From antagonists to adversaries: United States-China talks during the Cold War, 1949--1972

This dissertation is about U.S.-China diplomatic contacts between 1949 and 1972. Previous studies viewed this subject primarily in terms of bitter Cold War antagonism whose effect was to sterilize all attempts at productive negotiation. This dissertation differs from earlier work by recognizing the fact that significant and in the end fertile communication between the two powers existed in spite of intense hostility. It answers important questions that have never been raised before. Why did the two antagonists come to the negotiating table? What role did these talks play in shaping the adversarial relationships over time? Did they ultimately enhance or curtail mutual understanding?; Five cases have been chosen for analysis, as follows: Huang Hua-Stuart meetings in 1949; Korean armistice negotiation, 1951--53; ambassadorial talks, 1955--70; Kissinger's secret meetings in Beijing, 1971; and U.S-China summit in 1972. The story begins with the initial communication in May 1949 between U.S. ambassador John Stuart and Chinese foreign affairs official Huang Hua, which was followed by twenty-two years of U.S. containment of the PRC. It ends when Nixon made his trip to Beijing in February 1972, which inaugurated the new relationship between the two former enemies.; Through the use of communication and negotiation theory and in light of newly available archival evidence in the United States and China, this dissertation analyzes the background of each talk, chief negotiators, major issues, actual bargaining process, approaches, maneuvers and rhetoric, and follow-up actions. The analysis leads to the following four findings. First, in the context of mutual containment, there existed room for the antagonists to conduct de facto communications. Second, communication between antagonists had a lasting effect, proved useful in detecting each other's intentions, settled minor disputes, and eventually paved the way toward real and substantial high-level negotiation. Third, aside from institutional and ideological restraints, individual negotiators played an important role in shaping the talks. Their educational background, negotiation and communication style and personalities do matter. Fourth, ethnocentrism, or ignorance of cultural-bound factors, such as values, beliefs and historical consciousness fostered misunderstanding, misjudgment and misperception of one another, all of which protracted the state of antagonism.