Lot 55D128: Black Book, Tab 33: Telegram
The Commander in Chief, United Nations Command (Ridgway) to the Joint Chiefs of Staff
operational immediate
C–50076. 1. Admiral Joy will present to the Communist Liaison Officer at 0900K 2 Sep, the fol reply to Gen Nam IPs ltr of 30 Aug1 regarding alleged atk on Communist pers at Chong-Dam-Dong and firing into Pan Mun Jom area:
“1. This acknowledges receipt of your ltr of 30 Aug alleging:
- (a)
- An atk on your pers at Chong-Dam-Dong at 300600 Aug by 10 or more armed men and:
- (b)
- Firing in the Pan Mun Jom area at 300610 Aug.
“2. It is noted that you delayed more than 11 hours in reporting the incidents despite the fact that there is continuous telephone comm between our Hq.
“3. It is noted, too, that you did not rqst a representative of the United Nations comd to be present at any investigation which may have been made of these incidents.
“4. Since receipt of your report I have caused a thorough investigation to be made among all elements of the United Nations comd which could under any circumstances have been in a psn to participate in these alleged incidents. That investigation has established that no trps of the United Nations comd were west of the road running southward from Wan-Dang through Oryongpo-Songhyon-Ni Kwangmyon-Ni-Panqchuk-Tong on the day alleged. Thus, on the day alleged, none were nearer than 2500 yards from Pan Mun Jom and 500 yards from Chong-Dam-Dong.
“5. My ltr of 22 Aug2 made ref to the partisan activity which you have acknowledged exists within the neutral zone. The existence of such activity is not surprising. It is to be expected that residents of the area would be restive under an oppressive occupation. Kaesong is converted into a relative haven for their activities. What is surprising is that you should protest to the United Nations Comd fol every manifestation of minor disturbance in the neutral zone. Surely you recognize that the status of mil occupation carries with it the responsibility for the preservation of order within the area. Why then do you file protests with the United Nations Comd every time a shot is fired in the zone or a group of irregulars atks 1 of your police units?
[Page 873]“6. If the alleged incidents of 30 Aug actually occurred, it is reasonable to assume that they were perpetuated by the same group of irregulars that was involved in the incident of 19 Aug. If so, there is a good possibility that this band has been operating within the zone continuously since about 15 Aug. The agreement concerning the neutral zone does not deprive you of the capability of dealing effectively with groups of this size. Why then do you continuously complain to the United Nations Comd concerning the incidents which transpire within the zone?
“7. I can only conclude that your protests are not motivated by a genuine desire to maintain the neutrality of the Kaesong area. This neutral area was supposedly established in order to provide conditions favorable to the armistice talks. As in the case of the fabricated bombing of the conference site on 22 Aug, you are evidently using your mil occupation of the neutral zone to create conditions which tend to prevent resumption of the armistice talks.”
2. The above reply will be released to the press here at the same hour.3
- Not printed, but see the memorandum of conversation by Mr. Lockhart, August 31, p. 868.↩
- See footnote 1 to telegram C–69262, p. 845.↩
- On September 4, General Ridgway forwarded to the Joint Chiefs of Staff the texts of three communications from the Communist delegation rejecting the explanations given by the United Nations Command in its letters of August 22 and September 2 concerning the alleged violations in the Kaesong neutral area. In each case, General Ridgway suggested that a brief reply be made by Admiral Joy rejecting, in turn, the reiterated charges made by the Communist side. (Telegrams C–50183, C–50184, C–50185, September 4, from Tokyo; Black Book, Tabs 38, 39, 40)↩