Matthews files, lot 53 D 413: Telegram

The Commander in Chief, United Nations Command (Clark) to the Joint Chiefs of Staff 1

operational immediate

ZX 36484, HNU 5–10. CINCUNC transmits CINCUNC (Adv) msg HNU 5–10.

1.
Delegations reconvened at 1100 hours this date. Substance of record follows:
2.
Communists: “I have an important statement to make.
a.
“In the concrete proposal for implementation which our side put forward on April 26, the disposition of the remaining prisoners of war who are not directly repatriated is based upon the prerequisite of sending them to a neutral nation. But discussion in the armistice negotiations of the past 10 days have proved that your side has been trying to obscure this prerequisite of our side by the settlement first of the question of the nomination of the neutral nation, thereby attempting to realize the other prerequisite which your side has put forward, namely, the prerequisite of keeping in Korea the remaining prisoners of war who are not directly repatriated with the neutral nation coming to Korea to take them into custody. We consider that the 2 prerequisites mentioned above are entirely different. Under different prerequisites, there should be different proposals for disposition. The proposal of our side provides that the Korean and Chinese prisoners of war who are not directly repatriated be sent to a neutral nation, released from the original control of your side and received and taken into custody by that neutral nation; that thereafter, through the explanations made to them by the personnel sent to that neutral nation by our side, they be freed from their apprehensions so that it will be possible for them to express their will; and that thereafter, the authorities of the neutral nation concerned ensure that all those prisoners of war who request repatriation be repatriated to their fatherlands. However, the proposal of your side provides that the remaining prisoners of war who are not directly repatriated still be kept in the area controlled by the detaining side. This would obviously make it impossible for such prisoners of war to be completely freed from the control of the detaining side. Moreover, the neutral nation would meet great difficulties in the area controlled by the detaining side in receiving and taking into custody the prisoners of war, who according to the assertion of your side are in great numbers. At the same [Page 980] time, such a situation would not afford due freedom and facilities to the side concerned for its explanation work. Between these 2 proposals, the proposal of our side best embodies the principles of the Geneva Convention of 1949 and international practice, and can thus settle the question of the repatriation of prisoners of war justly and reasonably.
b.
“But in the discussions of the past 10 days, your side has obstinately insisted upon the prerequisite of your side that the remaining prisoners of war not directly repatriated should still be kept in Korea, and that a neutral nation should come to Korea to receive them and take them into custody. Such an obstinate action of your side will again hinder the realization of an armistice in Korea because of a question of steps and procedure. As a result, the ardent desire for an armistice in Korea of the people of both sides whose sons are fighting in Korea and of the peace-loving people of the whole world, will again receive a blow. In view of this fact, I now declare that we will continue to reserve the proposal put forward by our side on April 26. But on condition that your side accepts the following new proposal which our side puts forward now, we are prepared to try to adopt the prerequisite of your side that the remaining prisoners of war not directly repatriated be kept in their original places of detention and be handed over to a neutral nation which shall arrange for their repatriation. I must point out that the proposal put forward on April 26 by our side is more reasonable as compared to the new one which is based upon the prerequisite of your side.
c.
“The contents of our new proposal are as follows:
  • “(1) Within 2 months after the armistice agreement becomes effective, both sides shall, without offering any hindrance, repatriate and hand over in groups all those prisoners of war who insist upon repatriation to the side to which the prisoners of war belong, in accordance with the related provisions of paragraph 51, Article 3 of the armistice agreement and in conformity with the final names lists exchanged and checked by both sides.
  • “(2) In order to facilitate the return to their homelands of the remaining prisoners of war who are not directly repatriated, both sides agree that a neutral nations repatriation commission shall be established, to be composed of an equal number of representatives appointed respectively by 5 nations, namely, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Switzerland and Sweden, the 4 nations provided for in paragraph 37, Article 2 of the armistice agreement, and India as agreed upon by both sides.
  • “(3) All prisoners of war of both sides, with the exception of those prisoners of war who shall be directly repatriated as provided for in paragraph 1 of this proposal, shall be released from the military control and custody of the detaining side at the original places of detention and be handed over to the neutral nations repatriation commission, provided for in paragraph 2 of this proposal, which shall receive them and take them into custody. The neutral nations repatriation commission shall have the authority to exercise its legitimate functions and responsibilities for the control of the prisoners of war under its temporary jurisdiction. [Page 981] In order to ensure the effective execution of this authority, the member nations of the neutral nations repatriation commission shall each provide an equal number of armed forces.
  • “(4) The neutral nations repatriation commission, after having received and taken into custody those prisoners of war who are not directly repatriated, shall immediately make arrangements so that within the time limit of 4 months after the neutral nations repatriation commission takes over the custody, the nations to which the prisoners of war belong shall have freedom and facilities to send personnel to the original places of detention of these prisoners of war to explain to all the prisoners of war depending upon these nations so as to eliminate their apprehensions and to inform them of all matters relating to their return to their homelands, particularly of their full right to return home to lead a peaceful life.
  • “(5) Within 4 months after the neutral nations repatriation commission receives and takes into custody the prisoners of war, and after the explanations made by the nations to which they belong, the speedy return to their fatherlands of all those prisoners of war who request repatriation shall be facilitated by the neutral nations repatriation commission, and the detaining side shall not offer any obstruction. The administrative details for the repatriation of such prisoners of war shall be settled through consultation between the neutral nations repatriation commission and the sides.
  • “(6) If, at the expiration of the time limit of 4 months as provided in paragraphs 4 and 5 of this proposal, there are still prisoners of war in the custody of the neutral nations repatriation commission, their disposition shall be submitted for settlement through consultation to the political conference as provided in paragraph 60, Article 4 of the armistice agreement.
  • “(7) All the expenditures of the prisoner of war during the period in the custody of the neutral nations repatriation commission, including their travelling expenses in returning to their fatherlands, shall be borne by the nations to which they belong.
  • “(8) The terms of this proposal and the arrangements arising therefrom shall be made known to all prisoners of war.”
3.
UNC: “We have noted your proposal. We suggest a recess until 11 o’clock 9 May.”
4.
Communists: “We agree.”
5.
Meeting recessed at 1126 hours.
  1. This telegram was also addressed to Briggs in Pusan.