Office of the Historian

Lot 54 D 423

Memorandum Prepared in the Department of State

[Washington,] May 3, 1951.

Agenda

i. japanese peace treaty

1. Cable to U.S. embassies of countries from which we are awaiting comments on our draft of March 1951.

2. Reply to Canada note.1

3. Consider within Department further the matters left open with the U.K. Delegation, i.e.:

a.
Formula for Formosa.
b.
Formula for Congo Basin Treaty.
c.
Formula for services as reparation to occupied and damaged countries.
d.
Can signature of “China” be avoided at the initial signing, leaving the Japanese to deal with “China” as it sees fit?
e.
Status of Korea on initial signing.
f.
Shall U.S.–U.K. make a joint proposal on basis of new agreed text?

4. Consider schedule for final wind-up with U.K. after other government comments received. Presumably this would be in London the latter part of May or the first of June, the time to be coordinated with the Australian-New Zealand Treaty negotiations.

5. Consider place of signing conference.

6. Discuss further with Foreign Relations Committee, particularly in relation to:

a.
China adherence.
b.
Korea adherence.
c.
Treatment of Formosa.
d.
Treatment of Sakhalin and Kurile Islands.
e.
Treatment of Ryukyus.
f.
Place of signing.

[Here follows section II, which deals with the proposed trilateral pact with Australia and New Zealand. It is printed on page 214.]

iii. u.s.–japan security pact

a. Put this in final form, taking into account the most recent views of the JCS and Japan.

b. Clear with Foreign Relations Committee.

iv. administrative agreement with japan for garrisoning

a. Push Pentagon on this subject with view to getting an early formulation of their views. In this connection consider whether or not some general formula cannot be found to avoid a detailed specification of all facilities which might be desired.

b. Plan for clearance with Japanese, perhaps by Allison in Tokyo. When?

v. u.s.-japanese fishing treaty

a. How and when shall this be handled?

  1. Of May 1, not printed. (694.001/5–151) The United States reply of May 8 is not printed. (694.001/5–151)↩