Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, United Nations Affairs, Volume III

310.2/12–852

Memorandum of Conversation, by the Director of the Office of Northeast Asian Affairs (Young)

confidential

[Washington,] December 8, 1952.

• Subject:
• Japanese Views on Action in the General Assembly Regarding Japan’s Eligibility for United Nations Membership.

• Participants:
• Mr. Shinichi Kamimura, Minister, Japanese Embassy
• Kenneth T. Young, Jr., Director, Office of Northeast Asian Affairs
• Mr. Richard Herndon, Office of Northeast Asian Affairs

Mr. Kamimura called on me today at his request to tell me that he had informed his Government of the conversation with me on December 5[4?]¹ regarding the same subject, and that the Japanese Foreign Office had immediately replied that it was quite disappointed with what appeared to it to be a change in the United States intention to submit during the current session of the General Assembly a resolution regarding Japan’s eligibility for United Nations membership. Accordingly, the Japanese Foreign Office wished to know the views of the Department of State as to whether or not the Japanese Government should sound out some other government or governments as sponsor for such a resolution. Mr. Kamimura indicated that, since he was not entirely sure that he had accurately reported or fully understood the conversation of December 5[4?] with me and other members of the Department, he had come in today to seek confirmation or clarification of that conversation.

I expressed regret that the conversation on December 5[4?] had covered several complicated and technical aspects of this problem and that it had not left him with a clear understanding of the United States position. Therefore I reiterated briefly that the United States continued to believe that it would be desirable for this session of the General Assembly to express the opinion by a large majority vote that Japan possessed all the necessary qualifications for membership in the United Nations. I again pointed out that there were at least two ways of accomplishing such an expression of opinion—either by means of a single resolution on Japan or by inclusion of an affirmation of Japan’s eligibility in whatever resolution on membership is developed in the Ad Hoc Political Committee. I assured Mr. Kamimura several times that the United States did not change its own intentions to explore or develop this matter within the General Assembly.

He appeared to be fully reassured on this point.

At the same time, I briefly pointed out to Mr. Kamimura that our two governments must always keep in mind the realities of a parliamentary situation in the General Assembly involving some 60 governments, particularly the 55 delegations outside the Soviet bloc. I suggested that the introduction of Japanese eligibility faced three risks on the floor of the committees: (1) a large or sufficient majority might not be found to support the resolution because many delegations might prefer for technical reasons not to raise such an issue at this session; (2) the Soviet delegation might possibly retaliate by introducing a package resolution, omitting Japan, which might bring about a complicated parliamentary relationship between the resolution on Japan and such a package resolution; and (3) such Soviet tactics in any event would complicate the whole membership question which apparently many governments wish to avoid at this time. I carefully explained that I was bringing up such risks merely to point them out and not to suggest that there was any weakening in the intentions of the Department of State with respect to exploring the possibilities of a resolution regarding Japan. I told Mr. Kamimura that the United States delegation in New York already has begun to consult some of the other delegations in hopes that they will not find objections to action in this session regarding Japan.

I then suggested to Mr. Kamimura that in my view it would be inadvisable and premature at this time for Japan to approach another government with a view to its sponsoring the kind of resolution that the government of Japan desires. I explained that consideration of the membership question was just getting under way in the Ad Hoc Political Committee and that the United States delegation was still not in a position to know or estimate clearly the attitudes of a majority of the delegations regarding the question of a resolution on Japan. Therefore I suggested that the Japanese observer in New York maintain close contact with the United States delegation during this exploratory period. Mr. Kamimura indicated his agreement with my statements with regard to the above query of the Foreign Office.

Finally, I handed Mr. Kamimura a letter from me under today’s date (attached is a copy of the letter) summarizing our conversation of December 5[4?]. After reading it, he stated that it was a clear expression of the position I had outlined and that he felt it would be a reassuring response to the telegram from the Foreign Office.

Kenneth T. Young, Jr.

[Attachment—Copy]

The Director of the Office of Northeast Asian Affairs (Young) to the Japanese Minister of Embassy (Kamimura)²

[Washington,]December 8, 1952.

Dear Mr. Kamimura: I have the honor to refer to your letters of October 23 and November 4, 1952, and also to our conversation on December 5[4?], regarding several aspects of Japan’s application for membership in the United Nations.

With respect to your letter of October 23 and our conversation of December 5 [4?], I wish to make the following comments:

1. We are, of course, most anxious to bring about Japan’s membership in the United Nations. We have been studying various ways in which the Assembly might express a favorable opinion on Japan’s qualifications. We are taking full cognizance of the statements which you made to me in our conversation of December 5[4?] to the effect that your Government strongly desires a separate resolution on Japan to be taken up by this session of the General Assembly and passed by

2. In our conversation of December 5[4?], my colleagues and I mentioned that there may be a move in the Ad Hoc Political Committee to recommend the establishment of a special inter-sessional committee to study the entire question of membership in the United Nations between the Seventh and Eighth sessions of the General Assembly. On the assumption that the prevailing sentiment favors such an inter-sessional committee, we pointed out in our conversation that its establishment might complicate the introduction of any separate resolution on Japan’s qualifications and that there might be some risk that such a resolution would neither be adopted nor rejected by the General Assembly but merely referred to the inter-sessional committee for study and consideration. However, I wish to assure you that our delegation in New York has been and is now exploring with other members the possibility of a separate resolution on Japan’s qualifications or, alternatively, the possibility of the inclusion of a paragraph on Japan’s qualifications in the preamble of a resolution establishing an inter-sessional committee.

Regarding the question of non-voting participation for Japan in the General Assembly raised in your letter of November 4, 1952, I wish to confirm hereby the oral, informal understanding in our conversation of December 5[4?], 1952, that this will remain a tentative matter for future study by both governments. We do not propose to take any steps at this session of the General Assembly on this matter, but will continue to consider the draft formula which you submitted with your letter of November 4, 1952, as an “informal, tentative draft”.³

I wish again to assure you that the United States delegation in New York is carefully considering the whole problem of Japan’s membership in the United Nations and is in constant touch with the Department. May I suggest that the Japanese observer in New York keep in close contact with the United States delegation on the developments of the membership question. I would appreciate it if you would regard this letter as confidential.

Sincerely yours,

Kenneth T. Young, Jr.

1. No record of any Young–Kamimura conversation on Dec. 5 has been found in the Department of State files.
2. Drafted by Young and Paul W. Jones of the Office of UN Political and Security Affairs.
3. See p. 869.