January 14,1959

No.256
TO:His excellency The president
FROM:Tai Ha Yiu
At the invitation of Chief Japanese Delegate Sawada, I had lunch with him on the afternoon of the 14th at which time we naturally: discussed our mutual problems.
Ambassador Sawada told me of his meeting with Prime Minister Kishi the other evening and of the opinion exchanged between them on Korea -Japan problems. He reiterated the determination of the Prime Minister to settle our problems and of the hope Kishi expressed at their meeting that if it were at all possible he would like to settle the problems by his own hand. They also discussed the advisability of holding talks previous to the opening of the overall conference on the 26th. The Prime Minister could not be more sincere, Sawada said.
According to Amb. Sawada,the indication at present is that the Japanese government will return to Korea those art objects in its possession and in the possession of its various agencies. As to the vessels issue, if Korea accepts Japan 's stand to return only the vessels of Korean registry, it would be done. Sawada asked that we expert our efforts to settle the problems along the above lines as it was practically impossible for him to go any further.
With regard to the fisheries issue, Mr. Sawada again referred to the two suggestion he had made on several occasions. (1. To limit the number of vessels and tonnage of catch. 2. To withdraw the Line to some degree) He asked that no political significance be attached to the Line as the term Peace Line implies but that a restricted area be established to which Japanese fishing vessels are not allowed entry say perhaps for a period of five years or so to ensure fishery conservation and during which time Korean fishing techniques will have improved. This suggestion is another method of settling the fishery issue,bSawada said.
Concerning the problem of the legal status of the Korean residents in Japan, since the Korean side has submitted its proposal and the Japanese side is now studying its points,the experts can get together when the talk is resumed.
As to the various other claims which have not been touched upon, discussion shouls begin at the resumed talks.
After taking in what Amb. Sawada said, I came to the opinion that he must have discussed the above matters with the Prime Minister. I told Amb. Sawada that I had so often reiterated to him, we should institute a joint investigation of the art objects in possession of private individuals. If efforts were made on both sides, the return of those owned by Okura in Chiba and others would not be so difficult as he thought.
I pointed out to Amb. Sawada that we cannot get away from the facts in regard to our vessels issue. I asked him how much the Japanese intended to return to us.
To this, Amb. Sawada's immediate reply was that the Korean side must first present the complete list of the vessels before anything could be said on the part of the Japanese side for it too had evide▣...▣ material to compare with the Korean list. He added that our list of ▣...▣presented at the overall talks with the statement that ▣...▣ world follow was not enough and unless the Japanese side was given the complete tonnage,it would not be able to do anything.
With regard to the fisheries issue, I told Sawada that our Peace Line was not only for conservation of fisheries but more so for defense purpose as I had so often explained to him. I reiterated our stand as usual.
Amb. Sawada opined that he had reached the end of the line and would not be able to go anywhere further than he had already done. He stated that his proposals just made to me would meet with strong criticism and opposition but that he had already informed the Prime Minister of his determination. There marked on his friendship with former prime minister Yoshida and with various members in the anti-main current and that he was confident he could make them understand. The only obstacle might be the Foreign Minister but he was determined to make even Fujiyama accept what he had proposed to me. He repeated he could not do anything more than what he had just said and therefore the Korean side should give them serious consideration.
We ended our talks after agreeing to meet again on the afternoon of the 17th(Saturday).
The Japanese side has made the above proposals through its chief delegate. And I hope they will be studied for whatever they are worth and instructions issued to us accordingly. As I have repeatodly stated, it would do well to obtain some commitment from the Japanese even if it is only for one or two problems. It is the notorious habit of the Japanese to present proposals at yearends or at the height of a crisis. Although in a very precarious situation, Prime Minister Kishi, as Amb. Sawada said,As anxious to settle our problems by his own hands, and I believe him. Kishi is probably anxious to accomplish something to leave behind him, and this could well be understood. He should not therefore lose the opportunity in finding out what the Jap intersions are.
What interested me was the suggestion by Amb. Sawada that we should not give any political implication to the fishery line by the use of the term 'peace line ' but to establish a 'restricted are' from which fishing vessels are prohibited for a period of years, etc. etc. This suggestion recalls to my mind what Amb. MacArthur said to me that Korea and Japan should reach agreement on some conservation measures without regard to political significance of the Line.