347

CABLEGRAM TO PARIS

Canberra, 5 December 1972

5909. Secret Immediate

For Renouf.


Negotiations with PRC

Your 5537.1

When you call on PRC Ambassador you should give him the message in our following telegram from Mr Whitlam to Premier Chou En–lai,2 together with the draft in our separate telegram of a joint communique of the two Governments on mutual recognition and the establishment of diplomatic relations.

2. You should take the PRC Ambassador through the draft communique, making the following points.

(a) Paragraph 1. The wording is by now fairly standard and we assume will give the Chinese no trouble. The date on which mutual recognition is to become effective is the date the communique is signed or released. We would have no objections if the Chinese wished to add ‘at ambassadorial level’ after ‘diplomatic relations’ . We assume that China will wish to reverse in the communique published in China the order of the naming of the two countries in this para and in the heading to the communique.

(b) Paragraph 2. The wording of the ‘five principles’ is taken from the Nixon–Chou communique.3The reference to the principles of the UN Charter we think is appropriate since both the PRC and Australia subscribe to the Charter. We note too that a reference to the Charter principles was included in the Japan/PRC communique.

(c) Paragraph 3. This is included on the assumption that China will wish such a reference. (We have noted that in some joint communiques the phrase ’sole legal Government of the entire Chinese people’ has been used. Should this matter be raised with you, you should say that we fear that in our own case that phrase could be misconstrued by our friends and neighbours in South East Asia.)

(d) Paragraph 4. This too is included on the assumption that China will wish such a reference. The paragraph is taken from the Canadian/PRC communique.4 You should remind Huang that Mr Whitlam and Premier Chou reached agreement last year on the use in our case of the Canadian precedent.

(e) Paragraph 5. A paragraph along these lines has been included in several other joint communiques. (For your own information at this stage, we would not wish to stand out against any stated Chinese desire to name a period within which ambassadors should be exchanged. But our preference is not to fix a period in the communique lest we are unable, like other countries such as Canada which have named a period, to keep to it. You should tell Huang, however, that we want to move as quickly as possible and have in mind sending an advance party to Peking early in the new year if agreement has been reached by then—as we confidently expect—on the joint communique.)

(f) Paragraph 6. This seeks to make the point that there is more to normalising relations than simply establishing embassies in each other’s capitals. We look forward to developing with China a broadly–based relationship covering a variety of fields, including those specifically mentioned. Clearly these matters will need to be pursued in more detail in subsequent discussions but what we have in mind is exploratory talks in Peking or Canberra on such matters as trade and civil aviation, exchanges of cultural, scientific and sporting groups, ministerial visits in both directions, and talks from time to time between the two foreign ministries at officials level on international developments generally.

3. You should also tell Huang that naturally we will withdraw our Embassy from Taipei, and will expect (and if necessary require) the Embassy in Canberra to be withdrawn likewise, after the joint communique with the PRC is issued. (For your own information, Dunn is being recalled in the next week or so ‘for consultations’ and will not be returning to his Embassy, which will be kept under a Charge until the Embassy is withdrawn.)

4. Finally, you should make the point to Huang that we have a useful and increasing volume of trade with Taiwan, and wish this to continue. We think that for this purpose an unofficial arrangement, along the lines of but much smaller than the proposed Japanese ‘liaison offices’ in Taiwan, should be made to facilitate trade and the movement of persons, particularly businessmen, but not of course to undertake any political or official functions. We expect a Taiwan organization will wish to have similar arrangements in Sydney or Melbourne.

5. As a courtesy you may inform the French that you have been instructed to open negotiations with Huang.

[NAA: A6366, PA 1972/11 T]

1 4 December. Renouf reported that he had an appointment with Huang Chen for 6 p.m. on 6 December.

2 In his message, Whitlam noted that in discussions with Chou in 1971, it had been agreed as desirable to put relations between Australia and the PRC on ‘a proper footing’ . Therefore, as Prime Minister, he proposed that ‘normalisation’ of relations be achieved with ‘all possible despatch’ —the first step of which would be contact between respective Ambassadors in Paris. In expressing his confidence that terms would soon be agreed, Whitlam stated his hope for a ‘more substantial’ relationship and ‘one marked by understanding, friendship and co–operation’ . He added that he looked forward to extending to visitors from the PRC the same warm welcome he had received in China the previous year. In his reply of 10 December, Chou wrote of his ‘deep appreciation’ ofWhitlam’s proposal for normalisation, and remarked that the process conformed with the interests and common desires of Australians and Chinese. It would, he added, open up opportunities for cooperation in a number of fields, while strengthening the friendship between the two countries. See Current Notes, vol. 43, 1972, p. 632.

3 See Current Notes, vol. 43, 1972, p. 51.

4 See Document 158.