Investigation of the Automobile of the Soviet Consulate

The local authorities in Yili [Ili], considering the current conditions in Yili and to guarantee the safety of consular personnel, stipulated that consulate personnel are not to travel or leave downtown Yining [Gulja]. Comrade Cao Hongzhang of Yili Office of the [Xinjiang] Foreign Affairs Department notified Comrade Ta-qia-er-jin [sic], Consul of the Consulate of the Soviet Union in Yining, of this on 28 May.

At 3:00 p.m. on 20 May, the Consulate Secretary, Comrade Qie-mo-huo-nian-ke [sic], called upon Comrade Mu Tianxi of the Yili Office of the Foreign Affairs Department, “asking that he and his driver be allowed to leave downtown Yili on 30 May.” Mu Tianxi replied, “I expect to reply to you after I report this to the leaders and receive their approval.” However, the secretary, without the permission of the Yili Office of the Foreign Affairs Department, left downtown Yili and returned to the Soviet Union on the morning of 30 May.

On 29 May, an anti-revolutionary riot took place in Yining. The Yining Garrison Headquarters declared a curfew that evening and further stipulated that during the curfew all cars would be searched upon entering Yining.

Comrade Qie-mo-huo-nian-ke left for the Soviet Union at half past five on the afternoon of 30 May. He reached Shuiding County by car toward the start of curfew. As our inspectors did not receive advance notice that consulate personnel were going out, [they] requested, according to stipulations, that the consulate car be taken to a checkpoint and registered. However, Comrade Qie-mo-huo-nian-ke rudely refused and said many contemptuous words against our local authorities. Our inspectors tolerated a rude attitude to the maximum extent by pointing out that such a presumptuous and rude attitude was wrong on the one hand and, on the other hand, requested that he clear the formalities at our inspection station. He agreed to our proposal on the surface but refused to enter the inspection station upon arrival. Additionally, he, aiming to avoid the inspection, signaled for the driver to escape when our personnel were talking to him. Qie-mo-huo-nian-ke’s behavior was strictly curbed by our inspectors, who also displayed the inspection license. However, the secretary paid no attention to the rights of our local authority and threw the license and the red and green flag to the ground twice. He also made the false accusation that our inspectors were “robbers,” and, under these circumstances, falsely accused our inspectors fouled our inspectors as robbers. Under such circumstances, our inspectors checked the car on the highway outside of the inspection station according to rules and released the car immediately following the inspection.

It is also noteworthy that:

1. The secretary, by leaving for the Soviet Union without the permission of the Yili Office of the Foreign Department, severely violated the rules of our local government.

2. Yining was under curfew at that time and the local authorities had to check all cars in Yining as a special measure at a time of an emergency. Our inspectors did not receive advance notice that the consulate car was going out and, for that reason, they had to check all cars entering Yining, including the secretary’s car. However, the secretary not only refused the inspections, but also made false accusations that our inspectors were robbers. We could not help but feel angered by this outrageous disregard of the stipulations of Chinese local authorities.

3. The car inspection process was conducted by our inspectors in a very polite manner. The accusations in your verbal notice on 19 June that “the inspectors rushed into the car of the consulate, snatched Comrades Qie-mo-huo-nian-ke and Ma-er-li-ya-nuo-fu [sic] by the hands, and aimed a TT pistol at them” and “threw the articles in the car onto the roadside” are totally groundless. Therefore, we cannot accept your criticism.

4. During his meeting with Consul Ta-qia-er-jin on 31 May, Comrade Cao Hongzhang pointed out that the secretary had violated the rules of the local government and reiterated that it had been necessary to check any consulate car that went out without the permission of the relevant authorities. Consul Ta-qia-er-jin accepted our argument at that time. It is very difficult to understand why you are now making a new problem out of the Office of the Foreign Affairs Department’s “defense” of it itself.

5. You mentioned during a discussion on 19 June that, when they entered Shuiding (before the event took place), two uniformed guards, after inspecting Qie-mo-huo-nian-ke and Ma-er-li-ya-nuo-fu’s paperwork, notified them that they had already received a circular from the Yili Office of the Foreign Affairs Department on consulate staff travel and that the consulate workers were allowed to go to Yining. But this is not true because, during the entire vehicle inspection process, the Yili Office of the Foreign Affairs Department had no phone calls with the inspectors.