795.00/5–153: Circular telegram

The Secretary of State to Certain Diplomatic Offices1

confidential

1081. Korean Briefing Meeting, May 1. Johnson reported developments plenary meetings April 29–30, May 1.

At April 28 meeting Communist representative simply reiterated previous statements. UNC repeated Communist proposals in present form unacceptable and asked whether Communists prepared nominate neutral state to take custody PWs.

At meeting April 29 Communist representative said although appropriate length of time for PWs remain neutral custody “entirely necessary” to eliminate their apprehensions, since UNC felt proposed 6-month period too long, “specific length of time can be a subject of discussion”. He stated Communists prepared (1) nominate Asian neutral nation which geographical proximity made practical choice; and (2) would make specific nomination after principle sending non-repatriates to neutral agreed.

At April 30 meeting UNC stated until UNC knew Communist nominee, no reason for considering any country other than Switzerland whose neutrality was proverbial. Harrison pointed out geographic location irrelevant, and only neutrality should count. If Communists designate specific country, UNC could consider whether it is neutral and competent. He noted, however, that Asian state necessarily located close to countries dominated by Communists where might be subjected to Communist military, economic and political influence. He added that argument proximity of Asian state relevant advantage only if PWs actually moved from Korea, which UNC not considering. Communists were informed they had already shown UNC how to dispose of nonrepatriate Korean PWs by their own actions illegally incorporating Korean PWs into Communist armies. UNC by this standard could appropriately release in Korea those Korean PWs who wanted to remain South Korea and urged Communists to propose such a measure in order facilitate solution of problem.

At May 1 meeting, Harrison again asked Communists nominate neutral. UNC would also consider Sweden true neutral highly competent for task. Moreover, UNC did not refuse consult with Communists on subject but without Communist nomination nothing about which to consult. Harrison also said UNC saw no good reason why geographical location should be deciding reason for acceptance or exclusion of neutral state; essentials required were neutrality and competence. Communist [Page 962] representative replied only Asian neutral “reasonable and practical” but repeated nomination could be discussed only after agreement on sending non-repatriates to territory of neutral.

Johnson also described liaison group meeting May 1 when UNC informed Communists their statement that they had completed exchange sick and wounded PWs under April 11 agreement disturbing and not in accordance with facts. UNC had “indisputable evidence” Communists still held 234 non-Korean PWs and 141 Korean PWs fit to travel, desiring repatriation, and eligible as sick and wounded. UNC pointed out repatriation sick and wounded continuing obligation and UNC even now screening PWs that might be included this category. UNC told Communists if failed to carry out April 11 agreement and Geneva Convention in good faith, UNC had no choice but to question Communist sincerity re reaching and carrying out agreements on broader questions confronting armistice delegations.

In answer question from Millet (France) re time UNC would acquiesce in such unproductive exchanges, Johnson stated that while obvious discussions not getting any place no specific time limit set.

Dulles
  1. This telegram, drafted by Brown and cleared by Johnson, was a summary of a briefing meeting of the 15 nations with fighting troops in Korea, held May 1 in Washington. A more complete account can be found in a memorandum of conversation by Brown, May 1, 1953, not printed. (795.00/5–153) This telegram was sent to the same posts as circular telegram 1066; see footnote 1 p. 950.