off cultural and human contacts, and coming back to fundamental importance implementation September 10 announcement. During course this statement I made it entirely clear no discussion trade or cultural exchange until renunciation force and release of Americans achieved.

In reply Wang charged me with trying to “poison” our negotiations and during course rebuttal referred to three groups Americans in China: those who continue reside freely; those who opposed Chinese people; and those “dropped from air carrying poison, pistols and bombs.” Did I expect them treat latter as distinguished guests? Cited long list alleged US wrongs against “Chinese people” bombings, occupation territory etc., etc., and for first time in talks mentioned UN membership, alleging US pressure on others deny PRC legitimate rights in international affairs including representation UN. PRC attempting by every means improve relations. If US intends use talks poison relations “what is good of continuing such talks.” PRC efforts shown by successive draft proposals. With respect cultural relations Americans are protesting against own government’s denial permission journalists visit China and appears American Government has lost confidence in own people as well as system. PRC made cultural exchange proposal “in friendly spirit.” Failure US Govt favorable consideration this proposal would require PRC consider giving publicity thereto.

Meeting closed with my renewing charge PRC procrastinating on accepting simple and fundamental renunciation force proposal as well as on carrying out agreement on release Americans. I refuted his lack confidence charge and while regretting their threat again go to public, expressed confidence world could judge.

Next meeting Thursday, October 18. Departing Prague tomorrow morning.

Gowen

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 611.93/10–456. Confidential; Priority; Limit Distribution.