Page 206
169
Minutes.
In his telegram No. 984 Sir H. Seymour suggested that if we could not accept Chiang Kai-shek's delegation of authority there should if possible be no formal surrender document at all. It is for the Chiefs of Staff to advise whether this is practicable. Prima facie it seems unlikely to be so. In any case, we have received a telegram from General Hayes, the G.0.C. British troops in China, from which it appears that the Generalissimo intends to arrange with the senior Japanese Commander in China for the surrender of subordinate commanders throughout the China theatre to be nominated by Chiang Kai- shek. Even if there is no formal surrender document at Hong Kong, Chiang Kai-shek will presumably claim that Admiral Harcourt was acting on his behalf.
The considerations put forward in paragraph 5 of Sir H. Seymour's telegram No. 984 are very important and in fact explain why we have been trying to reach a mutually agreeable solution in spite of Chiang Kai- shek's unreasonable attitude.
We cannot be expected to forego the right to sign on our own behalf in regard to a British territory which we are taking over. But it seems worth whibe to couple Chiang Kai-
shek's name with our own in the surrender document. Admiral Harcourt could either sign twice, once on behalf of H.M.G. and once on behalf of Chiang Kai-shek, or once on behalf of both.
I submit a draft telegram accordingly.
JC Skandal Barnett
30 th August 1945.
Page 206
Page 206
Page 206
Page 206
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.