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

808. Telegram unnumbered from Geneva¹

Geneva, May 15, 1957

Unnumbered. From Johnson.

1. After Wang declined open, I opened 67th. It had been 20 months since he and I first entered agreement here to resolve first question with which we called upon to deal. It had been 20 months during which the high hopes of myself, my government, my people, that this problem of civilians could be resolved, had been disappointed. It had been 20 months during which failure his authorities carry out this agreement between us had blocked improvement relations between our two countries. So long as his authorities continued fail carry out this agreement between us, it could only have result increasing our distrust and increasing doubts concerning intent his authorities carry out agreements into which we entered. So long as this situation continued we could not expect anything other than the sterility which had thus far existed in resolving other problems in these talks. Apparently it was intent his authorities emphasize that none of persons whom we had been talking about in the Sept. 10 agreement would be released until expiration their sentences. Last two persons released, Reverend Mackensen and Father Gross apparently held until very last day their sentences, thus emphasizing this pattern.

2. I continued entirely apart from question of obligation of his authorities under Agreed Announcement, he had often spoken of his authorities humanitarian and lenient approach toward unfortunate victims of their oppression. It difficult for me not conclude even this had now been abandoned. For example, we know Father Wagner was in hospital and seriously ill. I would have thought any policy of leniency and humanitarianism would certainly have dictated release Father Wagner long before this. I wanted express hope Father Wagner could certainly be released at latest next month at time Father McCarthy and Father Houle due to be released so he could accompany them. I would have hoped he would have for me this morning some indication his intent, not only about Father Wagner, but about other imprisoned persons—and his intent concerning carrying out our agreement so that this block to progress in dealing with matters we called upon to consider could be removed.

3. Wang replied (from prepared statement) he also had feeling although more than twenty months had passed since we entered talks, yet problems we called upon consider remain as deadlocked as ever. People of our two countries held high hopes with regard talks between us; however they seem be disappointed in this hope. Must be made clear that he and I entered into this series talks for purpose achieving peaceful settlement problems between China and US. Therefore, good faith of each side must be demonstrated with regard reduction tensions and improvement relations between two countries.

4. Wang continued, however, for an extended period, aggressive acts of my side in Taiwan area entirely contrary this purpose. My government had recently taken new steps to aggravate tensions in Taiwan Area by flagrantly stationing guided missiles unit on territory of Taiwan, thus turning Taiwan into launching ground for attacks against China. This hostile act of US could only be regarded as another serious provocation against China. This act also served prove pronouncements of our peaceful intent, which I had made repeatedly in past, were entirely false.

5. Wang continued, in name his government he lodged strong protest. My side must be held responsible for all consequences this act aggression. Inside Conference Room my side continued stalling tactics, refused discuss tensions Taiwan Area and refused discuss his proposal removal embargo and cultural exchanges, etc. Outside of Conference Room my side tightening grip on Taiwan in attempt obstruct efforts Chinese people liberate Taiwan and continuing war-like acts to increase tension. One could not but doubt serious good faith my side.

6. Wang continued, so far as question civilians concerned, charges I had made were unacceptable to him. Ever since we had entered into Sept. 10 agreement his government had always been dealing with question civilians in accordance that agreement. As contrast to this there still remain 33 Chinese civilians in US prisons. So far as other Chinese nationals in US concerned, they still encounter repeated obstruction on part US authorities. He had raised such matters with me repeatedly in previous meetings. This morning he wanted take up case Chinese student Dr. Lin lan ying (spelling uncertain) who returned early this year. Since this case involved performance of US authorities in carrying out agreement of Sept. 10 and this related to ability thousands Chinese students in US return China, he felt it necessary call my attention to her complaint.

7. Wang continued. Dr. Lin graduated University Pennsylvania in US and employed in Sylvania Electric Co. in Philadelphia till her return in January, 1957. She departed San Francisco Jan 6, 1957 on SS President Wilson. Succeeded return homeland only after going through series unreasonable obstructions by US authorities. Let us follow story of unhappy lady and see what American authorities were doing in so-called carrying out of our agreement. When Dr. Lin was known to desire return, agents of U.S. Immigration Service came early December, 1956 interrogate her, used every vicious slander in intent intimidate her and compel her change mind. This sort interrogation and intimidation repeated Dec. 20, 1956, this time by agents FBI, who intruded in her apartment to do this. When these FBI agents failed to intimidate her they tried induce her move her family out of China.
After these two attempts failed to shake her resolve return, US authorities resorted to rough handling. On Jan 6 1957 when Dr. Lin waiting for embarkation San Francisco FBI agents suddenly turned up, made search all her baggage. What was more insulting was forced body search. In disregard her protests, agents also took away all notebooks and private property of $6,800 in travellers checks. When liner arrived Honolulu US authorities made last attempt by sending immigration agents aboard attempt influence her against continuing journey.

8. Wang continued, my authorities had remarkable record attempts hinder return Chinese students. Dr. Lin only one among many such unfortunate victims. That many more Chinese students so far unable return, due to our obstructions, was beyond question. Dr. Lin was Chinese student who had never offended our laws, yet subjected to rough handling by our authorities merely because she desired return and invoked Geneva accord to return. What was there to assure freedom of Chinese in US to return? He urged my government actually take necessary measures stop all violation of agreement to return Chinese from US. With view safeguarding legitimate interests of Chinese nationals, Wang also asked me request my authorities return to Dr. Lin her private property of $6,800 and all notebooks taken from her and give assurances against all recurrences such incidents. In addition, if I had any information with regard 52 and 22 persons who failed return, as well as concerning Chinese confined in our prisons, he glad hear it.

9. I replied, with regard Dr. Lin, I noted two things. First by his own statement she had returned to his country. Eight Americans who covered by our Agreed Announcement had not returned. There were other Americans who would never return—who had died from treatment they received in his prisons. There were others who had returned broken in mind and body. Virtually without exception they tell stories of most violent mistreatment. Second point I noted with regard Dr. Lin: if in fact there was basis for statements which he said she had now made and if in fact she felt being obstructed from leaving, she was at all times free to communicate with Indian Embassy. Fact that she apparently did not do so, fact that Indian Embassy not yet called to our attention single substantiated case obstruction among thousands Chinese in US, was incontrovertible evidence of faithfulness with which my authorities been carrying out our agreement. This has been affirmed also by public statements issued by Government of India and Indian Embassy.

10. I continued, with regard first part his statement I must flatly reject his completely erroneous statements that US had, or had intent carry out any acts aggression. We had to start with recognition of fact, whatever the views and policies of his government might be, the territory of Taiwan was lawfully occupied and administered by a government with which US had long had diplomatic relations, by a government recognized as a lawful government by majority of nations of world, by a government also so recognized by UN. US had with that government a treaty of mutual defense which had been published and registered with UN. That treaty and all our arrangements and understandings with that government were publicly and irrevocably defensive in their nature. Very first article of that treaty very specifically sets forth the agreement of both parties to it to settle any international dispute in which they may be involved by peaceful means. This an element which common to all our treaties with like-minded countries who entered into arrangements to pool defensive strength against aggression. US adherence to this principle without exception and without equivocation amply demonstrated to world in recent months. None who did not have aggressive intent, none willing accept principle peaceful settlement disputes had anything to fear from any defensive arrangements US might make with countries of like mind. No threat to use force being posed by US anywhere in world, including area Taiwan.

11. I continued, I wanted point out on October 8, 1955 I made proposal here that force be removed in settlement our disputes including dispute in Taiwan area. That was proposal which he thus far rejected. Threat hostile action Taiwan area thus still being maintained by his authorities. US would be deficient in carrying out international obligations and lacking in responsibility if it did not recognize this fact and take whatever defensive measures appeared be prudent. This posed no threat to his country or anyone of peaceful intent. I still hopeful he would accept proposal I had made for unconditional renunciation force in Taiwan area as well as elsewhere. No one of truly peaceful intent could object to that proposal.

12. Wang replied, cases Chinese civilians residing US who encountered unreasonable obstruction on part American authorities appearing every day. Experience of Dr. Lin to whom he referred this morning was only one of many similar such cases. Actions taken by American Immigration authorities in case Dr. Lin assumed such scale one could only term it plain robbery by taking away private property and confiscating all her notebooks. I had just now argued Dr. Lin returned Wang’s country after all. He wanted point out she did not return freely as entitled to under Geneva Agreement. Succeeded returning only after encountered series unreasonable obstructions by American authorities. Fact that Dr. Lin succeeded returning did not absolve US authorities of responsibility for obstructing her return. As to allegations I made this morning regarding alleged ill-treatment Americans in China, he could only term them entirely unfounded and irresponsible allegations. There were facts to prove even persons released out of prison, desired remain in his country of their own free will. These facts would shatter all unfounded rumors and slander against his country.

13. Wang continued with regard protest he had lodged with our side this morning regarding act aggression by US government by stationing guided missiles atomic unit on Chinese territory Taiwan, he could not accept statement I had just made. It was entirely due to military occupation by US government that Taiwan still not united with Chinese mainland. Unreasonable stand taken by US government in supporting in Taiwan the KMT regime to oppose the Chinese government also met a disapprobation by all peace-loving peoples of the world. Underlying factor in existing tension Far East entirely created by US in military occupation Taiwan. Had there not been American military occupation in Taiwan, reunion between Taiwan and Chinese mainland would have been realized long ago. Chinese people would never tolerate occupation of Taiwan by US. Chinese people certainly will liberate Taiwan. No force on earth could ever deter this determination on part Chinese people. No amount rationalization and argument offered by me could ever cover acts of aggression by US government demonstrated in their latest military threats, posed in the Taiwan area in form of stationing guided missiles unit on Taiwan.

14. Wang continued, had been common practice by aggressor governments in history always speak of aggressive arrangements as if these aggressive arrangements entirely for defensive purposes. The stark fact at present is that it is US government occupying Chinese territory and not Chinese government occupying any territory of US. Fact is at present US posing threats against China and not China posing threats against US. If one desires talk of renunciation of force he should make good his words by actual deeds. In face of latest tension created by US in Taiwan area, how could anyone believe any more in any peaceful promises by US. Chinese people would oppose to end such open aggression, provocation. If US had any peaceful intentions, it should demonstrate sincerity by concrete acts. This what he always looked forward to.

15. I replied, nothing he had said changed fact that it his government which still posed threat use force in Taiwan area. There was vast difference between saying willing settle disputes peacefully if other side surrenders to your point of view and saying unconditionally you willing settle disputes peacefully.

16. Wang replied, facts show who was advocating peaceful settlement dispute Taiwan area and who was willing use force that area. These facts could not be distorted. Today when people everywhere oppose policy of war threats, latest steps taken by US government in Taiwan area can never be explained as resulting from peaceful intent. Latest military threat posed by US government in Taiwan could never succeed in frightening people. On the contrary, they can only stir up indignation and hatred.

17. I replied, our problem not to reach agreement on situation in Taiwan area. Problem is to agree we will not use force to settle it. That and carrying out of first agreement between us are still the essential steps in bringing about that improvement in relations which we, on our side, seek.

18. Wang replied he had made clear his point of view that this series talks here in Geneva should have as purposes relaxation international tensions and improvement relations between our two countries. In accordance this purpose he had made series proposals advantageous to both peoples, both governments. Believed these proposals advantageous to both sides. They continued hope there should be progress in these talks between us.

19. I replied I accepted first proposal he had made here. I accepted it with understanding it would be advantageous to both sides. I could not see that there had been any advantage—in fact, it seemed to have been disadvantageous.

20. Wang rejoined whether advantageous or disadvantageous, only the facts could prove.

21. Wang had nothing more to say, and I had nothing more. I suggested next meeting July 11. Wanted him know I planned return this evening to Washington for consultation and short rest with my family.

22. Wang agreed.

Popper

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 611.93/5–1557. Confidential; Limit Distribution. Drafted by Johnson, Popper, and Freeland. Sent via pouch. Received on May 20.