Office of the Historian

794A.00/1–250: Telegram

The Chargé in China (Strong) to the Secretary of State

secret
Taipei, January 2, 1950—1 p. m.

Cantel 3. As new arrival Taipei I am being given the “treatment” by Formosan Independence “Movement”. Conversations with Peter Huang and Philip Ng and perusal of their propaganda have served only to establish their utter lack of realism, absence of any militant and armed popular foundation, and complete reliance on US to achieve their aims and assure their livelihood forever.

It seemed desirable to attempt to straighten out their thinking in relation to China scene as to US, and to prevent misconception as to nature of any personal relations with me.

In brief, they were told in friendly manner, as my personal opinion, that Formosans themselves, unarmed, could not get rid of Chinese now on Island; US would require several divisions of troops plus supporting naval and air forces to take and keep control over Island, a responsibility which we are not prepared to assume; for time being any hope for independence lay with Nationalists not with Communists, and thus measures designed weaken Nationalists merely served increase chances Communist control, so Formosans must recognize facts, not avoid them, and they should not forget that Formosa fits into large pattern from which it cannot be separated arbitrarily; and although US sympathetic to Formosan aspirations, there were very few grounds for optimism now and foreseeable future.

With steady economic deterioration rather certain, we feel we must be prepared to face more and more pressure and arguments from Formosans unless we now take and hold to a line of friendly but positive regret, both here and in Hong Kong. Disabusing them of false hopes now may avert more violent resentment later, by getting them [Page 258] used to the idea that probably nothing can be done for them under present circumstances.

Request Department advise whether approves line taken with or without modification.1

Strong

  1. The Department of State made the following reply in telegram Telcan 13 to Taipei, January 19:

    “Re Cantel 3 Jan 2. Dept approves ur remarks to Peter Huang and Philip Ng and believes you shld respond in like manner in similar circumstances arising in future, emphasizing this ur personal opinion. Urtel and Dept’s reply rptd Hong Kong.” (794A.00/1–250)

    ↩