Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, Korea, Volume XV, Part 2

795.00/8–1853

Memorandum by the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for United Nations Affairs (Sandifer) to the Secretary of State¹

confidential

[Washington,] August 18, 1953.

Subject:

• Summary of Korean Negotiations in New York, August 15–17.

At the meetings of the delegations of the 16 nations participating in Korea on August 15 and 16 agreement was reached on two resolutions which were submitted for circulation under the sponsorship of all these delegations with the exception of South Africa, which refused to cosponsor on the ground of lack of interest in the area.

1. The first resolution (Tab A, USUN Telegram 114²) on arrangements for the conference follows substantially the draft approved in the Department, with one major modification: the enumeration of the states participating on the UN side was replaced by a general clause giving all states with armed forces in Korea the right to participate. This formula was agreed upon after Canada insisted on being added to the original listing, Belgium and the Netherlands refused to cosponsor unless included and others reserved their position. Although the present text makes it possible for all states which contributed forces to participate, it is left open to private negotiations to determine which would actually participate.

2. The second resolution (Tab B, USUN Telegram 112³) expresses tribute to the UNC forces in Korea. It has been agreed that this resolution will be taken up last in the Assembly at the insistence of the UK and others who feel that its listing of all UN resolutions will provoke a strong Soviet attack.

3. The third resolution (Tab C, USUN Telegram 113⁴) providing for Soviet participation was developed by Ambassador Lodge and Lloyd. It represents a compromise between the UK view that the Soviets should participate in a round-table conference and our view that they should be invited by the other side since this is a conference of “both sides”. In order to get the UK to agree to the clause “provided the other side desires it”, Ambassador Lodge showed Lloyd your letter of August 13.⁵ Lloyd agreed with the letter, except for the paragraph stressing the “two side” concept, and showed Lodge a formula “drafted by Salisbury after consultation with Churchill“, calling for USSR participation as a member of the UN. The present text is sponsored by the UK, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. Lodge has made it known that the United States will vote for this resolution.

4. A fourth resolution (Tab D),⁶ submitted by Australia and New Zealand, provides for the participation of India.

Ambassador Lodge was unable to head off the introduction of this resolution even though he made it clear that the ROK would not participate if India were included and that if the ROK does not participate, the United States must reserve its position as to participation. Mr. Martin (Canada) and Spender challenged this view claiming that President Rhee cannot be allowed to have a veto on the selection of the participants.

5. Tab E (USUN Telegrams 117, 118, 119⁷) contains three telegrams from USUN reporting on the conversations with the 16 delegations, and indicating the general atmosphere among friendly delegations.

6. We have received through the Swedish Embassy a report on Chou En-lai’s views on the political conference as transmitted by the Swedish Ambassador at Peiping. It indicates that Chou En-lai desires a “roundtable” conference with the following participants: US, USSR, UK, France, Communist China, India, North Korea, ROK, Poland, Burma and Sweden. Decisions would require the agreement of the “parties to the armistice” to be binding. The Conference would consider items in the order specified in Article IV, paragraph 60 of the Armistice Agreement, i.e., withdrawal of foreign forces, peaceful settlement of Korean question, and then “other questions”. He does not desire a discussion of Indo-China to “parallel” the talks on Korea.

7. At Monday’s US Delegation meeting no disagreement was voiced over the US position as presented by Ambassador Lodge. In a perfunctory plenary Monday afternoon the Assembly, without discussion, referred the Korean question to the First Committee.

The First Committee held two meetings Tuesday, August 18. After rejecting by large majorities Soviet motions to hear the representatives of North Korea and Communist China, the Committee heard Ambassador Lodge, followed by France, the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Netherlands, and Belgium. A notable feature of the debate was the general support given by the speakers to Lloyd’s hope that the concept of the “two sides” would not be perpetuated and that India would be invited to participate. The Committee then adjourned until Wednesday afternoon for lack of further speakers.

At the Monday morning meeting the USSR introduced a resolution (Tab F)⁸ calling for a conference with eleven participants (as listed by Chou En-lai) and specifying that conference decisions “will be deemed to have been adopted if they have the consent of the parties which have signed the Armistice Agreement”.

8. When Ambassador Allen saw Pillai in New Delhi, August 15, pursuant to your telegram of August 13⁹ concerning Indian participation in the Conference, he was told that India would not “agitate or canvass for membership”. If the UK or Canada proposed Indian participation, Pillai thought the Government of India would await developments before deciding. Ambassador Allen commented that we may assume that, despite our reasoning, the Government of India will not voluntarily withdraw.

Present tentative indications as to the position of other delegations with regard to Indian participation are that (a) the Asian-African bloc (except for Pakistan) will probably support India’s participation, although they are not overly enthusiastic about the idea; (b) the Latin Americans appear undecided, although there is general sentiment for India’s participation; and (c) Norway and Denmark appear to have decided to vote for India.

1. A marginal notation by Scott indicated that the Secretary of State saw this memorandum on Aug. 19.
2. This telegram, containing the draft resolution submitted as UN document A/L.151/Rev. 1, was not attached to the source text. (795.00/8–1553)
3. This telegram, containing the draft resolution submitted as UN document A/L.154/Rev. 1, was not attached to the source text. (795.00/8–1553)
4. Not attached. (795.00/8–1553)
5. Ante, p. 1492.
6. Not attached; the reference was to UN document A/L.153.
7. These telegrams were not attached to the source text. (795.00/8–1553. and 795.00/8–1653)
8. Not attached; the reference was to UN document A/C.1/L.48.
9. The reference was to telegram 49 to New York, Aug. 13, not printed. (357.AD/8–1353)