Memorandum, State Department Summary of Telegrams

NLT (Naval Aide) 158 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE DECLASSIFIED WASHINGTON E.O. 12065, Sec. 3-402 State Dept. Guidelines, March 6, 1982 January 22, 1951 By DEB NLT, Date 9-4-85 TOP SUMMARY OF TELEGRAMS COUNCIL OF The text of the agreed tripartite reply to the FOREIGN MINISTERS Soviet note of December 30 regarding the proposal to hold a Council of Foreign Ministers meeting has been sent to our Embassy in Moscow. We have instructed the Embassy to concert with the British and French Embassies and arrange for early delivery of the note to the Soviet Foreign Office, if possible, on Tuesday, January 23. Prior to dis- - patch of the note, we informed British and French representatives in Washington that our agreement to hold preliminary four-power meet- ings in Paris was conditioned on our receiving a firm commitment that their governments would insist that the meeting of Foreign Ministers, if held, will take place in the US. Although the British and French representatives agreed, we have requested confirmation from Paris and London. It was also agreed that we would show the text of our reply to the Germans, Austrians and Benelux Governments in ad- vance of delivery. KOREA In connection with the resolution on Chinese Communist aggression introduced by the US delegation in the General Assembly on January 20, we have instructed certain of our missions in their discretion to convey to the respective Foreign Offices as strictly confidential information certain views of the US Government regarding military aspects of the resolution. We point out that the US has consistently sought to prevent extension of the conflict beyond the borders of Korea and the Unified Command has re - frained under the greatest provocation and at considerable cost to UN forces from ordering attacks on Chinese territory. We will continue to seek confinement of hostilities to Korea. The US does not consider that passage of the resolution would constitute authorization of the extension of general hostilities against the Chinese mainland, nor would it constitute UN permission to bomb China within the meaning of the President's statement of January 4. We also state that if the resolution is passed, we do not, in the present circumstances, contemplate asking the UN Collective Measures Committee to recommend any military TOP SEGRE