김용식이 대통령실에게 보내는 서한
REPERBLIC OF KOREA
KOREAN MISSION IN JAPAN
KOREAN MISSION IN JAPAN
Tokyo, October 4, 1956
No.61
Excellency:
Through my meeting with Foreign Minister Shigemitsu last Monday (on which I already reported by cable) I learned definitely that Japan is now very much anxious to settle the detainee issue in order to have an early release of Japanese fishermen now at Pusan. I did not reply directly to Shigemitsu's remark in this regard, instead I told him that Japan should withdraw the alleged property calims without delay.
On the detainee issue Shigemitsu attempted to get my commitment to the effect that release of Korean detainees from OMURA Camp, even if carried out, would not be used as a precedent in the future. I refused to give such commitment and press Japan to show more sincerity on all other outstanding problems.
As I mentioned several times, the US-Japanese relations are going through delicate change, since the start of the Russo-Japanese talks. Therefore, if we successfully obtain some understanding of our stand against Japan from the US side, we can convince the US as to the justifiability of our property claims to Japan.
The US side already made it clear, in the form of a memorandum, that the US takes the view that Japan has no right to her former property in Korea and also indicated that as for our property claims to Japan, separate arrangements. should be made His Excellency President Syngman Rhee between the two parties concerned. If the Government approves it, I can have Japan accept the US interpretation on the property claims issue in accordance with the said memorandum with assistance from Ambassador Allison here. (I already reported by cable last week that Ambassador Allison believes Japan will publicize its acceptance of the US interpretation)
It will be necessary in the meantime for us to prepare detailed itemization of our claims to Japan with sufficient reasoning. It will be particularly helpful in convincing the US side as to the propriety of each item of claims.
I am enclosing here memoranda containing the gist of my conversation with Ambassador Allison and Foreign Minister Shigemitsu during the past week.
With sentiments of loyalty and esteem, I remain,
Most respectfully,
Enclosures: Two (2) memoranda
Following is the gist of my conversation with Foreign Minister Shigemitsu on Monday, October 1. 1956
By Yongshik Kim
I called on Foreign Minister Shigemitsu Monday, October 1, afternoon and talked for about 70 minutes. Foreign Office adviser, Ambassador Sawada, was also present at the meeting.
Mr. Shigemitsu told me that he wanted to settle the detainee issue before winter came. I told him immediately that reponsibility for delay in settling the issue rested solely with the Japanese side, since it failed to carry out its commitment made in April, this year.
At this point Amb. Sawada said that the Justice Ministry was concerned because it might make a precedent in future, if Korean detainees were released in accordance with said commitment. I insisted that no Korean resident who entered Japan prior to the end of World War II should be detained. Shigemitsu then said that though it is true that the Justice Ministry is reluctant to the release of Korean detainee, he would try to make them implement the agreed formula.
Taking this opportunity, I told them that the main obstaclesin the way of resumption of the suspended talks are alleged property claims and Kubota statement. I asked the what was the real intention of Japan in not withdrawing them. Shigemitsu replied that Japan is ready to compromise on all the outstanding problems. I asked him if I was correct in understanding that Japan would withdraw the property claims, to which Shigemitsu said that he could not make any commitment until the talks were resumed, implying that the withdrawal of the property claims would be considered after the resumption of the talks.
I then told them that during the past four years enough talks had been exchanged and the biggest stumbling-block was the property claims and it was futile to continue the talks unless Japan withdraws them. Shigemitsu at this point stated that he must discuss the matter with the Finance Minister before making any commitment in this regard.
I told Shigemitsu that while I was in Seoul, all our p-eople thought Japan lacked sincerity, because she failed to withdraw unfounded property claims. I said, if Japan had any intention to show spirit of a good neighbor, she should withdraw the property claims without delay. Shigemitsu again said that his Government was ready to compromise.
I then touched on the problem concerning Article 4 of the San Francisco peace treaty, pointing out that Japan had no claim to property in Korea. Shigemitsu again said that if the detainee issue was settled, the atmosphere between the two countries would be improved and would turn in favor of settling other pending problems.
Arguments were exchanged on this point, however, I made no mention of US State Department note containing US interpretation on the issue. Shigemitsu then touched on the trade problem between Korea and Japan, saying that trade relations need improvement. I said that Korea is now buying more from Japan than Japan from Korea, including ICA purchases, and if Japan wanted improvement of trade relations, she should increase her purchases from Korea.
I then said that Japan should prevent departure of the 48 Koreans in question for North Korea. Though he tried to explain legal difficulty to comply with our request, I made it clear to him that our country was definitely against any sort of contact between Japan and Communists in north Korea. Lastly, Shigemitsu said treat the settlement of the detainee issue should be reached without delay. I replied that Japan should first read just difference of opinions among Ministries concerned and also Japan should promptly withdraw the property claims.
-End-
Following is the gist of my conversation with the US Ambassador here, Mr. John M. Allison. on September 28. 1956
By YongShik Kim
I met Ambassador Allison Friday afternoon (September 28, 1956) and talked with me on the property claims issue.
Referring to the US State Department note of April 29, 1952 concerning the interpretation on the property claims issue which was sent to our Embassy in Washington, I asked Mr. Allison what was his view in this regard. I also requested his support of our stand regarding our property claims against Japan.
Ambassador Allison replied that for the past three years he had been advising the Japanese Government to withdraw the alleged property claims along the line of the said US note. He added that the note was definitely giving Korea a bargaining point and that he believed that there was a good chance for Japan to accept the note and publicize its acceptance.
-End-
Excellency:
Through my meeting with Foreign Minister Shigemitsu last Monday (on which I already reported by cable) I learned definitely that Japan is now very much anxious to settle the detainee issue in order to have an early release of Japanese fishermen now at Pusan. I did not reply directly to Shigemitsu's remark in this regard, instead I told him that Japan should withdraw the alleged property calims without delay.
On the detainee issue Shigemitsu attempted to get my commitment to the effect that release of Korean detainees from OMURA Camp, even if carried out, would not be used as a precedent in the future. I refused to give such commitment and press Japan to show more sincerity on all other outstanding problems.
As I mentioned several times, the US-Japanese relations are going through delicate change, since the start of the Russo-Japanese talks. Therefore, if we successfully obtain some understanding of our stand against Japan from the US side, we can convince the US as to the justifiability of our property claims to Japan.
The US side already made it clear, in the form of a memorandum, that the US takes the view that Japan has no right to her former property in Korea and also indicated that as for our property claims to Japan, separate arrangements. should be made His Excellency President Syngman Rhee between the two parties concerned. If the Government approves it, I can have Japan accept the US interpretation on the property claims issue in accordance with the said memorandum with assistance from Ambassador Allison here. (I already reported by cable last week that Ambassador Allison believes Japan will publicize its acceptance of the US interpretation)
It will be necessary in the meantime for us to prepare detailed itemization of our claims to Japan with sufficient reasoning. It will be particularly helpful in convincing the US side as to the propriety of each item of claims.
I am enclosing here memoranda containing the gist of my conversation with Ambassador Allison and Foreign Minister Shigemitsu during the past week.
With sentiments of loyalty and esteem, I remain,
Most respectfully,
Enclosures: Two (2) memoranda
Following is the gist of my conversation with Foreign Minister Shigemitsu on Monday, October 1. 1956
By Yongshik Kim
I called on Foreign Minister Shigemitsu Monday, October 1, afternoon and talked for about 70 minutes. Foreign Office adviser, Ambassador Sawada, was also present at the meeting.
Mr. Shigemitsu told me that he wanted to settle the detainee issue before winter came. I told him immediately that reponsibility for delay in settling the issue rested solely with the Japanese side, since it failed to carry out its commitment made in April, this year.
At this point Amb. Sawada said that the Justice Ministry was concerned because it might make a precedent in future, if Korean detainees were released in accordance with said commitment. I insisted that no Korean resident who entered Japan prior to the end of World War II should be detained. Shigemitsu then said that though it is true that the Justice Ministry is reluctant to the release of Korean detainee, he would try to make them implement the agreed formula.
Taking this opportunity, I told them that the main obstaclesin the way of resumption of the suspended talks are alleged property claims and Kubota statement. I asked the what was the real intention of Japan in not withdrawing them. Shigemitsu replied that Japan is ready to compromise on all the outstanding problems. I asked him if I was correct in understanding that Japan would withdraw the property claims, to which Shigemitsu said that he could not make any commitment until the talks were resumed, implying that the withdrawal of the property claims would be considered after the resumption of the talks.
I then told them that during the past four years enough talks had been exchanged and the biggest stumbling-block was the property claims and it was futile to continue the talks unless Japan withdraws them. Shigemitsu at this point stated that he must discuss the matter with the Finance Minister before making any commitment in this regard.
I told Shigemitsu that while I was in Seoul, all our p-eople thought Japan lacked sincerity, because she failed to withdraw unfounded property claims. I said, if Japan had any intention to show spirit of a good neighbor, she should withdraw the property claims without delay. Shigemitsu again said that his Government was ready to compromise.
I then touched on the problem concerning Article 4 of the San Francisco peace treaty, pointing out that Japan had no claim to property in Korea. Shigemitsu again said that if the detainee issue was settled, the atmosphere between the two countries would be improved and would turn in favor of settling other pending problems.
Arguments were exchanged on this point, however, I made no mention of US State Department note containing US interpretation on the issue. Shigemitsu then touched on the trade problem between Korea and Japan, saying that trade relations need improvement. I said that Korea is now buying more from Japan than Japan from Korea, including ICA purchases, and if Japan wanted improvement of trade relations, she should increase her purchases from Korea.
I then said that Japan should prevent departure of the 48 Koreans in question for North Korea. Though he tried to explain legal difficulty to comply with our request, I made it clear to him that our country was definitely against any sort of contact between Japan and Communists in north Korea. Lastly, Shigemitsu said treat the settlement of the detainee issue should be reached without delay. I replied that Japan should first read just difference of opinions among Ministries concerned and also Japan should promptly withdraw the property claims.
-End-
Following is the gist of my conversation with the US Ambassador here, Mr. John M. Allison. on September 28. 1956
By YongShik Kim
I met Ambassador Allison Friday afternoon (September 28, 1956) and talked with me on the property claims issue.
Referring to the US State Department note of April 29, 1952 concerning the interpretation on the property claims issue which was sent to our Embassy in Washington, I asked Mr. Allison what was his view in this regard. I also requested his support of our stand regarding our property claims against Japan.
Ambassador Allison replied that for the past three years he had been advising the Japanese Government to withdraw the alleged property claims along the line of the said US note. He added that the note was definitely giving Korea a bargaining point and that he believed that there was a good chance for Japan to accept the note and publicize its acceptance.
-End-
색인어
- 이름
- Shigemitsu, Shigemitsu, Allison, Allison, Allison, Shigemitsu, Shigemitsu, Shigemitsu, Sawada, Shigemitsu, Sawada, Shigemitsu, Kubota, Shigemitsu, Shigemitsu, Shigemitsu, Shigemitsu, Shigemitsu, Shigemitsu, Shigemitsu, Shigemitsu, John M. Allison, Allison, Allison, Allison
- 지명
- Japan, Pusan, Japan, OMURA Camp, Japan, Japan, US, Japan, the US, Japan, Korea, Japan, Japan, Japan, Japan, Japan, Japan, Japan, Japan, Japan, Seoul, Japan, Japan, Japan, Korea, Korea, Japan, Korea, Japan, Japan, Korea, Japan, Korea, Japan, North Korea, Japan, north Korea, Japan, Japan, Washington, Japan, Korea, Japan
- 관서
- the Justice Ministry, the Justice Ministry, Japanese Government
- 문서
- US State Department note, US State Department note, US note
- 기타
- the San Francisco peace treaty
