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

320/1–1354: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Embassy in the United Kingdom¹

secret
priority

Washington, January 14, 1954—6:56 p.m.

3645. We are disturbed by paragraph 2 urtel 2978² to effect that UK will agree to Indian proposal convene GA February 9 on basis understanding POWs will be returned January 23. Scott made same points to Murphy today.

1. Reports from Young in Munsan-Ni indicate Communists are engaging in war of nerves in Panmunjom which is having its effect upon Indians and even Swiss and Swedes and which could produce new obstacles to release of POWs. We think that if Indians knew they could now count on GA meeting on February 9 they might possibly be tempted to yield in face of heavy and increasing Communist pressure and take steps which would increase complications surrounding return POWs January 23. We wish reduce to absolute minimum any possibility prisoners will not resume civilian status January 23. Consequently we cannot give any commitments regarding reconvening GA prior to their release and strongly hope UK would take same position.

2. Furthermore GA when it meets will presumably also take up status negotiations for Korean political conference. We do not believe decision at this time to resume GA session February 9 would be helpful to objectives of group of sixteen. Indeed, from point of view political conference, we have some apprehensions about GA session at all in next few weeks. We must frankly say we foresee prospect of embarrassing divergencies arising between US and UK and others in group of sixteen as a result of clever Indian or Communist “compromise” proposals on composition and other aspects of Korean political conference. We do not relish this prospect, having in mind our common difficulties on subject in GA last August. It would be particularly harmful to run risk of a public show of dissension at GA during Berlin conference if that should then be in session.

3. We do not therefore agree with UK line implicit urtel 2978 that discussion might as well come February 9 as at any other time. We see no reason whatever on basis our past experience to believe support of Indian position on this matter of procedure will favorably influence Indian presentation before GA. On contrary we think force of Indian aspersions against UNC position on POW issue will be lessened if that subject debated sometime after prisoners have been released, and not while mutual recriminations over what has happened and what should have happened on January 23 are fresh in everyone’s mind. Nor do we believe support of Indian position will have appreciable effect in influencing Arab-Asian opinion at GA or help to assure majority vote.

Please make these points at Foreign Office.³ They appear to us to justify fully reply we plan make Madame Pandit’s request for reconvening GA, copy being repeated you in separate telegram. In any event we think it most desirable avoid any definite commitment to Indians or answer to their request prior to January 23.

Dulles

1. This telegram was drafted by Popper, cleared by Drumright, Murphy, Key, McClurkin, and Ward P. Allen. It was repeated to Paris as 2516, to Munsan-ni as 200, to Seoul as 595, to New Delhi as 830, to USUN as 327, and to Tokyo as 1651 with instructions to pass CINCUNC.
2. Not printed. (320/1–1354)
3. In telegram 3014, Jan. 15, from London, Butterworth reported that the arguments embodied in paragraphs 1–3 of telegram 3645 to London were presented thoroughly and energetically to the Foreign Office on Jan. 15. (320/1–1554)