795.00/4–1451
Memorandum of Conversation, by the Assistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs (Rusk)
Subject: Australian Suggestions with Respect to Korea
| Participants: | The Australian Ambassador, Mr. Makin |
| Mr. Colin Moodie, Counselor, Australian Embassy | |
| FE—Mr. Rusk | |
| BNA—Mr. Shullaw |
The Australian Ambassador, Mr. Makin, called on me today at his request to inquire whether we were able to give any further reactions to Mr. Spender’s suggestions concerning the question of Korea which had been brought to the attention of Mr. Merchant and myself earlier in the week. I told the Ambassador that unfortunately the press of work during the past few days had prevented me from giving the consideration I wished to give to Mr. Spender’s message.1
The Ambassador inquired whether we still intended to have the President make a report to the United Nations for the Unified Command on objectives in Korea. I said that we planned to give the matter further consideration in the light of recent developments and that we had an open mind concerning the form and content of such a statement. Mr. Makin remarked that his government found itself in general agreement with the proposal of the United Kingdom respecting a statement to be made by the countries making contributions in Korea. He added that in the opinion of his government Arab-Asian support, and particularly the support of India, was important if it were to serve a useful purpose. The Ambassador said that Australia had a reasonable claim to participate in negotiations which might follow for a settlement of the Korean question but that it was not prepared to push the point if it were an obstacle to agreement.
I told the Ambassador that we would have difficulty in accepting a proposal which would appear to set up something comparable to a Council of Foreign Ministers for the purpose of settling Far Eastern questions. The inclusion of India would make it even more difficult for us.
I took advantage of the opportunity to tell the Ambassador that in some quarters it was being stated that the relief of General MacArthur increased the chances of a peaceful settlement in Korea. I remarked that this might indicate a misunderstanding of the situation. The relief of General MacArthur did not indicate any change in United States policy. Furthermore the Chinese Communists have given no indication of a willingness to negotiate a peaceful settlement but instead are building up for another offensive, this despite the fact that it is obvious to them that they could get a negotiated settlement on the basis of a cease-fire in the vicinity of the 38th parallel.2
- The views of Australian Foreign Minister Percy Spender had been conveyed to Mr. Merchant on April 9; they are covered in the memorandum of conversation by Mr. Rusk of April 10, p. 324.↩
- On April 15, in remarks delivered on the NBC television program “Battle Report”, Mr. Rusk outlined the choices facing the United Nations in Korea. He rejected both withdrawal and expansion of the hostilities and stated that the United Nations aimed at maintaining peace and security without a general war. He went on to say that peace could only come in Korea when the Communists gave up their aggressive purposes, which they showed no sign of yet doing. (Department of State Bulletin, April 23, 1951, p. 655)↩