795.00/5–2654: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Embassy in Korea1

secret

956. Seoul’s 12472 and 12493 repeated Geneva 127 and 129 and Tokyo 739 and 741. Tokyo pass CINCUNC. From the Secretary. Re Mutual Defense Treaty.

At appropriate time convey following to President Rhee as view of Secretary concerning possible alternative Defense Treaty ROK.

Japanese Treaty imposes no obligation on US and gives Japan no rights. Treaty gives US rights dispose US forces in and about Japan, utilize these forces for specified purposes and veto any proposed grant by Japan of base, maneuver or transit rights to military forces of any [Page 1800] third power. Termination clause Japanese Treaty continues Treaty until both parties agree other satisfactory individual or collective security arrangements have come into force. Effect this termination clause is to make it impossible for Japan unilaterally to cancel rights granted US by Treaty. Therefore termination clause discriminates against Japan in contrast to termination clause of treaties with Australia, New Zealand and Philippines on which termination clause of Korean Treaty is modeled.

I do not believe President should recommend to Senate and I believe Senate would not grant termination clause which would make it impossible for US ever terminate its obligations under a treaty without consent other party. I know of no treaty by which US has thus bound itself.

For your information. Defense has received Seoul’s 12134 repeated Tokyo 721 together with CINCUNC’s opinion in C 681275 would be highly desirable, prior to or concurrently with bringing treaty into effect, obtain reaffirmation ROK commitment leave forces under UNC. Desire Embassy comments on probable Rhee reaction such request and political desirability making it at this time.

Dulles
  1. The substantive part of this telegram, drafted by McClurkin and repeated to Geneva as telegram Tosec 280 and to Tokyo as telegram 2637, was a paraphrase of a memorandum by Dulles to Drumright, May 26, 1954, not printed. (795.00/5–2654)
  2. According to telegram 1247, May 26, the following exchange took place in the course of a discussion between Dean and Rhee concerning the Geneva Conference:

    “President next turned to mutual defense treaty (please see Embassy telegram 95 to Geneva, 1204 to Department, 712 to Tokyo, May 19) informing me of message from ROK Chargé d’Affaires Washington who said State Department preparations now completed for exchange ratifications and promulgation. In this connection Rhee again asked whether it would be possible modify text in two particulars. First a termination clause similar to US–Japan treaty (I assume Article IV although Rhee did not specify) and second ‘an aggressor clause’ which would cover US assistance in ROK military action to eject Communist aggressors from north. After considerable conversation reminiscent Rhee’s efforts obtain secret letter from Dean, Rhee agreed not insist now on second modification. But he declared Korea must have improved termination clause lack of which he described as discrimination.

    “I pointed out any modifications or amendment of treaty would have to follow same Washington procedure as treaty itself including Senate approval and that delay probably until next session would be caused by attempt to modify present already approved text. Also said executive of course not in position guarantee Senate approval.

    Rhee then said he desired to have statement from State Department approving desire termination provision and agreeing to recommend such provision to Senate. Rhee asked if I would give him such letter and if not would I request one from Secretary Dulles. Whether Rhee plans instruct Chargé d’Affaires to defer exchange ratifications until this point clarified remains to be seen.

    “I gave Rhee no encouragement Secretary would accept different termination clause, much less Rhee’s proposed aggressor clause.” (795.00/5–2654)

    For the full text of telegram 1247 along with that of telegram 95 from Seoul to Geneva, referred to, see vol. xvi, pp. 319 and 284, respectively.

  3. In telegram 1249 from Seoul, May 26, Briggs suggested that the Department of State could interpret Rhee’s remarks concerning the Mutual Defense Treaty reported in telegram 1247 from Seoul as a basis for further postponement of the exchange of ratifications of the treaty. (795.00/5–2654)
  4. In telegram 1213 from Seoul, May 20, Dean noted that once the Mutual Defense Treaty came into effect, Rhee would not be obligated to leave his forces under UN Command. (795B.5/5–2054)
  5. Not printed.