Cable from the Chinese Foreign Ministry, 'Instructions for the 13th Meeting of the Sino-US Ambassadorial Talks'

Secret

1. The US consented to the wording in the agreed announcement at the twelfth talk, but continues to pester us with the issue of a time limit and suggests a recess of six days. Meanwhile, at the news conference on 30 August, [John Foster] Dulles said that they require patience for the Sino-American talks and they will end up with some positive results eventually. From the aforementioned situation, it is still possible for the US side to procrastinate the talks, although the US representative showed signs of conciliation and relaxation. Our policy is the same as the previous one: to stick to principles and eliminate the other’s excuse for delaying the talks, to win over an agreement and meanwhile to prepare for the other side’s dilatory tactics.

2. At the thirteenth talk, we should take the initiative to notify the other side of the situation of those US nationals who have applied to leave [China]. In this way, if the other side is ready to reach an agreement, it will give the other side a chance to back down with good grace. If the other side intentionally procrastinates in the talks, it will leave us in a favorable position.

3. After notifying the other side of the situation of US nationals, we should take the initiative to mention the text of the agreed announcement, finalizing the wording. We suggest that both sides reach an accord on the return of civilians.

[…]

4. Should the US side continue to nag at us with the issue of a time limit, we should refute it based on the so-called “the issue of trust” as proposed by the other side at the last meeting. We may indicate, although the actual situation of Chinese nationals in the US conflicts with what the other side has stated, we still believe in what the other side stated at the talks and are prepared to reach an accord. We have stated on many occasions that we give convicted US nationals lenient treatment. But the other side insists that we set a time limit for releasing US nationals. This is not only an issue of trust toward us, but also a violation of our sovereignty. This demand will absolutely not be satisfied because it is unjustifiable.

5. If the US side says an accord has been reached on the text of the agreed announcement and asks our side to inform him of the results of the reviewed cases of US nationals, we should ask if the other side completely agrees to the text without any reservation. If the other side continues to ask us to release US nationals, we should point out that both sides have not reached an accord on the essence of the agreement. If the other side says an agreement has been reached without reservation, then we could inform the other side that we will inform him of the results of those US nationals whose cases have been reviewed.

6. If the US side again proposes to put off the talks for six days, we can agree. If the US side doesn’t touch on that, we can propose 10 September for the next meeting.

Foreign Ministry

4:30 p.m., 5 September 1955