Paris, 27 May 1971
2486. Secret Priority
Chinese Representation
Your cable 2940.1
We note that the US draft resolution is similar to the part of our draft2 that dealt with the General Assembly seat. However, the US draft is less likely to win support, both because of the deletion of the reference to the Security Council seat and the erosion of the ROC’s position since the discussion on Chinese representation at the ANZUS talks last February. In these circumstances, our examination of the draft US resolution remains without commitment to the Government.
In order to assist our examination of the issue, we would like you to seek any further elaboration that can be obtained from the Americans of the following aspects of their thinking:—
(a) In particular, what is the basis of their belief that their draft resolution would get majority support? Could they provide for despatch by bag to us a detailed breakdown of their voting estimate?
(b) What are their reasons, both procedurally and in terms of numbers, for their view that the Albanian resolution, for which there is already a majority, would not be adopted?
(c) Will the soundings that will be made by the US on its draft be accompanied by approaches to waverers (e.g. Belgium, Turkey) to reverse the trend against the ROC?
(d) Will the US persevere with a dual representation resolution if it looks like being unsuccessful?
3. You should also make it clear that we would expect, if it so happens that the President decides to opt for some course other than a dual representation for China proposal, to be consulted in advance and in time for us to review our own policies.
[NAA: A1838, 3107/38/18, xii]
1 Document 191.
2 See Document 182.