Foreign Relations of the United States, 1969–1976, Volume E–13, Documents on China, 1969–1972

39. Memorandum of Conversation, Beijing, October 21, 1971, 10:20 a.m.-12:15 p.m.¹ ²

Beijing, October 21, 1971, 10:20 a.m.-12:15 p.m.

MEMORANDUM OF CONVERSATION

PARTICIPANTS:

• Mr. Hsiung Hsiang-hui, Secretary to the Prime Minister
• Mr. Chen_________, Deputy Division Chief from the Western European and American Department
• Madame__________, Interpreter
• Madame Ma, Notetaker
• Mr. Alfred LeS. Jenkins, Department of State
• Mr. John H. Holdridge, Senior NSC Staff Member

DATE, TIME, PLACE:

Thursday, October 21, 1971, 10:20 a.m.- 12:15 p.m., Hupei Hall, Great Hall of the People, Peking

Jenkins: I think if it’s agreeable to you that we might first take up a subject which Mr. Holdridge of the White House staff would like to discuss concerning the manner of continued communication and relations of that sort.

Hsiung: According to the procedure agreed upon by Prime Minister Chou and Dr. Kissinger yesterday, this morning we are going to exchange views within this group. I suppose that we don’t know everyone present here. So I first will introduce those present here from the Chinese side: Chen____________ he is Deputy Division Chief from the Western European and American Department; Madame ____________ [interpreter; she said “I am a staff member from the Foreign Ministry”]; Madame Ma [notetaker] is also a staff member from the Foreign Ministry. If Mr. Jenkins please would you introduce people from your side present at this talk.

Jenkins: I would be glad to have that opportunity. Mr. Holdridge here is a senior member of the National Security Council staff at the White House and has long worked with Dr. Kissinger. He is a foreign service officer on loan to the White House and we are hoping some day to get him back. And here we have Miss Pineau who is one of Dr. Kissinger’s secretaries at the White House, and has worked with him for some time, and whose father I have known for some time. And I have very much enjoyed getting to know her on this trip.

Hsiung: According to the Chinese practice, we would like to hear our guests speak first. And I am very glad to hear that Mr. Jenkins has mentioned just now that Mr. Holdridge is going to speak first. So we hope that during our talks today the United States side will raise their questions and make known their ideas first.

Jenkins: Thank you very much. We are happy to have that opportunity and I hope that as we do so you will please feel free to break in at any time with any comments you may have, or questions either as to procedure or substance.

Hsiung: Exchange views.

Jenkins: Yes.

Holdridge: I would like to bring up if I could the question of continuing contacts between our two countries of what we might call a semi-official nature. Prior to the time of full normalization of relations between our two countries, we of course believe it would be very useful to have contacts, so we can exchange ideas of mutual interest. I think you will recall that Dr. Kissinger and Prime Minister Chou discussed this last summer. Prime Minister Chou very kindly suggested that a trusted representative of the President or Dr. Kissinger might again come to Peking and remain here for several weeks, or go to other parts of China, and as the Prime Minister suggested, investigate and report back. We, of course, very much appreciate this offer of Prime Minister Chou. In addition, you will recall that there was a special contact which was worked out between Prime Minister Chou and Dr. Kissinger, and we are very grateful for the fact that this has been established and is working very well. However, it does occur to us that as our relationship grows and as our contact increases, and as the preparations for the President’s visit next year are worked out, it might be very useful to have communications other than those just discussed. There may be many things of an administrative nature which we would like to take care of and which we would not like to burden our more high-level contacts with. So I would simply like to raise a number of possibilities, and would like to stress that these are simply possibilities which I would like to offer for your consideration. We have noticed, for example, that the People’s Republic of China and the Government of Japan maintain liaison offices. We know this is in the context of trade, but would like to raise the possibility—on a reciprocal or on a unilateral basis—of establishing an office having diplomatic status, but not full diplomatic status, with the ability to communicate, use the diplomatic pouch, and use crypto systems.

Hsiung’s Interpreter: [indicated confusion]

Holdridge: Cryptographic systems.

Hsiung: There is one point not quite true to the fact mentioned by Mr. Holdridge just now. There isn’t any such contacts between the Chinese and Japanese governments and there isn’t any liaison office.

Holdridge: I though that was in connection with trade.

Hsiung: What liaison office you mentioned is between the peoples, an unofficial trade office. We can explain this later. Not between the governments.

Holdridge: I don’t want to belabor the point. Let me move on to another possibility.

Hsiung: You say you don’t believe in this point?

Holdridge: No, I said I don’t want to belabor this point.

Hsiung: I am not going to make any comments on suggestions you mention now. I have just clarified a point.

Holdridge: I appreciate that, and think it is probably more practical not to go into details. I just wanted to review some of the suggestions we had in mind.

Jenkins: May I make one brief comment on this before we leave it. As I understand, we don’t have anything very definite in mind, but while we are not necessarily picturing anything of a materially different nature organizationally from the Japanese “Trade Office,” I believe to call it a trade office is not what we had in mind. “Trade Office” is more a special indicator than the precise format we had in mind. Isn’t that right?

Holdridge: Yes.

Hsiung: Excuse me; I must make a break here. [Photographers enter.] The photographers are very aggressive. He wants to take a photo of me. Might we let him in?

Jenkins: Some time we might have a friendly competition as to which are more aggressive, American or Chinese photographers.

Hsiung: Do you have also this custom?

Jenkins: With a vengeance.

Hsiung: [Indicated he didn’t understand.]

Holdridge: [Explained with Chinese expression chueh tui, meaning emphatically.]

Laughter

Hsiung: But they didn’t know it in advance, so after they have learned if they want to put in.

Jenkins: This often happens in our circumstances too.

Hsiung: So we have to agree to it.

Jenkins: This I understand fully.

Hsiung: And, of course, as Dr. Kissinger also mentioned yesterday, some of the pictures can also be given to you.

Jenkins: That would be very gracious.

Hsiung: And he also mentioned the film material made last time can be given to you before you leave. If there is an opportunity we can show it to you first.

Jenkins: Very nice.

Hsiung: Very short one. Although it is short, but I believe you would like to get it.

Jenkins: We would prize it very much.

Hsiung: Because Dr. Kissinger mentioned it twice yesterday. Perhaps it is not well taken.

Jenkins: I am sure it is very good.

Hsiung: They [the photographers] want to continue. I am sure it won’t be good by 70 percent.

Jenkins: I think they always take a great deal more footage than they end up using. At least that’s the way our people do it.

Hsiung: I would like to add a few words on the suggestions which Mr. Holdridge mentioned just now, first suggestion. I am not going to give a reply on the suggestion itself which has been put forward, by Mr. Holdridge just now. I am just going to clarify a fact. That is, there isn’t such a liaison office between the Chinese and Japanese governments. As to what is going to be done between the Chinese and United States governments, we can give further considerations; we can exchange views. I am not going to comment on your suggestion itself. Perhaps you understand it.

Holdridge: Let me proceed and offer another possibility if I may. I am sure Mr. Hsiung is aware in the Middle East, for example, of American interest sections inside friendly embassies, such as in the UAR, Algeria, and so on. [to Jenkins]: Isn’t it at the Spanish Embassy …

Jenkins: Yes.

Holdridge: At the Spanish Embassy in Cairo as an example, and of course the countries such as the UAR can also be in the United States in Washington, D.C. in the same fashion.

Hsiung: They haven’t restored the United States embassy in Cairo?

Holdridge: No, our representative is simply an American interest representative. He has the personal rank of Minister and is accorded diplomatic status, but we do not have formal representation in Cairo.

Jenkins: Actually, he operates from our regular embassy quarters there. He is not housed in the Spanish Embassy, but he is technically a section of the Spanish Embassy. But that’s a matter of mutual convenience, and need not be a pattern for other cases. These patterns vary considerably.

Holdridge: So this is another possibility which we offer for the consideration of the People’s Republic. We assume we would have to find a friendly embassy. Of course, we would also offer this on a reciprocal basis if that would be the preference of the People’s Republic of China.

One third possibility comes to mind, and that is simple reverting to what Prime Minister Chou said, a senior representative of the President or Dr. Kissinger coming to Peking again. It might be helpful for a small group, perhaps from the American Consulate General in Hong Kong, to come in advance of the representatives’s trip, be here before his arrival, during his stay here, and remain after. It would be helpful in administrative matters. Of course the people I am talking about need not come from Hong Kong; they can come from any other convenient place, or from Washington for that matter.

Now these are three possibilities which occur to us, and they certainly do not in any way supplant the suggestion which Prime Minister Chou raised with Dr. Kissinger last summer, which we are very grateful for. And we welcome any suggestions from the People’s Republic of China or any suggestions that you might care to make.

Hsiung: This is one point, one question. Any other questions? Shall we link them together? Shall we hear your questions, all the points first?

Jenkins: Related to this subject or to our next subject?

Hsiung: If there is any addition to these points, we would like to hear about it.

Holdridge: That is all I have to talk about at this point concerning continuing contacts. What Mr. Jenkins has to discuss is rather unrelated.

Hsiung: Then Mr. Jenkins, please speak.

Jenkins: Yes. I think as our affairs progress in these prior visits—what your Prime Minister referred to last night as this interim visit to the President’s visit—that we are hoping we can approach these matters between us sort of organismically, as a whole. I myself am particularly cognizant of this turning point, this really quite historical occasion. I was impressed, and I must say moved, yesterday and particularly last evening. I have presumed to inject a slight personal note into this because I have been associated with the lengthy Warsaw Talks pretty much since their inception, their beginning in 1955, and their preliminaries in 1954, and during that period it seem that we were, as someone put it, like ships passing in the night.

Hsiung: During the Warsaw Talks you frequently attended?

Jenkins: Yes, I was advisor to the Talks during the time that I was Deputy Chief of Mission at our American Embassy in Stockholm. I went to the talks 17 times then.

Hsiung: You are a very frequent traveler. But as it was mentioned in our Prime Minister’s speech, although we carried on our talks 16 years, nothing has come out of it.

Jenkins: That’s true. We were like ships passing in the night. But I maintained a bit of hope then, because the tradition of humor between the Chinese and American people, which I think is similar, would come out even during these trying times. Even when no substantive agreements could be reached, we would day “Ah, we have agreed on one point, the date of the next meeting.”

Hsiung: This I think is not a question of a sense of humor. It’s a very serious question. And just now, Mr. Jenkins said you greet this as a turning point. How did you think prior to this turning point? How did you think of Sino-U.S. relations?

Jenkins: I think it was painful to both sides because we were cognizant of some misunderstandings and misconceptions perhaps, but primarily because of different circumstances in East Asia and in the world it may have been difficult for us to be other than ships passing in the night. Whereas now, fortunately, we are not like ships passing in the night, but people meeting in broad daylight and have had the openness and frankness which has been so abundantly demonstrated by your Prime Minister and Dr. Kissinger, and our President, and we find it a very refreshing thing that we seem to be meeting in daylight now.

Hsiung: If we take this ship as an analogy, then whether it sails at night or in the daylight, you will need a direction, an orientation. For without a fixed orientation then even if you sail in the daylight then you sail to the wrong course.

Jenkins: Mr. Hsiung is exactly right in that point, and I think this is an appropriate introduction to what I hope to take up now.

Hsiung: That’s why I am not going to make any comments on Sino-U.S. talks which have lasted 16 years.

Holdridge: Pai tse-ti (without results).

Jenkins: Exactly. I think we have fully recognized that the People’s Republic considers some of these questions which you have called ‘subsidiary’ as precisely that, and I want to emphasize we do not intend to use these issues as any sort of diversion from what we both consider to be the fundamental issues. I believe that our principals are facing some of the fundamental issues, and expect us concurrently to look at some of the things which will help make movement possible on these fundamental questions—which can help us, I know, and possibly you in the People’s Republic, to convince those who would detract from our present course that acceptable movement is possible and can be mutually profitable.

Hsiung: What do you mean by condemning those who want to divert the attention of these questions?

Jenkins: You say condemning? I mean detracting. Last night Dr. Kissinger mentioned quite frankly that there are elements in our society which have questions, or more than questions, about the direction in which our present efforts are going. It isn’t easy to cope with that. We believe that it can be done, but we believe that some agreement in these subsidiary issues to the fundamental issues, which are also to be faced, show we attach no conditions to progress in relations.

Holdridge: There have been some leading people in the United States who have criticized the turn of events, say this will harm U.S. relations with other countries, and these voices are quite powerful still. I am sure Mr. Hsiung is aware of some of the people who have spoken out. They are quite influential indeed.

Jenkins: And therefore if we can point to some particular movement on these substantive issues, for us at least it will be something of an insurance policy that can be applied to movement in some of the more fundamental questions. I have here quite a number of purely suggestive proposals, some of which may appeal to the People’s Republic and we will offer them as possibilities for your consideration. They are not exclusive. We would certainly welcome any suggestions and observations from you and I would like to review a few of them orally, and then perhaps offer you some written material which you may like to study and refer to later. Due to the multi-faceted…

Hsiung’s Interpreter: [indicated confusion]

Jenkins: multi-faceted

Interpreter: [indicated she understood] Perhaps it is your Georgia accent.

Jenkins: I have met that hazard before.

It is frankly difficult for us to picture just the best mechanics for approaching such matters as precise contacts in scientific, cultural, and sports areas. For us it would unquestionably be easier, simpler, and perhaps more reliable and managable if there were some type of government-to-government arrangement concerning them. However, if the People’s Republic prefers to handle such matters on a non-governmental basis, through private organizations, people’s organizations, that would be thoroughly acceptable to us. If there were to be a government-to-government agreement, I am sure that we could work together on the format for such. If, however, it is to be carried on through peoples’ organizations on a private basis, we might simply prefer, both of us, to carry a reference to that effect in a joint communique. Unless there is some comment on this that you would care to make at this point, I could proceed to just mention briefly several illustrative possibilities along this line, and as I earlier said, I could give you some written possibilities which you might want to study in further detail and comment upon.

Hsiung: Yes, please proceed.

Jenkins: As an example, we have heard, particularly in recent times in the United States, of some rather remarkable techniques that you have derived in China concerning the treatment of severe burn victims and also for retaining severed limbs. There may also be areas of surgical practice in the United States which would interest Chinese specialists. If you should find any interest in this area, we are prepared to arrange invitations for Chinese visitors to leading hospitals and specialty surgical clinics in the United States. As I have said, we believe that we could learn from you in this area to the benefit of our people in these humanitarian endeavors, in the saving of life; and if this were to be done on a governmental level we would suggest that our National Institutes of Health would be willing to cooperate in this field. If it is done on a private basis perhaps the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences, which is not a governmental organization, might be of help.

Hsiung: National Institutes of Health. Is it one of the more than 60 administrations of the government? Is that right?

Jenkins: That’s correct.

Holdridge: Part of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare.

Hsiung: [Does it have more than 60 subsidiary bodies?]

Holdridge: I believe so. You probably have more information on that than I do.

Hsiung: The Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences?

Jenkins: As a second, again purely illustrative idea which occurs to us, we have noted that your Premier has personally mentioned the Chinese concern for protection of the environment and the natural ecology of the planet. This is a very topical question today. I think particularly the youth of the world are very vocal on this subject, although all of us are having to take it with increasing seriousness. The United States is very cognizant of the fact that the highly industrialized countries have a particular responsibility in trying to do whatever they can to reduce pollution and unfavorable effects on the environment, because our planet has in a sense shrunken, so that in effect what any of us does affects the others.

Hsiung: I remember in one of his speeches, President Nixon made special emphasis on the question of pollution.

Jenkins: Yes, so on this subject, both of our leaderships in the two countries are openly expressing concern. Prime Minister Chou En-lai has spoken of this.

Hsiung: [laugh] The situation of pollution in Japan is no better than in the United States.

Holdridge: Worse.

Hsiung: Perhaps it is more serious.

Jenkins: It is much worse.

Hsiung: Many friends, the people of Japan, in Japan you can hardly find any fish in the lake now. And the Danube in Europe you can hardly find any fish now.

Jenkins: That’s right.

Hsiung: It has also much to do with the social system.

Holdridge: Partly. It has also to do with size of the society, number of people, and degree of industry in certain areas.

Hsiung: I mean the social system. But we won’t debate on this subject.

Jenkins: Even though we agree not to debate that question, I can say that we have witnessed that the Chinese have set a remarkable example for other nations in the recovery and recycling of a wide variety of waste materials, that is both industrial and, shall we say, societal wastes.

Hsiung: Yes, we make full use of the three kinds of waste materials, waste gas, waste water, and waste materials.

Jenkins: We have seen articles on this and have been very much impressed by them. Air pollution, water pollution, waste recovery and recycling and, just as importantly, sanitary engineering are areas of much interest to us. We believe that you can help us in these areas, and we would hope that that might also be mutual.

Hsiung: Sanitary engineering?

Jenkins: The management of societal wastes. We in recent times have had quite a rapid growth of interst in organic farming in the United States and we know that China has had long and successful experience in that type of farming.

Hsiung: Organic farming?

Jenkins: Non-chemical. If the People’s Republic finds interest in this area of rapidly growing importance in the world we are prepared to provide to you summary information on the nature and the magnitude of environmental problems which we have encountered in the United States.

Hsiung: We would like to know if you know how much fertilizer, both organic and synthetic would you apply to each acre.

Holdridge: I am afraid we are not experts in that field. We would be very happy to find out for you.

Hsiung: Of course this is also secondary; I just mention it in passing.

Holdridge: A lot. We are using a great deal in places like Iowa to increase corn yield per acre of land. We have a great corn yield because of this.

Hsiung: What kind [of fertilizer]?

Holdridge: For the most part nitrogenous.

Jenkins: Chemical.

Jenkins: Yes. But one has to be very careful in using fertilizers. To increase the amount can kill crops unless some other measures are taken concommitantly.

We could, if you are interested, provide a collection of, I should think, several hundred technical reports of our office of saline water on studies related to development of water desalinization techniques. We could also furnish you, if you would like them, our latest information on air and water quality standards. [Hsiung indicates he doesn’t understand.] I believe what’s meant by that is safe levels of the standards of puity of air and water.

Hsiung: Purity of water?

Jenkins: Yes. Various means of helping each other in this field are possible. One thing which occurs to us is a Dr. Abel Wolman who is the Professor of Sanitary Engineering at Johns Hopkins University, would be prepared to visit China if you would like him, to learn from you and also lecture here on some of his studies, if you would wish that. That’s just an illustrative suggestion, an example. One possible means of contact from our side in this whole area of interest would be our National Academy of Sciences.

Holdridge: That’s non-governmental.

Hsiung: Where is the headquarters of this organization?

Jenkins: In Washington. Many of our organizations which are private but of nationwide interest have headquarters or offices in Washington.

Hsiung: Where do the (the National Academy of Sciences) get their funds?

Jenkins: I don’t know. I can find out.

Hsiung: Just mention in passing. Don’t bother.

Jenkins: There is another possibility which we don’t need to spend much time on unless you like it, but it’s a fascinating one, and that is the issue of efficient translating procedures from one language to another. We could give some suggestions on how we might be of help to each other in that area if you are interested.

Hsiung: You mean the oral or written translating?

Jenkins: I was thinking of written.

Holdridge: This means by machines, using computers.

Hsiung: The United States is a country of computers.

Holdridge: There is a project in Princeton aimed at the rapid translation from Chinese into English using this particular technique.

Hsiung: Is it effective?

Holdridge: I think so.

Jenkins: Within limits.

Hsiung: Everything has its limits. How is the accuracy?

Holdridge: Fair.

Jenkins: The whole effort is pretty much in the beginning stages but it does have sufficient promise for us to believe that to have further attention put to it would be very useful, and might be something of interest to you.

Hsiung: Have you solved the problem of translating English to French or Spanish by computers?

Jenkins: Again, not perfectly, but surprisingly well. I have read printouts of French and Russian translations into English and the sense is almost complete and rather accurate. The grammar sometimes, word order and construction, sometimes leaves a good bit to be desired. It at times sounds a bit childish, but the ideas are there.

I don’t want to overdo this oral presentation, but there are two or three other things if I may continue a little longer. I don’t know what you plan as to our schedule, as to whether we sould probably break and come back—whatever your pleasure is.

Hsiung: As I mentioned at the beginning, according to our Chinese practice, we like to have our guests to speak first. If we can’t finish it in the morning we can find some other time, wither in the afternoon or some other time to continue it.

[BREAK: 11:35 - 11:45]

Jenkins: I have mentioned several areas in which China seems to form something of a vanguard …

Hsiung Interpreter: [indicates confusion]

Jenkins: leader. There is an area which I am sure is of considerable interest to both of our countries because of our long coastlines in which, if I am not being immodest, I think the United States has made considerable advance.

Hsiung: Your coastline is longer than ours because you have them on both sides.

Jenkins: Yes, but I think you catch more fish than we do.

Hsiung: Because of your pollution.

Jenkins: This area that I am speaking of is in marine science work. We believe that our work in that field is of high quality and certainly of very broad coverage. We are prepared to encourage the three major American west coast oceanographic institutions to host a delegation of Chinese oceanographers and marine scientists for disucssion of areas of common interest if this would appeal to you.

There are a number of other ideas in here which to me seem so attractive that I am loathe to skip over them, but in the interest of time I will perhaps go to only one more at the moment and. we can discuss other later if you wish. I mentioned earlier Prime Minister Chou’s expressed interest in environmental problems. I recall also that Chairman Mao has written a poem about a particularly troublesome disease. We frankly know very little about your efforts in the field of control of schistosomiasis, but we have seen artilces which interest us, and we have done some study on the subject. One possibility for consideration would be some sort of cooperative research program in this field. We could provide samples of experimental drugs with full test data which we have obtained to date in this area of research.

Hsiung: Are there many cases of schistosomiasis in the United States?

Jenkins: No, it’s almost non-existant. However, in our aid and other interests in some other countries in the world, I believe in South America and—I am not sure of this, but perhaps in Africa—we have been requested to give what help we can in this area, and we are interested in the problem. We have done some work in immunology and also in test procedures for identifying the presence of the disease.

I think perhaps I should stop here in reviewing specific suggestions. This will illustrate some of the suggestions we have been thinking about and perhaps I can pass to you some papers with a longer list of suggestions you may want to look over and comment on later. It seems that I have spent our time so far on scientific matters. We also have cultural, athletic, and journalistic suggestions here, and I would not slur these. I don’t mean that we are emphasizing one area over another. It just happens that I got started talking about some of these rather fascinating subjects, and have not gotten to the others, but we can do so if you would wish.

Hsiung: Personally, I would like rather to listen to what you have got to say than to read them. Of course, if you would like to hand over these very thick pieces of long lists, I would also like to read it over. I would like to know if you have covered all the points you would like to raise.

Jenkins: I have not covered all the points in this paper, simply illustrative ones, and if you wish I can go on. I think these (pointing to the papers) present it quite well and it is up to you whether you would like to go over it orally now or like to look this over and return to them later. And if you have any questions or observations on your part, we would certainly like to receive them.

Hsiung: Of course, we have covered some secondary points, if we may quote what Dr. Kissinger used the term, subsidiary points. What I mean is, are there any other main points you want to make? Because this morning we have touched on questions of contacts between our two countries, and also cultural and scientific topics. Are there any other main points?

Jenkins: I believe not this morning. These were the main points on our mind. If there are any other points you would like to discuss we would be interested in knowing that, aid would perhaps return to these later. I believe that our principals plan to take up, of course, other issues when they meet.

Hsiung: Within this scope, are these the only two points which the United States side would like to put forward?

Jenkins: These are the two which Dr. Kissinger wished us to take up this morning. If there are other ideas you would like to discuss, we are prepared to discuss anything of interest to you.

Hsiung: What I mean is your side. Are there any other main points? Any points you would put forward later?

Jenkins: There are a number of things we could talk about. I don’t know to what extent you wish to talk about possible increase in trade for instance. But we could possibly talk about that at a later time.

Hsiung: First of all, we would like to know the views of the United States side, see what points you would like to make.

Jenkins: As for this session, I think these are the two main points we had contemplated.

Hsiung: If so, then there are two approaches: one is we will read it over first, and then we can exchange views. Another approach is we will not read it over but we will ask you to cover all these points which are contained in these lists.

Jenkins: I am quite prepared to do whichever you wish. It is immaterial to us. I can continue talking if you wish, or it might be useful for you to get an overview and spend more time later on those topics which you wish to cover more fully.

Hsiung: Then we can consider how to carry on our talks in this session. Either we read it over first, and fix a time to make an exchange of views later, or we can meet again this afternoon and you will tell us all the points covered in this list.

Jenkins: It is perfectly agreeable to us to do it either way, however, I suggest if it’s agreeable to you it might be useful for you to have this list and look it over, and we will return whenever you set a time.

Hsiung: Then our exchange of views this morning will soon finish. And of course, I believe that Mr. Holdridge and Mr. Jenkins you will know very well the whole process of Sino-American ambassadorial talks, and also the consistent stand of the Chinese side. That’s why I am not going to make any comments on any of the possibilities you have raised just now. I will make more comments next time we have a session.

Jenkins: I understand. That’s perfectly agreeable to us.

Hsiung: I think it would be better for me to make clear in advance that we believe you know very well the Chinese government’s consistent fundamental stand. The Warsaw Talks have lasted for 16 years, and of course we can further make clear our views. Of course, if there is any other point you would like to put forward, we are ready to listen.

Jenkins: Thank you very much for your attention this morning. I think both sides have talked so often in the past that we both have understandings of each other’s long held positions, but as our principals discussed, at this turning point the necessity is not only to base things on the realities of the past and present, but to learn from that in order to change the future ofor the better.

Hsiung: That’s all for this morning.

Jenkins: Very well. If I may offer these three copies to you.

Hsiung: As for the program for this afternoon, our protocol office will exchange views with you and. ask your opinion about that.

Jenkins: That sounds very promising.

Hsiung: Take some visits to some places, or you may take a rest if you like.

Jenkins: Probably prudence would call for a little rest, but for my part, I have such an interest in this capital city that I would really like to see something of it.

Hsiung: In this regard, we respect your opinion.

Jenkins: That’s very kind.

[The meeting ended at 12:15 p.m.]

1. Source: National Archives, Nixon Presidential Materials, NSC Files, Box 1035, Files for the President-China Material, HAK visit to PRC, October 1971, Memcons-originals. Top Secret; Sensitive; Exclusively Eyes Only. No drafting information appears on the memorandum. All brackets are in the source text. The meeting was held at Hupei Hall, the Great Hall of the People.
2. Department of State official Alfred Jenkins and NSC staff member John Holdridge broached the establishment of reciprocal or unilateral liaison offices and other lower level relationships such as scientific, cultural, environmental, and sports between the two nations in a conversation with the Prime Minister’s Secretary Hsiung Hsiang-hui.