Office of the Historian

209. Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in the Republic of China1

Washington, December 8, 1955—8 p.m.

349. Eyes only Rankin. Your 528.2 Visit Far East Subcommittee offered unique channel influence Chiang’s decision membership issue under especially advantageous circumstances. Subcommittee also constitutes influential segment Congressional opinion. In view of Depcirtel 322, Deptels 304, 305, 308, 317, 326, 329, 333, 334,3 which we assume you received prior to your conversations with Subcommittee, Department unable understand your statement “I was in position to add very little to what they already knew”. Included in foregoing messages were two detailed and reasoned statements of US position prepared for use by Ambassador Lodge, two comprehensive expositions of US position on membership and the reasons therefor prepared by the President for Chiang and one prepared by the Secretary for Chiang. You were also informed of President’s direct concern with issue, of finality of US decision, of importance which US attached to obtaining Chiang’s agreement to forego use of veto and of probable gravity of consequences in event of failure [Page 440] obtain such agreement. In response to your 5134 a further message reviewing US position was sent. The answer to your query in the last sentence your 528 is given fully by the Secretary in his message to Chiang (Deptel 305).

It is improbable that this collective information could previously have been available to Subcommittee or that being in possession of it, Committee could reasonably conclude that you “unfortunately” did not “have full information on reasons for US position because lack of information from Washington and NY (UN)”. It would seem that the information supplied you would have enabled you not only to give Subcommittee effective guidance but to engage its aid with Chiang.

We are attempting to establish contact with subcommittee in Tokyo to clarify US position.

Vote on Canadian proposal in General Assembly today was 52 in favor, 2 (Cuba, China) against and 5 abstentions including US. It is now expected Security Council will meet on December 10.

Dulles
  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 310.2/12–655. Secret; Priority. Drafted and signed by Robertson for the Secretary. Cleared by Wilcox.↩
  2. Document 205.↩
  3. For telegrams 304, 305, 317, 329, and 333, see Documents 176, 177, 188, 197, and 199, respectively. Regarding circular telegram 322 and telegrams 308 and 326, see footnote 3, Document 160; footnote 2, Document 178; and footnote 1, Document 195; respectively. Telegram 334, December 3, is not printed. (Department of State, Central Files, 310.2/12–355)↩
  4. Document 198.↩