740.00119 Control (Korea)/11–145: Telegram
The Political Adviser in Korea (Langdon) to the Secretary of State
priority
[Received November 3—8:02 a.m.]
Tfurc 65 [to Tokyo]. [From Langdon and Bunce:] The following is a translation of a letter dated October 26 from Soviet Commander Chistiakov:
“In your letter of 1 [12] August ’4669 concerning the resumption of the work of the joint Soviet-American Commission, you, speaking of the intentions of the American Delegation to resume the discussipn to [of] the Joint Commission, at the same time have advised the Soviet Delegation to restudy its position.
In answer to this, I must declare that the Soviet Delegation is guided in its work by the terms of the Moscow decision of the three Foreign Ministers on Korea and intends to steadfastly adhere to this decision.
I again assure you that the Soviet Delegation is always ready to resume the work of the Joint Commission on the basis of strict fulfillment of the Moscow decision on Korea.
As far as the question of the discontinuing of the work of the Joint Commission is concerned, as you will know, it was the American Delegation itself which after a time in the course of the discussions suggested that the work of the Joint Commission be suspended, and finally at its suggestion the work of the Commission was suspended 5 May ’46. In your letter you stated that ‘the exact fulfillment of the Moscow decision is and always has been the mission of the American Delegation.’
I must, however, note that during the work of the Joint Commission the American Delegation did not, in fact, evidence such a readiness and many times even declared that it did not quite understand the Moscow decision on Korea.
Your assertion that the Soviet Delegation allegedly interprets unilaterally the Moscow decision concerning the creation of a provisional Korean Democratic Government and the consultation on the subject with Korean political parties and social organizations is unfounded.
In the decision on Korea reached by the Moscow Conference of the three Foreign Ministers, a series of measures were laid out which aim at the reestablishment of Korea as an independent state, the creation of conditions for the development of the country on democratic principles and the speedy liquidation of the ruinous after-affects of long Japanese domination in Korea. Therefore, the Soviet Delegation, being guided by the aims and spirit of the Moscow decision, deems that it would not be right to consult on the question of methods of fulfilling the Moscow decision with those parties and those, who for tactical considerations, although declaring their support of the decision, at the same time make such stipulations which convert [Page 758] their statement of support of the Moscow decision into an empty declaration.
In regard to that part of your letter concerning the definition of the word ‘democratic’, the Soviet Delegation would like to point out that in this question it is necessary to consider not the declarative announcements of the party, and not the names of separate parties and organizations, but the actual policies pursued by a given party.
In as much as the Moscow decision has outlined the necessary measures for the democratic reconstruction of Korea, it is the opinion of the Soviet Delegation that the attitude of different parties and groups towards the Moscow decision is the most important criterion of their true democratic nature and of their striving to see Korea a democratic state.
Thus, the position of the Soviet Delegation on the question of consultation of the Joint Commission with the Korean democratic parties and organizations fully corresponds to the Moscow decision.
At the same time it is impossible not to note that there is an obvious contradiction between the interpretation in your letter of the word ‘democracy’ and the actual position which the American Delegation assumed during the period of the work of the Joint Commission.
It is well known that the American Delegation has included in the list of political parties and organizations for consultation with the Joint Commission on the question of the creation of the provisional Korean democratic government, all political parties and organizations which had voiced their opposition against the Moscow decision and only three democratic parties which upheld the Moscow decision. It is completely obvious that the American delegation, when it excluded from participation in consultation with the Joint Commission such democratic parties and organizations of mass character as the Korean national revolutionary party, the all-Korean Confederation of Labor, the all-Korean Womens Union, the all-Korean Youth Union, the all-Korean Farmers Union and a number of other organizations, [was?] guided by other than their democratic principles.
As regards the freedom for the Koreans to express their position toward formation of the Korean Government or the realization of the Moscow decision on Korea, the Soviet Delegation has never anywhere made proposals directed against the freedom of expression by the representatives of Korean parties and organizations, wherever they may be, and it is accordingly understood that any part[y?] or group as well as any individual Korean citizen can express similar ideas or present them to the Joint Commission.
I cannot agree with the interpretation set forth in your letter on the question of trusteeship because such an interpretation actually places in doubt the decision of the Moscow Conference on this question, as it is known the Moscow decision states: ‘it shall be the task of the Joint Commission with the participation of the Provisional Korean Government and of the Korean democratic organizations to also work out measures for helping and assisting (non70 trusteeship) the political, economic, and social progress of the Korean people, the development of democratic self-government and the establishment of the national independence of Korea.’
[Page 759]Thus, among the tasks of the Joint Commission is included the preparation of proposals dealing with the establishment of a trusteeship in regard to Korea with the stipulation that these proposals relating to Korea for a period up to five years, will, after consultation with the Provisional Korean Government be submitted for joint consideration to the governments of the four powers.
From the above it is clear that the question of the establishment of the trusteeship as a measure which must aid in the democratic transformation of Korea has been definitely decided by the Moscow Conference and on this basis there must be prepared concrete proposals for the eventual working out of the agreement of trusteeshipment [trusteeship].
During the interruption in the work of the Joint Soviet-American Commission many events have occurred in south as well as in north Korea. All these events testify that the Korean people are striving to unite their country, to have a democratic government and to carry out their democratic transformation.
It is the opinion of the Soviet Delegation that the delay in the formation of the Korean Provisional Democratic Government impede[s] the so necessary unification of Korea into a single state; it is having a negative effect on the economic and political situation of the Korean people and is holding back the realization of democratic transformation in all Korea.
The Soviet Delegation is greatly concerned that the negotiations of the Joint Commission, interrupted on the initiative of the American Delegation in May,’46, have not yet been resumed and wishes to resume those negotiations as soon as possible on the basis of exact fulfillment of the Moscow decision.
If after taking this into account, along with the foregoing statement, you will express your consent to resume the work of the Joint Commission, the Soviet Delegation will always be ready to resume the work.”
We are presently drafting our reply and its text will be reported to the Department when it is dispatched. We are treating this exchange as secret and request the Department treat it so for the time being.
Dept please pass to Moscow.
- Reference is to General Hodge’s letter dated August 12 to General Chistiakov; for text, see Department of State publication 2933, Korea’s Independence, p. 22. This was in reply to General Chistiakov’s letter dated August 6, ibid., p. 21.↩
- The word “non” does not appear in the text of the Moscow decision of December 27, 1945.↩