Paving the Way for Peking's Entry

We think the realities of the world require that both [Peking and Taipei] be represented. One represents 700 million to 800 million people. In Taiwan there are 14 million or more people. And we think both should be represented in the United Nations.

EVEN though it was no great surprise, Secretary of State William Rogers' formal announcement that the U.S. would actively support Peking's admission to the U.N. this fall was a milestone, reversing a policy that had endured since the first attempt to seat the mainland Communist regime 21 years ago.

The new U.S. policy was attacked by both Chinas, since each claims to be the sole and rightful representative of all of China's people. But that did not deter the Administration. As President Nixon told reporters in the Oval Office after returning from a swing through Iowa and Ohio, China must be regarded not only as "the most populous nation in the world,* [but one] which potentially in the future could become the most powerful nation in the world."

Despite Washington's "two-China" policy, Mao Tse-tung's regime may ultimately enter the U.N. on its own terms--as the one and only Chinese delegation. There is in fact only one seat marked "China" at the U.N. The U.S. effort to seat two delegations in the U.N.'s Manhattan headquarters (see box, page 25) will involve an effort to sidestep a fundamental issue of representation--if Peking takes the China seat, whom does Taipei represent? The strategy may not work; in truth, the U.S. might be relieved of some sticky diplomatic problems if it fails and Taipei is expelled. But the Administration rejects suggestions that its effort to keep Taipei in the U.N. might be less than wholehearted. "We are going all out," said George Bush, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. "It's going to be difficult, but we believe we have a chance."

Desultory Demonstrations. Though the new U.S. policy put Chiang Kai-shek's Nationalist regime at a decided disadvantage. Taipei was outwardly calm. The regime issued a terse statement that merely promised a fight for Taipei's "lawful rights and position" in the U.N., and warned that the organization could "drift into impotence and total failure" if Peking is admitted.

In Taipei, where there had been some desultory demonstrations earlier, the Rogers announcement was received calmly. A few red, yellow and green posters urging the world to SAVE THE U.N., BLOCK THE COMMUNISTS' ENTRY appeared on downtown walls. The foreign ministry organized regional conferences of its diplomats in Asia, Africa and Latin America in preparation for a new diplomatic offensive. The chances that such an offensive will succeed are slim indeed. Only last week, Turkey became the eighth NATO member (of 15) to recognize Peking and sever relations with Taipei, and Greece may soon follow suit. With reason, the Nationalists are increasingly fretful about diplomatic isolation, and they are no longer summarily breaking relations with governments that recognize Peking.

Taipei is also becoming less rigid about the conditions under which it would remain in the U.N. The regime now says that it will stay in the U.N. in order to "fight the Communists" if Peking is voted in. There is also talk in Taipei of staying on even if the Communists actually come to New York to occupy a seat. What if Taipei were voted out of its seat on the Security Council, as is almost certain, and could hope for no more than a seat in the Assembly? Despite U.S. prodding, Taipei has yet to provide a clear answer. Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek must make the final decision, but he seems in no hurry.

Disgusting Duet. It was Peking and not Taipei that exploded at Washington's announcement. The official New China News Agency thundered that the U.S. decision "peddles the preposterous proposition of two Chinas." It accused Rogers of "barefaced lying," described the two-Chinas plan not only as "absolutely illegal and futile" but also as a "trick" designed to keep Taiwan in the U.N. and thus make it impossible for Peking to accept a seat. The Chinese seemed particularly worried about Japan's role; they insisted that Tokyo had a key "go-between" role in the "disgusting duet" played by Washington and Taipei. N.C.N.A. saw dark portents in the recent visit of Chiang Kai-shek's personal secretary, Chang Chun, to Tokyo; Peking seems to fear that Japan is easing into the role of protector of Tai wan, which was under Japanese rule for a half-century before V-J day.

The Administration was not surprised by the harsh words. U.S. officials understand that Peking cannot change its tone too quickly; it must try to keep restive allies in North Viet Nam and North Korea content while "normalizing" relations with the U.S. Still there was some uneasiness at Peking's vehemence -- mostly beyond Administration circles.

Forecasting what it would be like with Peking in the U.N., former Ambassador Arthur Goldberg said: "Let's not kid ourselves. They are going to be very, very troublesome." Former G.O.P. Congressman Walter Judd, long a stalwart friend of Nationalist China, complained that "in essence, what President Nixon said is, 'If they won't give in, we will.' "

The Administration counters that its willingness to back Peking's admission to the U.N. is an unavoidable consequence of reality; in its own interest the U.S. needs to establish relations with the regime that governs one-fourth of the world's population.

* The current U.N. estimate is 740 million, and most American demographers lean toward 800 million But not even Peking is sure of the size of the population it commands. The last published census, taken in 1953, showed 583 million. Peking now claims 700 million. But when American Journalist Edgar Snow asked Mao Tse-tung about these figures, the Chairman said in disbelief: "How could there be so many?"

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