TEXT OF THE US MEMORANDUM ON THE INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 4(b) OF THE PEACE TREATY WITH JAPAN
The Charge d'Affaires ad Interim of the United States of America presents his compliments to His Excellency the Minister of Foreign Affairs and has the honor to transmit the following statement or the position of the Government of the United States on the interpretation of Article 4 of the Treaty of Peace with Japan with respect to settlement of claims between the Republic of Korea and Japan.
In a note to the Ambassador of Korea of April 29, 1952, the Department of State interpreted Article 4 of the Japanese Peace Treaty as follows:
The United States is of the opinion that by virtue of Article 4 (b) of the Treaty of Peace with Japan and the relevant directives and acts of the United States Military Government in Korea, all right, title and interest of Japan and of' Japanese nationals in property within the jurisdiction of the Republic of Korea have been divested. Accordingly, in the opinion of the United States, valid claim to such assets or to an interest therein cannot be asserted by Japan. The disposition or such assets, which Japan has recognized as valid in Article 4 (b) of the Treaty, is relevant, however, in the opinion of the United States, in the consideration of the arrangements contemplated by Article 4 (a) of the Treaty."
The United States Government remains of the opinion expressed above. It may be useful to explain reasoning behind that opinion and the pertinent articles of the Peace Treaty.
Japanese properties in that part of Korea within the jurisdictiion of the United States military government were vested and thereafter transfered to the Republic of Korea because of establishment of an independent state in Korea appeared to require a clean and absolute break of the ties to Japan. lt was the intention of the vesting decree and the transfer agreement to put the Korean authorities in full control of the properties, and while from the juridical point of view it is recognized that a distinction is possible between vestiong title and the question of compensation, claims by Japan to compensation are regarded by the United States Government, in the circumstances as incompatible With the language rationals and intent of the vesting decree. the transfer agreement, and Article 4 (b) of the Peace Treaty.
When it came to Korean claims against Japan and Japanese nationals, the drafters of the Peace Treaty did not consider that they had before them either sufficient facts or sufficient analysis of applicable legal theories to lay down a solution in the Treaty, although it was obvious that such claims had already been met to some degree by the vesting of Japanese-owned property in Korea. Accordingly, as in the case of other former Japanese territories, they left these question entirely to arrangements to be made by the countries concerned. They contemplated that in the special arrangements referred to in Article 4 (a) the parties would take into account the fact that Japanese-owned properties in Korea had been vested - hence the statement in the above opinion that such disposition was "relevant" in the consideration of the special arrangements. Thus the special arrangements between Korea and Japan would encompass determination of the extent to which Korean claims against Japan should be considered to be extinguished or satisfied by virtue of the take-over by the Korean Government of Japanese assets in Korea.
It was appropriate, it is believed, for the United States to give the interpretation set forth in the Department of State's note of April 29, 1952, to the Korean Ambassador because of the responsibility of the United States for the treaty provisions; but it does not appear appropriate for the United States to express opinions as to just how the disposition of Japanese properties in Korea is to be taken into account by the parties in entering into the special arrangements contemplated by the Treaty, The special arrangements are a matter between the two governments concerned, and such a determination can only be made by the parties themselves or by an authority which might be charged by them with doing so and after full examination of the facts and applicable legal theories which the parties might present.
Embassy of the United States of America, Seoul, December 31, 1957,