Washington, 2 August 1971
4153. Confidential Priority
China Representation
After Secretary Rogers had made his statement, State Department this afternoon briefed a number of ambassadors of countries who either sponsored IQ resolution last year or might be asked to sponsor Non–Expulsion resolution this year. (Final decision on sponsorship will be taken by United States Mission in New York). Following is text of notes prepared for use of senior officials who conducted these briefing sessions. Please do not disclose your possession of them at this stage.
Begins.
A. General
(1) United States believes the time has come for the General Assembly to break away from the narrow either/or choice posed by the Albanian resolution. We think it is both possible and highly desirable for the General Assembly to seat both PRC and ROC, and to do so on terms which do not contest claims of either party.
(2) We wish to stress at the outset our desire to bring about the participation of the PRC in the UN. We will support a resolution calling for Peking’s entry into the United Nations. We believe that given the will on the part of the General Assembly, the question of Chinese representation can be solved in a way that will not do violence to the interests of either the people of mainland China or the people of Taiwan.
(3) As we see it, the essence of the matter lies in the fact that there are two realities. One on the mainland and one on Taiwan. Though one is many times larger than the other, it is an indisputable fact that both exist, that both enjoy a vigorous economic, political, and cultural life, and that neither is able to speak effectively for all of the people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait.
(4) The separation between Taiwan and the mainland has occurred through historical processes and doubtless can be resolved only through the operation of a further historical process. The United States considers it neither wise nor necessary for the United Nations to try to dictate the terms under which this should take place. Rather, the UN can and should make it possible for the people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait to work out their destiny through the peaceful means required by the world organization. In so doing, the UN will fully live up to the spirit of the Charter.
B. The ‘Two Chinas’ Objection
(1) It may be objected that the United States is proposing a ‘two Chinas’ scheme, or that if Peking or Taipei or both reject our proposal, it cannot be a true solution. We believe, however, that it is both possible to draft, and within the powers of the General Assembly to adopt, a resolution which does not require members to take a position on the political, geographic, or legal claims of the two, but which seats the representatives of both pending peaceful agreement between them on some other means of representing the Chinese people in the UN.
(2) We believe that a resolution of this type would be a desirable recognition by the UN of contemporary world realities, and would better enable the UN to play the role envisaged in the Charter. If the UN is to solve the real problems of the world, it must deal with the world as it really is.
(3) When two parties to a dispute put forward mutually exclusive claims, it does not seem at all reasonable for the UN to impose a solution by simply accepting the claims of one party without reference to the de facto (underline two) situation. The proper business of the UN is to build bridges that will lead to a resolution of the conflict by the parties concerned. Even if one or both should initially reject a resolution of the type described, this does not necessarily mean the solution put forward was unreasonable or that it may not be accepted eventually.
C. The Security Council Seat
(1) We believe that many UN members favor addressing the Security Council seat in the GA. As the Secretary has indicated, we are prepared to have this question resolved on the basis of a decision of members of the United Nations.
D. The Important Question Resolution
We wish to see both the PRC and the ROC represented in the UN. Therefore, while supporting action to seat the PRC we will oppose any action to deprive the ROC of representation. To expel the ROC would have unfortunate consequences and would be a turning-away from the ideal of the UN as an all-embracing world organization. It is hard to see how such an act could be undone in the future. We thus continue to view the expulsion of the ROC or any proposal to deprive it of representation as an important question under Article 18 of the Charter.
E. ROC and PRC attitudes
(1) We have been in active consultations with the Republic of China on this issue. Clearly they are unhappy with this decision, but we think they understand that we are seeking to protect their interests. We believe an exposition of their views would best come from the ROC itself.
(2) We can expect that the PRC will promptly indicate that it would not participate in the UN on these terms. That is the obvious reaction consistent with their past position. But the adoption by the Assembly of a reasonable position on this question will create a new situation and in our view the impact of such a situation on the PRC will only be known after the Assembly has acted. In any case we are not proposing any UN action that would prejudice their claims, any more than our proposed action would prejudice the claims of the ROC. Our proposed resolutions are thus in no way hostile to the PRC and should not have a damaging effect on our developing dialogue with them.
F. Next Steps
We hope that as many states as possible will give us the benefit of their advice arid assistance in this matter. (Discretionary—use wherever it might produce favorable votes or at least abstentions.) We therefore hope that you will be able to vote for both the IQ against depriving the ROC of its UN representation and for a resolution to seat both the ROC and the PRC in the UN. (Where host government is known to have established position which would clearly preclude its support, you should nevertheless request they refrain from actively opposing us on this issue.)
Ends.
[NAA: A6364, WH1971/07–02]
1 2 August. It contained the verbatim text of the statement on Chinese representation alluded to in paragraph ‘C’, Document 225.
2 The meaning of the appendage, ‘A’, is unknown.