894.628/11–149

The Acting Political Adviser in Japan (Sebald) to the Secretary of State

secret
No. 759

Sir: I have the honor to refer to this Mission’s despatch no. 594 of August 29, 1949,1 concerning informal discussions with the Natural Resources Section of General Headquarters with respect to a proposed northern extension of the Japanese fishing area which would embrace Etorofu and Kunashiri Islands in the southern Kuril chain and the Habomai and Shikotan islands.

In a communication to this Mission dated October 1, 1949, the Natural Resources Section has initiated action on the proposed northern extension as described in this Mission’s despatch under reference. A copy of the Natural Resources Section’s communication of October 1, together with its enclosures consisting of a draft memorandum to the Chief of Staff and a draft letter to the Soviet Member, Allied Council for Japan, are enclosed.2 There is also enclosed a copy of this Mission’s reply in its capacity as Diplomatic Section, General Headquarters, to the communication of the Natural Resources Section of October 1. In this Mission’s reply it is pointed out that the northern extension, notwithstanding the likelihood of Soviet objection, appears desirable in order to place on record the fact that SCAP does not regard the present boundary of the fishing area in the vicinity of Hokkaido and Kuril Islands as a permanent boundary. This Mission, however, is withholding concurrence on the present proposal for a northern extension of the fishing area until the Department’s views on the problem are known. It would be appreciated, therefore, if the Department would advise this Mission of its position as soon as may be practicable since the Natural Resources Section has expressed its desire to take up the proposed northern extension of the fishing area at the earliest possible date.3

Respectfully yours,

W. J. Sebald
  1. Not printed.
  2. Enclosures not printed.
  3. In airgram A–219, December 1, to Tokyo, the Department agreed to northward extension of the fishing areas and found no objection to the proposed letter to General Derevyanko (894.628/11–149).