Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume XXIX, Part 1, Korea

70. Telegram From the Embassy in Korea to the Department of State¹

Seoul, January 6, 1966, 0935Z.

716. SOFA Negotiations.

1. FonMin this morning told Ambassador that at very high level meeting which President attended ROKG had decided to postpone SOFA signing. Sole reason for decision, according FonMin, is ROKG concern lest consideration of SOFA by Assembly about same time as request for additional troops for Vietnam be exploited by opposition and DRP dissidents so as to jeopardize chances of approval of latter.²

2. After ascertaining that President was party to this decision, Ambassador said it was matter for Korea’s own judgment. He made it clear to FonMin that U.S. could not accept any indication on ROKG’s part that U.S. responsible for delay. FonMin said he had never mentioned January 28 (now widely publicized as proposed date of signing) and if asked why SOFA not being signed then, would say it had never been his date and that certain details remained to be worked out. He might also refer to fact DRP floor leader had recommended March signing.³

Brown

1. Source: National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1964–66, DEF 15–3 KOR S-US. Secret; Limit Distribution. Repeated to the Department of Defense and CINCPAC.
2. In a January 11 meeting the Foreign Minister told Brown that the signing would be postponed because the “time was not ripe for introducing measure to National Assembly prior to President Pak’s SEA trip scheduled to begin about Feb. 7.” Brown also learned prior to that meeting that the Koreans wanted to reopen the negotiations on the labor clause of the agreement and indicated he would try to resolve the problem without creating a major impasse. (Telegram 726 from Seoul, January 13; ibid.)
3. In telegram 1098 from Seoul, March 31, Brown reported that acceptance of the SOFA agreement was in doubt because of increasing Korean demands to renegotiate the criminal jurisdiction article as well as the labor article. Ratification by the National Assembly presented another obstacle because of opposition to some of the agreement’s provisions and the precarious position of the Foreign Minister relative to that body due to his “alleged poor handling of negotiations with US on troop despatch” issue. (Ibid.)