740.00119 Control (Korea)/6–2847: Telegram
The Political Adviser in Korea (Jacobs) to the Secretary of State
us urgent
176. Cite Zur[c] 839. During discussions on June 27 in Subcommission of arrangements for consultation with representatives of [Page 681] parties and organizations, which hitherto had been proceeding smoothly, Tounkin, in connection with preparation of list of those to be consulted, announced that Soviet delegation would insist on exclusion of all parties opposing trusteeship and named eight parties specifically, all rightists or with rightist leanings with declared membership totalling about 3,000,000, which would cut deeply into rightists’ availability for consultation and might drive all rightists to boycott the Joint Commission. He went on to say that his delegation also reserved the right to insist on the exclusion of other organizations later if it appeared that such were opposing trusteeship or the Moscow agreement. Bunce pointed out that under the terms of the Marshall–Molotov exchange of notes only the Joint Commission could exclude organizations from consultation and then only for cause stated, and asked for an adjournment. American delegates discussed matter and decided the Subcommission first should meet following day June 28 to get an approved list (even with Soviet reservations) for submission to Joint Commission, and second, to attempt to persuade Soviets to drop insistence upon their viewpoint, or failing that to get a clearer statement of their position for consideration by the Joint Commission in Pyongyang next week. Subcommission met today and in quite lengthy discussion Soviet delegates admitted that anti-trusteeship activities prior to signing declaration prescribed in communiqué Five did not constitute bar to consultation but they insisted that all parties and organizations, approximately 35 and all rightists, which formed an anti-trusteeship committee last January be refused consultation unless they declare that they are no longer members of that committee. They also refuse to approve a list and arrangements for consultation until this matter is settled. Matter will be discussed again next week in Pyongyang first by Subcommission and then if necessary by Joint Commission.
Matter is serious because if Soviet position prevails most participating rightists, who are at best lukewarm to cooperation under Moscow agreement, will probably refuse to make public statements required and withdraw leaving only leftists with whom to consult. That is what Soviet delegates wish.
Position of American members is that mere membership in an anti-trusteeship committee organized months ago does not constitute per se active opposition to Moscow agreement by organizations signing declaration prescribed in communiqué 5, and that Joint Committee should proceed with consultation, taking up individual cases on their merits as they arise. Soviet proof of instigation and fomentation of opposition can then be considered with each case and referred if necessary to Joint Commission as provided. If Soviet delegates continue [Page 682] to insist, this new development has in it the makings of a deadlock as they cannot be permitted to impose new conditions not agreed upon.