Canberra, 12 February 1969
Confidential
Recognition of Communist China
You may wish to have an account of moves in recent weeks towards recognition of communist China by Canada, Italy and Belgium.
Canada
2. When the Trudeau Government came into office it undertook to seek an exchange of diplomatic relations with the Peking regime. Last week the Government instructed its Ambassador in Stockholm to approach the Chinese Charge d‘Affaires there to seek agreement on a time and place for talks on the question of diplomatic recognition and the exchange of embassies between Ottawa and Peking. No matters of substance were to be discussed during this first contact in Stockholm. Contact has been made between junior officials of the two embassies but no reply has so far been received from the Chinese.
3. The Canadian High Commissioner has told us that although Canada would not be prepared to endorse Peking’s claim to sovereignty over Taiwan nor to commit itself not to recognise Taiwan as a separate state if this should become feasible, it considers that it would not be possible for it to maintain diplomatic relations with the Republic of China once it has recognised Peking. Future Canadian policy on the representation of China in the United Nations has not yet been given detailed study.
4. Prior to this action by the Canadian Government Australia had on several occasions pointed out to the Canadians its view that the recognition of Peking would be harmful to the interests of the countries of the Asian and Pacific region, many of whom were faced with grave problems as a result of the policies followed by communist China. Now that the Canadian Government has decided to seek to negotiate recognition with Peking we are strongly urging that, whatever the outcome of the negotiations, the Canadian voting position in the United Nations should not be changed and that in particular Canada should continue to support the ‘important question’ resolution (thus helping to ensure that a resolution to expel the Republic of China and admit Peking could not be passed by a simple majority).
Italy
5. On 24th January the Italian Foreign Minister announced in Parliament that his Government believed the time had now come to recognise communist China. According to our Ambassador in Rome, Italy has so far had no contacts with communist China on the matter. He has also been informed that no decisions would be made about how recognition would be effected and on what terms until Peking had reacted to the Foreign Minister’s statement. So far there has apparently been no reaction from Peking.
6. When the Foreign Minister’s statement became known representations were made to the Italian Ambassador here by the Minister and the Department expressing the Australian Government’s hope that the Italian Government would not at this stage recognise Peking (see attached copy of Savingram 1 to Rome).2
7. On a number of occasions representations have also been made to the Government of the Republic of China urging it not to respond precipitately to Canadian or Italian statements, by, for example, breaking relations with the Italian and Canadian Governments.
8. Representations similar to those made by Australia to Canada, Italy and the Republic of China have been made by the United States, the New Zealand and Japanese Governments.
Belgium
9. It is understood that the Belgium Cabinet will consider the question of recognition on 21st February. The Chinese Ambassador has told us that the Belgium Government is likely to announce unilaterally its recognition of the Peking regime and a separate state of Taiwan. He has asked us to express our opposition to both these propositions.
10. We have told the Chinese Ambassador that instructions have already been sent to the Embassy in Brussels to make known our opposition to further moves to recognise Peking. We have, however, avoided taking an attitude in regard to Brussel’s intention to recognise a separate state of Taiwan.
ASPAC
11. The Standing Committee of Representatives of ASPAC countries meets in Tokyo on 19th February. At this meeting the Chinese Ambassador, supported by the Korean Ambassador, is likely to urge that the Standing Committee include in the communique issued following its meeting some expression of concern at the actions contemplated by Italy and Canada. The Australian Ambassador has been instructed that while some general expression of concern might be included in the communiqué, the Australian attitude would be very much influenced by whether the inclusion of such a reference was acceptable to the Malaysian representative and the Laotian observer. A further factor is that the Japanese Government itself might not feel able publicly to subscribe to statements as firm as the Chinese may wish.
12. Submitted for information.
M.R. Booker
First Assistant Secretary
Division II
[NAA: A1838, 3107/33/1/1, xx]
1 Gordon Freeth, Minister for External Affairs
2 3 February. It reported that Freeth and officers of the Department of External Affairs had held discussions with the-Italian Ambassador to Australia in Canberra on 30 and 31 January. They expressed the hope that the Italian Government would not accord recognition to the Peking regime and handed him a paper summarising the arguments in support of the Australian view. The paper adduced examples of why the Australian Government considered it inappropriate to accord recognition to the People’s Republic of China. These included the contention that Peking was encouraging North Vietnam and the Viet Cong to be intransigent in the Paris talks in regard to Vietnam and the argument that, if the Republic of China were expelled from the United Nations, ‘this would seriously damage the prospects for the continued separate existence of Taiwan, and its own rights to membership would be subject to the veto of mainland China’.