276. Memorandum of Conversation0
SUBJECT
- Call by Korean Foreign Minister Cho
PARTICIPANTS
- Dr. Cho Chong-hwan, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Republic of Korea
- Mr. Pyo Wook Han, Minister, Embassy of Korea
- Mr. Walter S. Robertson, Assistant Secretary
- Mr. David M. Bane, Director, Office of Northeast Asian Affairs
Foreign Minister Cho expressed his sorrow over the death of Secretary Dulles1 and the loss that his passing represented to the free world. He said he particularly wished to express his regret over Mr. Robertson’s departure from this Government2 and to convey his appreciation for all that Mr. Robertson had done for Korea. He emphasized President Rhee’s appreciation of Mr. Robertson’s strong convictions and firm stand against Communism. Mr. Robertson said that he greatly valued President Rhee’s opinion and asked Dr. Cho to give the President his warm regards. If President Rhee were less stalwart, he said, there would not be a Korea today. Korea’s cause is the cause of the free world and Korea is one of the stalwart defenders of the free world. Dr. Cho said he wished to assure Mr. Robertson that Korea would remain the true and faithful ally of the United States and would stand by it in time of need. Dr. Cho said that although Mr. Robertson was leaving his important post he was sure that Mr. Robertson’s influence would remain and that he would continue to work for the free world. Korea, he said, would continue to count on him as a strong friend. Mr. Robertson emphasized that Korea had many friends in the United States.
While emphasizing that he had no desire to interfere in the internal affairs of the Korean Government but speaking as a true friend of Korea and as one who appreciates Korea’s stalwart role in the free world’s fight against Communism, Mr. Robertson said he felt compelled to say that the thing that has embarrassed us most and embarrasses us today has been the Korean Government’s action to close the leading opposition newspaper, the “Kyonghyang Sinmun”. He said that he was working [Page 557] at that moment on an answer to a letter3 from a prominent Senator who had expressed his strong concern over the closure of this paper. It is difficult for us, however, to explain or defend this action. In the United States freedom of the press is one of the foundation stones of our democracy. He said that both Ambassador Yang and Minister Han had given us the Korean Government’s reasons for taking this action. Nevertheless, we could not explain or defend this action since it puts Korea in the position of doing the very thing which Korea is fighting against. Korea has developed, Mr. Robertson said, a degree of democracy not exceeded by any Asian nation. However, this action cancels out much of what Korea stands for in the eyes of its friends. Mr. Robertson said he regretted, therefore, that he could neither explain nor defend this action in the letter he was presently writing. He said that he had hoped that the Korean Government would have taken some action to remove the basis of this criticism by this time.
Foreign Minister Cho said he appreciated the friendly advice tendered by Mr. Robertson and he was sorry to cause a friend concern. He said that he feared that the Korean Government’s action in this case was misunderstood. He said that while Korea had made remarkable progress in democracy and while it was a great admirer of the traditions of the United States, we must bear in mind that it had only had ten years of democracy and those years had been interrupted by the Korean conflict. The Korean Government, he said, has tried its best to preserve the freedom of the press in Korea to the maximum extent possible and he expressed the hope that it could perfect a completely free system in time. He said that he hoped the United States would also understand the security situation confronting the Korean Government and the problems posed by the intensification in Communist infiltration and subversive activities. He said the Government had tried hard to persuade the “Kyonghyang Sinmun” to avoid the willful publication of false information in its paper to the detriment of the Korean Government. The Communists, he said, exploited falsehoods and distortions appearing in the opposition press. Mr. Robertson pointed out that the Korean opposition, however, was not Communist. He emphasized that the closure of the “Kyonghyang Sinmun” moreover was the type situation that the Communist propagandists could exploit effectively since it was difficult for Korea’s friends to defend the Korean Government’s action. Further-more, it was difficult for us to understand why the leading opposition paper, which was supported by the Seoul Catholic diocese, was closed as representing a threat to the Government since the Government party had won a large majority in the free elections held last year. He pointed out that the closure action provided ammunition to those in Congress [Page 558] opposed to our aid program for Korea and thereby complicates our problem of obtaining the necessary funds to continue the fight against Communism. He emphasized again that we could not adequately defend this action before Congress because it runs counter to what Korea stands for. To the many friends of Korea in the United States this action is out of character.
Minister Han said that perhaps he and Ambassador Yang had failed to make their Government’s position clear. He said that the news-paper had been closed not because it had engaged in legitimate criticism of the Korean Government but because it had openly defied the Government and had willfully sought to falsify information with the aim of causing the people to lose confidence in their Government. In this connection, Minister Han said that Korea had applied for membership in the International Press Institute (IPI) and that six Korean press representatives had attended the recent meeting in Germany at the invitation of the Institute. While recognizing that there were shortcomings in the press situation in Korea, the IPI accepted the fact that there was considerable freedom of the press in Korea. Mr. Robertson said that there had previously been complete freedom of the press in Korea. However, we could not possibly explain to Congress the Korean Government action in closing the leading opposition paper. Mr. Robertson said that he found it difficult to understand the distinction between “legitimate criticism” and “defiance” of the Korean Government in this instance, and he asked who determined what was “legitimate criticism”. He stated that no political party of Government is immune to criticism; the important thing, however, is that the criticism be used constructively. He pointed out that distortions and false information appear in our press as well as in the press of every democracy. This is a price we pay for freedom of the press. However, we feel strongly that the closure of a newspaper is not the way to deal with press abuses. The extent and intensity of reaction in the United States to the closure, which had had wave-like proportions, was due to the fact that this occurred in an operating democracy in Asia and in a country in which we considered democracy to have made remarkable progress. Such an action would have only caused a ripple, he said, in a country which did not know democracy. He concluded by saying that he had not heard a single one of Korea’s many friends in the United States defend the closure action which is a reflection of our deep concern. Dr. Cho said he would probably not be able to understand this action either if he were an American in view of the difference in the two countries’ background and the fact that Korea was not a fully developed democracy.
- Source: Department of State, FE Files: Lot 61 D 6, MC Korea, 1959. Confidential. Drafted on June 12 by Bane.↩
- Dulles resigned as Secretary of State on April 15 and died on May 24. He was succeeded by Under Secretary of State Herter.↩
- Robertson resigned as Assistant Secretary on June 30. He was succeeded on July 1 by J. Graham Parsons.↩
- Not further identified.↩