264. Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in Japan1
859. Deptel 851; Tokyo’s 1051.2 Japanese delegate to UN Miyazaki told USDel October 9 Japan had instructed him sponsor resolution Vietnam but not ROK… . USDel replied difficult include Japan one resolution and not other in view fact all other co-sponsors identical both resolutions. Resolutions subsequently submitted without Japanese… .
Department believes Japanese co-sponsorship both resolutions of greatest importance especially in view Japan’s recent election Security Council. Possible for Japan add its name to list co-sponsors in addendum during debate. Its failure co-sponsor Korea because of present stage Japanese-Korean negotiations would be harmful Japan, make Koreans more intransigent and hurt Korea’s case in the UN. Department agrees [name deleted] Japanese offer co-sponsor Vietnam but not Korea constitutes conspicuous discrimination against Korea.
Embassy is instructed to raise matter directly with Fujiyama with view convincing him necessity Japan co-sponsor Korean resolution as well as Vietnam resolution… .
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 310.2/10–1057. Confidential; Niact. Repeated to USUN.↩
- Telegram 851 to Tokyo October 9, reported that in view of the importance of Japanese-Korean relations, the Embassy should consider the possibility of directly approaching Foreign Affairs Minister Fujiyama on Japanese cosponsorship of the existing membership resolutions at the United Nations since Japan “might gain good will from announcing decision co-sponsor during debate.” (Ibid., 310.2/10–957) Telegram 1051 from Tokyo, October 10, reads: “Do not believe approach suggested Deptel 851 would be productive.” (Ibid., 310.2/10–1057)↩