Slow Boat to China

Ever since the Communists banished U.S. newsmen from China in 1949, correspondents have longed and schemed to get back after the news there. With growing impatience since European journalists began traveling into China in 1954, Americans pressed visa applications on Hong Kong intermediaries and fired off direct appeals to old China acquaintances, such as attractive Madame Kung Peng, press chief of Peking's Foreign Ministry. Last week Peking broke its long silence. Out went cables inviting 18 newsmen* for a month's visit, and telling them that they can pick up visas before the end of August in Moscow or at a Chinese border point.

Bargaining Instrument. After the issue went all the way up to Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, the State Department promptly ruled that it would make no exception, even for newsmen, to its policy of invalidating the passports of all U.S. citizens for travel to China. State's main argument: in bargaining at Geneva for the release of ten Americans still held captive in China, the U.S. has taken the position that it will let no more Americans into China until the Communists let the prisoners out; yielding now to the Reds' desire for visitors from the U.S. press would weaken the U.S. stand and relax the pressure of ostracism against China. Beyond that there were other points in the State Department argument: 1) the U.S. cannot let the Communists hand-pick the newsmen it invites, at least one of whom (Marquis Childs) had not even applied for a visa; 2) making an exception for newsmen would renew pressure from others (e.g., parents of prisoners, businessmen, etc.) for permission to enter China.

Bridling at the decision. U.S. editors and publishers sent out a storm of objections ranging from sharp editorials to private messages of friendly but firm dissent. Said U.P. President Frank H. Bartholomew: "The tragic plight of American prisoners and the reporting of world news are separate and distinct issues. We do not believe any government should use as a bargaining instrument the traditional right of reporters to seek the truth." In the minority supporting the State Department's ruling stood New York's Daily News and David Lawrence, in his syndicated column and as editor of U.S. News and World Report, which publicly turned down the Chinese invitation.

"Iron Curtain." As the argument grew in the U.S., Peking reported that some correspondents had already accepted. That seemed based on the fact that several had cabled their passport numbers to Canton, as instructed in their invitations. Some were preparing to leave, on the chance that the State Department might back down; some even considered taking the trip without valid passports. When asked about the State Department's reaction to that idea, a spokesman pointedly cited the law subjecting violators of passport rules to fines up to $2,000 and a prison term up to five years. Monetary dealings with Red China, he noted, are punishable by fines up to $10,000 and as much as ten years in prison for each transaction.

There is no doubt that the Chinese Communists think that a visit by U.S. reporters would produce some copy favorable to them; in the late '30s and early '40s some highly touted U.S. correspondents were gullible enough to describe the Communists as mere "agrarian reformers." But most U.S. editors did not consider that a valid reason for rejecting the first chance in seven years to get some first-hand U.S. reporting out of China. Said the Washington Post and Times Herald: "It is patently impossible to lead as many as 15 reporters--among them some of the most respected hands in the business--into any wholesale whitewash of Red China."

At week's end Communist propagandists were making the most of the State Department's decision. Moscow's Pravda editorialized that the "Dulles Department" had made itself the laughingstock of the world as it "zealously darns holes in its Iron Curtain." In a phrase that added weight to the supposition that the invitations were indeed a maneuver in the cold war, Izvestia said that truthful reports by U.S. correspondents from China would reveal the "hopeless failure" of U.S. policy against recognition of the Peking regime.

* The New York Times's C. L. Sulzberger, Henry R. Lieberman, Tillman Durdin and Mrs. Peggy Durdin, A.P.'s John Roderick, U.P.'s Robert Miller, I.N.S.'s Kingsbury Smith, the Christian Science Monitor's Gordon Walker, the New York Post's Seymour Freidin, the U.S. News and World Report's Robert Martin, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch's Marquis Childs, McGraw-Hill's Dan Kurzman, NBC's James Robinson, CBS's Sam Jaffe, Free-Lancers Walter Kerr, Harrison Forman and William Worthy, and TIME-LIFE's James Burke.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.