FOREIGN MINISTRY'S POINTS OF VIEW ON "ESSENTIALS OF OUR RED CROSS PROPOSAL TO ICRC"
1. The main purpose of this proposal seems to employ a delaying tactics to postpone a settlement and thereby avoid an imminent danger. If the present issue could be dealt with solely in our talks with the ICRC, a delaying tactics of this kind might deserve consideration. But on the issue, the United States is now a third party with grave concern which intends to stand between the two countries to extend good offices. One of the major motives by which the U.S. seems to move is an apprehension that it may face a great difficulty in applying Regulation I of ICA if the present Korea -Japan tension is prolonged longer. In U.S. view, therefore, the matter is to be urgently settled. Unless we give up hope that we may go with U.S. good offices, there is no time to empley a delaying tactics.
2. Logic underlying point one of the proposal is that ICRC should investigate first under what condition a number of Korean residents allegedly wish to be "repatriated' to the Communist north. ICRC, which is a humanitarian organisation, will certainly have concern ever the present sufferings of Koreans in Japan. But it seems that ICRC 's conception of "free choice of residence" is so academic that there is little connection with the predicament of the residents and their alleged wish to leave the place of residence. ICRC may agree to undertaking such investigation. But this investigation may be one thing, and the so-called repatriation may be another thing.
3. Even if a conclusion is drawn differently from the above, will ICRC be able to investigate satisfactorily the sufferings of Korean residents in Japan without bona fide assistance of the Japanese authorities? In this connection, it is to be recalled that Japanese persecution of Korean residents in Japan has been a social one which is not easily visible. According to Japanese theory, there is no discrimination at least legally between Japanese nationals and Korean residents in social lives.
4. According to the recommendation, ICRC should urge the Japanese Government to take necessary steps to legally guarantee the right of the Korean residents in Japan to permanent residence which is not subjected to deportation. It would be a wishful thinking if we believe that ICRC gives any serious consideration to this recommendation. ICRC is not likely to move in legal condieration. According to ICRC 's theory, a question is not the right of Korean residents in question but their will to reside permanently in Japan.
5. Point 4 of the recommendation is not very clear in its meaning. However, to hold a meeting between two Red Cross Societies under the auspices of ICRC is to virtually shift the Korea -Japan talks of governmental level to one of the Red Cross level. This may be want ICRC and JRC want to have. But this is completely unaceeptable to our Government.