193. Memorandum of a Conversation, Department of State, Washington, April 7, 19551

PARTICIPANTS

  • The Secretary
  • Sir Roger Makins, British Ambassador
  • Douglas MacArthur II

[Here follows discussion concerning changes in the British Government; on April 6 Eden succeeded Churchill as Prime Minister.]

The Secretary then said he had asked Sir Roger to come in to talk to him primarily about the Bandung Conference. The Secretary felt that the Bandung Conference could exercise a real influence for peace with respect to the Formosa situation if something constructive came out of it. On the other hand, the Secretary had received a recent indication, from Burma he believed, that at Bandung it was probable that a resolution might be adopted which neither the US nor the UK would like. If any resolution or statement came out of Bandung which seemed to give a green light to the Chinese Communists to take Formosa, the possibility of hostilities which could not be confined to the offshore islands and Formosa was greatly enhanced. If, on the other hand, some resolution or statement could come out of Bandung calling for a cease-fire and calling on both parties not to resort to force, the chances of maintaining peace in that area would be very considerably enhanced. In other words, the question of war or peace in the Far East could be significantly affected by what happens at Bandung.

In strictest confidence, the Secretary said he could tell Sir Roger that if assurances could be obtained through the Bandung Conference that the Chinese Communists would agree to a cease-fire regarding Formosa which would leave the islands to be fought for, this would in itself be a considerable contribution, although it would obviously [Page 454] be nowhere near as good as an over-all cease-fire such as envisaged in the draft New Zealand Resolution prepared for presentation to the UN. The Secretary said he had decided to urge certain friendly countries which would be represented at Bandung to propose a cease-fire if the subject of peace or the subject of Formosa came up at the Conference.

Sir Roger asked if the Secretary would suggest a general ceasefire or indicate that even a cease-fire for Formosa leaving aside the question of the offshore islands would be helpful. The Secretary replied that he did not contemplate suggesting that the friendly countries propose a cease-fire for Formosa and the Pescadores only, but rather a general cease-fire.

The Secretary then said he had been considerably depressed last evening in thinking over the general situation in Asia. He felt that there were signs that Asian solidarity in an anti-Western sense might be hardening. He did not like Nehru’s speech2 at all. He had attacked the Manila Pact as an organization which increased tension and might lead to hostilities; he had attacked NATO, claiming it gave Portugal Western support in Asia with respect to Goa; he had attacked the Union of South Africa; he had attacked the West for “meddling” in the Middle East. Nehru’s speech had in spirit, though not in content, reminded him of a speech made by a Czech, Hromadka,3 during the 1948 World Council of Churches at Amsterdam. Hromadka had taken the general line that Western civilization had failed and that some new type of civilization was necessary to replace it. Nehru’s speech had the same general ring. With respect to Asia, the Secretary felt we were up against a bigger and more long-term problem than the details or incidents which make daily headlines in the press. In effect, he felt that there were Asian elements that were pushing for a pan-Asian movement which would be by its very nature and concept anti-Western. He hoped that the British might, prior to Bandung, also use their very considerable influence with certain friendly Asian countries so that both the Formosa situation and the over-all problem of pan-Asianism might not become more aggravated.

Sir Roger said he would report this conversation to his Government, and he personally felt that they would wish also to take a similar line.4 He asked to what countries the Secretary contemplated [Page 455] sending messages with respect to a cease-fire between the Chinese Communists and the Chinese Nationalists. The Secretary replied that he had not decided as yet, but had in mind Pakistan, the Philippines, Thailand, Turkey, possibly Iraq, and Lebanon in the event that Malik5 represented that country at Bandung. If Malik went to Bandung, the Secretary would urge him to take a position as indicated above.6 Sir Roger said that if the Secretary could let him know the sense of the instructions we sent out, and the countries to which they were sent, it would be most helpful. The Secretary replied that he would hope to be able to pass this word on to him tomorrow, giving a list of the countries and the tenor of our instructions.7

The Secretary reiterated his grave concern regarding the Formosa situation and his belief that the action of the Chinese Communists will be influenced to a very considerable extent on what backing or approval they believe they will get from other Asian powers. He then mentioned and described in some detail the Chinese Communist activity in building up and improving their air fields along the coast and in the interior area opposite and just to the north and south of Formosa.

[Here follows discussion relating to Burma.]

D MacA
Douglas MacArthur II
  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 670.901/4–755. Top Secret. Drafted by MacArthur. Approved in draft by the Secretary, according to a marginal notation on the source text.
  2. Reference is to a speech made by Prime Minister Nehru before the Indian Parliament on March 31; see the New York Times, April 1, 1955.
  3. Theologian Joseph L. Hromádka.
  4. On April 11, Peter A. Wilkinson, First Secretary of the British Embassy, informed J. Jefferson Jones, Director of the Office of South Asian Affairs, that the Foreign Office had previously taken steps to urge upon some of the governments which would be represented at Bandung the desirability of a renunciation of force by both sides in the Formosa dispute. (Memorandum of conversation by Jones, April 11; Department of State, Central Files, 670.901/4–1155)
  5. Charles Malik, Lebanese Ambassador to the United States.
  6. Dulles talked to Malik on April 8 and 9.
  7. See Document 197.