299. Telegram From the Chargé in the United Kingdom (Butterworth) to the Department of State1

176. Re Embtel 150, July 13,2 following from FonOff:

Brit Chargé O’Neill, having received only 45 minutes notice, called on Chou En-lai at 5:30 pm on 13th and delivered President’s [Page 650] message;3 he made points about no publicity until Chinese reply and discussion not implying diplomatic recognition. He added UKG thought message constructive and hoped Chinese would give favorable consideration to it.

In reply, Chou said he would not at present make formal reply to US communication but wished make following 3 preliminary comments.

(a)
Talks between US and Chinese consular representatives at Geneva had from the beginning been confined to question of Chinese nationals in US and US nationals in China, and exchange of information about them. Chinese side had provided information about US nationals in China. US now admitted disappointment over results of these talks. Chinese had, however, far more reasons express disappointment; they had not been given definite information on question of Chinese students in US.
(b)
For this reason the Chinese had suggested to Krishna Menon a reciprocal arrangement by which a third country such as UK would act for US in Peiping in matter of US nationals in China, and another country such as India would similarly act for Chinese in Washington in the matter of the Chinese nationals in US. Chou recalled that some years ago US had proposed that HMG should look after US interests in China, but circumstances at that time were different and Chinese had not responded and that year ago at Geneva Chinese had proposed that third party should look after Chinese interests in US but on that occasion US had not responded. It seemed to him that proposal he had made to Krishna Menon, which latter had probably mentioned in London, was more practical and helpful than that now made in US communication.
(c)
He undertook not to publish US communication before the Chinese had replied to it.

Since Chou En-lai’s remark seemed to indicate that he regarded American proposal as confined only to question of US nationals in China and Chinese nationals in US, O’Neill drew his attention to third sentence of US message and read it out to him again.

O’Neill added that he would report that Chou had reserved his formal reply to US communication. If, after necessary study, he wished make any further communication through O’Neill no doubt he would send for him. Chou said that as this communication had been made through O’Neill he would of course send his reply through him.

Butterworth
  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 611.93/7–1455. Limited Distribution. Repeated for information to Paris for the Secretary. Dulles was in Paris for meetings with the British and French Foreign Ministers in preparation for the Geneva Summit Conference.
  2. Telegram 150 reported that the Foreign Office had cabled O’Neill the previous day instructing him to seek an interview with Chou En-lai as soon as possible. It also reported that the message contained in telegram 201 to London had been delivered to Macmillan that morning and that the Foreign Office was sending a message to Nehru as suggested therein. (Ibid., 611.93/7–1355) For telegram 201 to London, see footnote 3, Document 295.
  3. Reference is to the communication transmitted to London in Document 293. It is apparent from the form of the Chinese reply, transmitted in Document 302, that O’Neill did not describe it to Chou as a message from the President.