Foreign Relations of the United States, 1950, East Asia and the Pacific, Volume VI

743.13/9–1550

Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs (Perkins) to the Secretary of State ¹

secret

[New York,] September 15, 1950.

Subject: Visit of Mr. Percy C. Spender, Australian Minister for External Affairs.

Mr. Spender has been in Washington for two days during the course of which he has seen the President,^* Messrs. Harriman and Webb² and a number of Departmental officers. The most urgent problem he has on his mind is the lack of Australian participation in global planning. The Department reports that he discussed this with the President, who suggested he take it up with you. The Australian Embassy has indicated a list of other topics he wishes to mention. The number he in fact touches on will depend on how long you can see him. The list, mot in order of importance except for the first three, follows:

1. Absence of any organic political machinery to enable Australia to participate in global planning.

Mr. Spender has expressed the view that Australia, which has demonstrated in Korea its readiness to contribute to the common cause, should have some way of participating in global planning which he believes is largely done by the U.S., U.K. and France. He would have little sympathy with the idea that Australia’s interests are covered through the U.K. representation of the Commonwealth.

It is recommended that you ask him to expound his ideas of how such participation might be worked out. He will probably mention a Pacific Pact as his principal proposal and less importantly, the establishing of some consultative group, outside the UN, consisting of countries making the major contributions in Korea. These are discussed immediately below. (See memo of conversation with Mr. Jessup. Tab B³)

2. Pacific Pact.

Although Prime Minister Menzies is understood not to believe a Pacific Pact necessary now, Mr. Spender has consistently advocated it. He has favored the Commonwealth countries taking the initiative to form the nucleus of a pact which the U.S. would be invited to support.

It is recommended that you tell him the U.S. has an open mind on this subject. While we have given the matter a good deal of thought, there are problems such as membership, geographical scope and the nature of the commitments to be included which appear very real and to which we have no answers.

3. Establishment of an Advisory Committee of countries making the largest contribution in Korea.

Such a committee would not be of Security Council members (Australia not being one) and would deal with

(a) questions of coordination of offers of assistance and related matters;

(b) military liaison between contributing countries and the Supreme Command, and

(c) political and other matters (such as political responsibility for South Korea excesses and their future prevention) and supply of information generally in connection with UN action in Korea.

This proposal reflects a strong belief that Australia, which is making a major contribution in Korea, has no participation in the political or military direction or planning.

It is recommended that you express understanding of the validity of the Australian views and interest in this idea, but that you indicate we would be reluctant to change the established focal points of the UN and the Secretary-General, which seem to be functioning satisfactorily and preserve the wide degree of UN support in Korea.

4. UN General Assembly.

(a) Mr. Spender may mention the Australian desire for a vice-presidency and for representation on ECOSOC. We have given a negative answer on ECOSOC in view of the heavy Commonwealth representation.

It is recommended that you express the hope that Australia and Canada can work out between them their respective desires for a vice-presidency. We would presumably have to support Canada (Pearson⁴) who approached us first.

(b) Mr. Spender may touch on Soviet strategy and other UN problems generally. He discussed these with Departmental officials. Australia has not placed any items on the agenda except for joining with the U.S. and U.K. on the war prisoners item.

It is recommended that you avoid discussing any specific items and suggest he may want to continue his discussions of the agenda further with Mr. Hickerson.⁵

5. Japanese Peace Treaty.

The views Mr. Menzies expressed when he was in Washington were in large measure close to ours.

It is recommended that you repeat to Mr. Spender about what you said to Messrs. Bevin and Schuman,⁶ including the suggestion that he discuss the matter further with Mr. Dulles next week.⁷

6. Commonwealth Aid to South and Southeast Asia.

Mr. Spender discussed this at length in Washington with Mr. Thorp and others.⁸ He will probably not wish to say much more.

It is recommended that you welcome the Commonwealth initiative, largely spearheaded by Australia, in working out an aid program and assure him of our willingness to coordinate any program we may have with the Commonwealth efforts.⁹

7. Netherlands New Guinea.

Australia has actively voiced its opposition to Indonesian control over Netherlands New Guinea. We joined with the British several months ago in urging Australian moderation. The Dutch and Indonesians are beginning negotiations on this on September 30 and both hope the issue will not be brought up in the UN. If Mr. Spender expresses the active Australian concern in this matter, it is recommended that you reiterate our previous urgings that the Dutch and Indonesians be permitted to try to work this out bilaterally without outside intervention.¹⁰

8. Policy with relation to Formosa.¹¹

9. Chinese representation at the UN.¹²

10. Continued recognition of the Chinese Nationalist Government.

No special Australian angle on these is known and it is recommended you take the same positions as with the British and the French.

11. Policy of “continuance” in Korea.

This item is believed to refer to the status of the Rhee¹³ Government both in relation to North Korea and after hostilities cease. The Australians have no sympathy with the Rhee Government and even question whether it is still a government.

It is recommended that you point out that the Rhee Government was legally established under UN supervision and we understand continues to receive the support of the South Koreans. The question of the political set-up in Korea after hostilities should be worked out through the UN.¹⁴

12. Use of Australian bases by Naval forces.

The Australians offered to share bases with the U.S. on Manus Island. We have told the Australians, pursuant to a JCS decision, that we believed the establishment of joint bases not necessary militarily but that it was desirable that U.S. and Australian ships be able to use each other’s bases when occasions arise.¹⁵ Mr. Spender left Australia before we told the Australians this and it is recommended that you express appreciation of any offer he may suggest but discourage the idea of joint bases.

13. European and Middle Eastern strategy.

It is believed Mr. Spender will only wish to express some general views.

It is recommended that all you need do is listen.

14. Wool.

You have a separate memo on wool.—Tab C¹⁶

1. Secretary of State Acheson was in New York for meetings with British Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin and French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman (September 12–18), for the Fifth Session of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Council (September 15–26), and for the opening of the Fifth Session of the United Nations General Assembly. Assistant Secretary of State Perkins was a member of the United States Delegation to the meetings of the Foreign Ministers.
2. See telegram—Tab A. [Footnote in source text. The reference was to telegram Telac 6, September 15, to the United States Mission at the United Nations in New York, for the Secretary of State, not printed, summarizing the conversation between President Truman and External Affairs Minister Spender on September 13 (see p. 212).]
2. No records have been found of Spender’s meetings with Presidential Special Assistant Harriman and Acting Secretary of State James C. Webb.
3. External Affairs Minister Spender and Australian Ambassador Makin met with Ambassador at Large Philip C. Jessup and Wayne G. Jackson, Officer in Charge of United Kingdom and Ireland Affairs in the Office of British Commonwealth and Northern European Affairs, in New York where Jessup and Jackson were serving as members of the United States Delegation to the meetings of the American, British, and French Foreign Ministers. During the conversation, Spender raised the question of Chinese representation in the United Nations, the Formosa question, the absence of any organic political machinery which would enable Australia to participate in global planning (upon which Spender laid the greatest emphasis), the matter of a Pacific Pact, the Australian offer for the reciprocal use of military bases, the possibility of the establishment of an advisory organization of countries making substantial contributions in the Korean War, and the Netherlands New Guinea problem about which Spender spoke at some length and with considerable feeling. Jackson’s memorandum of the conversation, under reference here, is not printed. The portion of that memorandum dealing with the discussion of the Pacific Pact corresponds closely to the account in Spender, Exercises in Diplomacy, p. 43.
4. Lester B. Pearson, Canadian Secretary of State for External Affairs.
5. John D. Hickerson, Assistant Secretary of State for United Nations Affairs. For documentation on matters of general constitutional, administrative, and political significance affecting the United Nations and of particular interest to the United States, see volume ii.
6. Documentation on the meetings of the American, British, and French Foreign Ministers in New York, September 12–19 is scheduled for publication in volume iii.
7. For documentation on the efforts of the United States to secure a Japanese peace treaty, see pp. 1109 ff. Regarding Spender’s meeting with John Foster Dulles, Special Assistant to the Secretary of State, on September 22, see the editorial note, p. 1308.
8. For an account of the conversations under reference here, see the Report Prepared by the Department of State, p. 207.
9. For additional documentation on general United States policies respecting the East Asian-Pacific area, see pp. 1 ff.
10. For additional documentation on United States relations with Indonesia, including materials on the attitude of Australia toward the Netherlands New Guinea question, see pp. 964 ff.
11. For documentation on United States relations with the Republic of China, see pp. 256 ff.
12. For documentation on this subject, see vol. ii, pp. 186 ff.
13. Syngman Rhee, President of the Republic of Korea.
14. Documentation on Korea is presented in volume vii.
15. See telegram 24, August 14, to Canberra, p. 211.
16. The memorandum of September 12 from Assistant Secretary of State Perkins to the Secretary of State under reference here, not printed, reviewed the position to be taken if the United States wool allocation proposal was raised by External Affairs Minister Spender. In view of a significant expansion of United States wool requirements resulting from the Korean War and an anticipated short world wool supply, the United States in August 1950 proposed international collaboration among producers and consumers of apparel wool in order to allocate the current season’s supply. Immediate action was urged inasmuch as a substantial portion of new wool would be marketed in late August. Australia did not favor such an allocation program but agreed to discuss it in secret meetings in London prior to the regular session of the International Wool Study Group in early October. Regarding those discussions, see the editorial note, p. 223.