823. Letter from Johnson to Clough1
Thanks very much for so promptly getting to me the text of the release on the travel of correspondents which I was very happy to see. I suppose that we should have anticipated the Peiping reaction which, I believe, was mostly triggered by the specific statement that we would not give reciprocity. They probably found this, together with the rest of the statement, too much publicly to swallow. The press have been so intent on the Department being their only block that they have utterly failed to take into consideration the possibility of Peiping not giving the visas. Thus, things have now been worked around to where they should be—that is, the controversy is between Peiping and the press, rather than between the Department and the press, and Peiping is really put on the spot. If they grant the visas they will appear publicly to a degree to be acquiescing in the Department’s position as set forth in the statement. If they do not grant them, they will be incurring the rising wrath of the American press expressing its outrage at what it feels is a double-cross by Peiping. It seems to me the best thing for the Department to do is to sit quiet and let Peiping and the press fight it out. My guess is that Peiping will try to find a way out by again inviting a few correspondents (perhaps some on our list and some not) for a limited trip. However, this is certainly not going to make the press happy, particularly those that do not receive invitations. It seems to me that they have pretty much shut the door, at least for the time being, on granting visas to all twenty-four.
[Typeset Page 1409]As far as the next Geneva meeting is concerned it does not now seem likely Wang will take the initiative in raising the matter, except perhaps by oblique reference to the Department’s statement in characterizing them as not civilized, etc., as another example of “hostility”. I do not believe I should take the initiative in any way raising the matter, but if he should do so I would have considerable material for rebuttal that would fill up time. I could, of course, refer to his previous statement to me that they were not asking reciprocity for Chinese correspondents to visit the United States, and on the “civilized” aspect I could come back to implementation.
[Facsimile Page 2]Of course, there may be further developments by the time of the next meeting that may change the picture, but I wanted to pass on these thoughts at this time.
Sincerely,
P.S. After writing the above I have just seen in this morning’s paper an August 27 Washington story quoting the Secretary as saying that we will “consider” applications of Chinese Communist correspondents. If the Secretary was correctly quoted this may put a somewhat different light on the possibilities of the subject coming up at the next meeting, and the desirability of my taking the initiative on it. I believe it is something on which I might make a little mileage. It certainly goes a long way to give Peiping a way out of the box in which they are now in if they want to use it. Of course, “consider” certainly does not mean we will grant any visas, but it would seem to me that it does mean we would accept applications to be “considered” on their merits and our laws and regulations. I know that you will send me at Geneva the full text of the Secretary’s statement, which the article I have seen in the Herald-Tribune does not give, together with as much amplification as you can to enable me to handle it with Wang whether or not you want me to take the initiative. As far as the legal aspects are concerned the only thing I find in the Regulations is section (a) of 22 CFR 41.12 which contemplates the possibility of issuing visas to holders of passports of non-recognized governments. I suppose this frequently comes up in issuing visas to officials of non-recognized governments to attend the UN. However, I do not know of any case in which we have issued such a visa to non-officials although the principle would presumably be the same. Of course there is also the whole background of waivers being required for members of the Communist Party, etc. In the case of recognized Communist governments this has usually been handled by giving correspondents official visas which do not require a waiver. However, it would seem to me that this would be entirely out of the question in the case of an unrecognized government.
- Source: Department of State, Geneva Talks Files, Lot 72D415. Secret. Johnson signed the original “Alex.” A copy was sent to Martin.↩