802. Letter 68 from McConaughy to Johnson1
The cancellation of the April meeting at Geneva has somewhat disrupted the normal exchange of letters with you there. CA has been sending to Geneva some of the material that would normally have been sent as enclosures to a letter, so as to keep down the bulk of the letter I will send you in time for the May 15 meeting. However, Defense has raised some questions with regard to the missing personnel issue, going beyond the immediate context of the Geneva meetings, and we would appreciate your preliminary thoughts on the matter, if possible before your arrival in Washington.
[Typeset Page 1357]I am enclosing a copy of the letter from Defense asking about the current status of your efforts at Geneva, and whether it would be desirable for the UNC again to raise the issue in the MAC. The Defense letter enclosed a copy of a statement prepared by the UNC for possible use in the latter eventuality, and asked for our approval or comments. We sent Defense an interim reply to the effect we were asking you for your comments and would reply more fully when we had heard from you.
On the desirability of taking the issue up in the MAC, it is our feeling here that we can build up a better public position if we maintain a posture of [Facsimile Page 2] unremitting efforts in both forums to get an accounting, continuing to bring it up both at Geneva and in the MAC.
I think you will agree that the proposed UNC statement is not of the sort best calculated to build up a strong public position, and that it should be re-written to bring it more into line with the approach you have followed at Geneva. To be of maximum usefulness, a public position on the missing personnel question ought to be ready for disclosure by the fall, shortly before the opening of the UNGA. It would be good if, before that time, all the well-documented individual cases (i.e., those where the Communists obviously should have information, but have indicated “no data” in their accounting) could have been cited, either in your presentations at Geneva, or the MAC, or both. We also feel our position would be stronger if the UNC took more note of the Communist “accounting,” calling attention to its falsifications and its inadequacies, but not simply ignoring it. For example, with regard to the “escaped” category, the UNC could ask the Communists to provide supplementary data on the time and place of escape. Naturally any presentation in the MAC should be cleared by such other of the 16 allies as have unaccounted for personnel on the list, but this ought not to prove too difficult.
If a general strategy along the above lines can be agreed upon, it would not cause much of a change from your past approach to the problem at Geneva. There would be individual presentations on perhaps four or five persons per meeting, drawing your material largely from the better documented cases in the Air Force roster (as the Air Force list was entirely in the “no data” category in the Communist “accounting”). We have sent on to Geneva material on 20 USAF personnel. However, you need not feel restricted to the use of this [Facsimile Page 3] material, as Defense has informed us that all the information on the copy of the roster you have (Air Force included) may be used as though it were unclassified, except for actual citations of certain specific intelligence sources.
With regard to the selection of “well-documented” cases for individual citation, we believe after talking to Defense it would be better to let you choose on the basis of the material you have in Geneva, as you will in any case to work up the presentation. We will effect some [Typeset Page 1358] coordination with the effort in the MAC by keeping Defense informed of the cases you have cited.
I would hope that when you are here on consultation we will be able to arrange a meeting on the missing personnel question with Defense representatives. We would appreciate any comments you may be able to send us before your arrival in Washington, however, as they would help prepare the ground for our discussions.
Sincerely yours,
Enclosure:
Copy of letter dated 3/11/57 from Gen. Erskine with attached copies of letter, and statement proposed by the UN Command.
- Source: Department of State, Geneva Talks Files, Lot 72D415. Secret; Official–Informal. Drafted by Osborn.↩