Editorial Note
On January 17, the People’s Republic of China responded to the proposals put forth by the Cease-Fire Group and forwarded to Peking on January 13 by the First Committee. The response came in the following telegram sent from Chou En-lai to the Acting Secretary-General of the United Nations, David Owen:
“Peking, 17 January 1951.
“I have the honour to acknowledge receipt of the cablegram dated 13 January 1951, transmitted by Mr. Owen at the request of the First Committee of the General Assembly, on the principles concerning the Korean and other Far Eastern problems. In the name of the Central People’s Government of the People’s Republic of China I wish to reply as follows:
“1. The Central People’s Government of the People’s Republic of China has always maintained and still maintains that a rapid termination of the hostilities in Korea should be sought by negotiations among the various countries concerned with a view to the peaceful settlement of the Korean question on the basis of the withdrawal of all foreign troops from Korea and the settlement of Korean domestic affairs by the Koreans themselves; that United States armed forces must be withdrawn from Taiwan (Formosa); and that the representatives of the People’s Republic of China must assume their rightful place in the United Nations. These principles were also mentioned in my statement of 22 December 1950; transmitted by cable to Mr. Entezam, President of the General Assembly, on the same day, and are now well known to the whole world.
“2. On 13 January 1951, the First Committee of the United Nations General Assembly adopted, without the participation of the representative of the People’s Republic of China, various principles concerning the Korean and other Far Eastern problems, the basic points of which are still the arrangement of a cease-fire in Korea first, and the conducting of negotiations among the various countries concerned, afterwards. The purpose of arranging a cease-fire first is merely to give the United States troops a breathing space. Therefore, regardless of what the agenda and subject-matter of the negotiations may be, if a cease-fire comes into effect without first conducting negotiations to fix the conditions therefor, negotiations after the cease-fire may entail endless discussions without solving any problems. Besides this fundamental point, the other principles are also not clearly defined. It is not clearly stated whether the so-called existing international obligations refer to the Cairo and Potsdam Declarations, and this may easily be utilized to defend the position of aggression maintained by the United States in Korea, Taiwan and other parts of the Far East. We understand that many countries in the First Committee agreed to [Page 92] the principles adopted on 13 January 1951 because of their desire for peace. It must be pointed out, however, that the principle of a ceasefire first and negotiations afterwards would only help the United States to maintain and extend its aggression, and could never lead to genuine peace. Therefore, the Central People’s Government of the People’s Republic of China cannot agree to this principle.
“3. With a view to a genuine and peaceful solution of the Korean problem and other important Asian problems, I hereby submit, in the name of the Central People’s Government of the People’s Republic of China, the following proposals to the United Nations:
- “(a) Negotiations should be held among the countries concerned on the basis of agreement to the withdrawal of all foreign troops from Korea and the settlement of Korean domestic affairs by the Korean people themselves, in order to put an end to the hostilities in Korea at an early date.
- “(b) The subject-matter of the negotiations must include the withdrawal of United States armed forces from Taiwan and the Taiwan Straits and Far Eastern related problems;
- “(c) The countries to participate in the negotiations should be the following seven countries: the People’s Republic of China, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, the United States of America, France, India and Egypt, and the rightful place of the Central People’s Government of the People’s Republic of China in the United Nations should be established as from the beginning of the seven-nation conference;
- “(d) The seven-nation conference should be held in China, at a place to be selected.
“4. If the above-mentioned proposals are agreed to by the countries concerned and by the United Nations, we believe that it will be conducive to the prompt termination of the hostilities in Korea and to the peaceful settlement of Asian problems to hold negotiations as soon as possible.
Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Central People’s Government of the People’s Republic of China”
(U.N. document A/C.1/653)
Following receipt of the Chinese message, Mr. Acheson released the following statement:
“The reply of the Chinese Communists to the United Nations ceasefire proposal is still further evidence of their contemptuous disregard of a world-wide demand for peace. Their so-called ‘counterproposal’ is nothing less than an outright rejection.
“Once again, the Peiping regime has shown a total lack of interest in a peaceful settlement of the Korean question.
“There can no longer be any doubt that the United Nations has explored every possibility of finding a peaceful settlement of the Korean question. Now, we must face squarely and soberly the fact that [Page 93] the Chinese Communists have no intention of ceasing their defiance of the United Nations.
“I am confident that the United Nations will do that. The strength of the United Nations will lie in the firmness and unity with which we now move ahead.” (Department of State Bulletin, January 29, 1950, page 164)