396.1 GE/6–1554: Telegram
Tenth Meeting of the Heads of the 16 Allied Delegations, Geneva. June 15, 11: 07 a.m.: The United States Delegation to the Department of State1
priority
Secto 443. Ottawa 6, Paris 435, Addis Ababa 3, Bogota 3, Athens 12. The Hague 21, Wellington 9, Manila 12, Luxembourg 7, Ankara 4, Canberra 13, Brussels 13, Bangkok 25. London 282, Seoul 127; repeated information Tokyo 136. Tokyo pass CINCUNC. Department pass Defense. At meeting of 16 this morning, agreement reached on [Page 375] text 16-nation declaration. Discussion centered on draft declaration by 16 (Secto 4362) and particularly use word “appropriate”. Pyun remained adamant to his insistence on its exclusion. Other participants generally urged him accept it for sake unanimity, stressing that phrase would refer to UNCURK in present circumstances though no one could bind UN as to body it might consider appropriate in future.
Finally Prince Wan suggested that since ROK finds word “appropriate” insurmountable obstacle, solution might be to omit word from declaration, but in text of report to UN which UN members will be sending, this word could be included.
Deadlock broke when Canada in prepared statement said that though they would prefer inclusion word “appropriate” as umbrella to cover those who had expressed different views on appropriate composition supervisory commission, declaration is on this subject basically contrary to Canadian position regardless of inclusion or exclusion word “appropriate”. Canada prepared to accept declaration as is and would not make any public statement derogating from unanimity. It wanted its friends to know, however, that it reserved its position for the future, and whenever issue properly arose would feel free to take position that important question was impartiality and effectiveness of supervision whether or not it is strictly supervision by UN.
Smith said that we would have preferred inclusion of “appropriate” for opposite reason, i.e., there might theoretically be some kind of UN supervision we would consider inappropriate. For sake of unity, however, we are prepared accept text without this word.
McIntosh (New Zealand) who had supported Canada’s position said that his government would not wish to remain sole holdout and will go along, but reserved its position for future along lines Canada.
Text draft declaration approved, therefore, without word “appropriate” and with deletion sentence “we have failed”, end fifth paragraph. Subject unforeseen developments, it will be signed this afternoon and issued immediately following close plenary tonight.
Group was informed that Nam Il and Molotov inscribed and probably Chou En-lai would speak also. Smith suggested that in accordance with agreed tactics yesterday’s meeting, no member of 16 should inscribe. Communists would be allowed to speak before recess, and after recess form caucus of 16, Garcia and Spaak would sum up for our side.
Smith warned, however, that Nam Il might propose establishment joint North-South Korean commission which we did not think conference should deal with. UK reported Molotov indicated Nam Il [Page 376] would raise question of continued validity of armistice. Smith said that if this happened, he would ask to speak before recess for caucus and would on behalf UNC assert that validity of armistice is not an issue at conference, that it continues in accordance paragraph 62, and there is no need for conference to deal with question. Canada supported need for making such statement.
Pyun said that he hoped none of 16 would make statements which would in effect promise Communists we would continue abide by armistice even if Communists violate it. He warned that it might be necessary for him to speak on this subject. Smith reminded him that ROK was not party to armistice and that US would speak for UNC and for all UN members and would have declaration on armistice which would accord with our commitments under it.