Tokyo, April 1958,

SUMMARY RECORD
No.II
MEETING ON ADMINISTRATIVE LEVEL BETWEEN THE TWO DELEGATIONS
1. Time and place: From 7:00 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on April 18, 1958 at Room 523 of the Japanese Foreign Office.
2. Conferees:
The Korean side : Counsellor Kyu Hah Choi
First Secretary Pil Shik Chin
Mr. Yung Kyu Kang, Chief of Asia Section
The Japanese side : Counsellor Takano
Mr. Kiyoshi Suganuma, Chief of Asia Section.
Mr. Tsuchiya, Deputy Chief of Asia Section
3. Gist of talks:
COUNSELLOR TAKANO:
Concerning the view that the Korean side expressed at our meeting yesterday, with respect to the adoption of agenda for the fourth overall talks, the Japanese side has no objection to the adoption of the agenda of the 4th overall talks as agreed upon in the Agreed Minutes.
COUNSELLOR CHOI:
Leaving the question of expression or wordings in this regard for later discussions, may I understand that the agenda for the 4th overall talks will be the same as agreed on December 31, 1957.
COUNSELLOR TAKANO:
No objection. Now, with regard to procedural matters, how it would be to fix language question as follows: The Japanese side will use Japanese or English and the Korean side will use Korean or English. When necessary, interpretation service will be provided by the speaker's side for interpretation into English or in the language of the other party
COUNSELLOR CHOI:
There would not be any difficulties in fixing language problem. It is, therefore agreed between us that the Korean side will use Korean or English, while the Japanese side will use Japanese or English through the whole meetings of the plenary sessions and of the committees and sub-committees. Regarding the interpretation service, as it seems to me that there would be some more alternatives to be considered. I would like to reserve my definite view until tomorrow.
COUNSELLOR CHOI:
Regarding the compiling of summary record for the plenary sessions, our side has no objection to your suggestion that the gist of talks of each session will be drafted in English alternately by the designated officials from each side and that the summary record so drafted will be subject to confirmation by the two chief delegates at the following session. Such draftee will be appointed from full delegates.
COUNSELLOR TAKANO:
No objection. In this regard, how is it that the draft summary record to be submitted to the plenary session be initialled?
COUNSELLOR TAKANO:
Do you have any idea on the compiling of summary record for various committee meetings?
COUNSELLOR CHOI:
How would it be to follow the practice in the previous conference? As for committee meetings, I don't think they prepared any joint summary records in the past.
COUNSELLOR TAKANO:
So do I understand.
COUNSELLOR TAKANO:
Our side agrees to your suggestion with regard to press release that joint press release will be made immediately after each plenary session through the designated press officers of the both sides. It will be subject to decision to be made by the Chief Delegates of both sides.
COUNSELLOR CHOI:
The joint press release will be made in English, won't it be? How about the press release on committee meetings?
COUNSELLOR TAKANO:
Yes, the press release will be made in English. As for committee meetings, why don't we leave the matter to the chairman of each committee?
MR. CHIN:
As for the Korean side, Counsellor Choi will be the press officer on while sessions of the conference including the committee mooting, and therefore, any release will be made through Counsellor Choi.
COUNSELLOR TAKANO:
In this connection, it would be very difficult, technically, for the chairman of a committee to keep his mouth shut in the face of reporters' questions. How do you think regarding the problem?
COUNSELLOR CHOI:
All official press release will be made through the press officer. In this connection, I think it would be very important to release any statements or comments through a designated officer in order to avoid unnecessary reactions from misunderstandings and for protection of secrecy, etc.
COUNSELLOR TAKANO:
I agree with you in principle.
COUNSELLOR CHOI:
It would be taken for granted that the relationship between the works of the plenary session and those of various committees will be in accordance with general practices of previous conferences and other international conferences. I agree with you on your view that the works of committees covering understanding reached and points of conflict shall be reported to the plenary session for its confirmation or discussions.
COUNSELLOR TAKANO:
With regard to composition of committees, our side wants to set up 5 committees as before, namely, (1) Basie Relations Committee, (2) the Claims Committee, (3) the Fisheries Committee, (4) the Nationality end Treatment Committee and (5) the Vessels Committee. Wordings thereof will be subject to later discussions. The question of setting up sub-committee may be considered by Chairmen of each committee, When they find it necessary according to progress of each committee.
In view of internal reasons, our side wants to set up the same five committees as in the previous conferences. For one reason, the Chiarman and members for the five committees have already been decided. The Director of the Maritime Transportation Bureau of the Transportation Ministry has been already appointed as Chief Japanese member of the vessels committee. As it involves problem of personnel of other Ministries concerned beyond Foreign Office, it is a really difficult problem for our side to consider any change of organization of the overall talks from that of the previous conferences. I am further afraid that by placing the vessels problem under the claims committee as a sub-committee thereof, the job of settling the problem of vessels will become more difficult, because when the problem put under a sub-committee, Chief Japanese member of the sub-committee naturally has to be a minor officials.
COUNSELLOR CHOI;
I would like to reserve our opinion on you counter proposal regarding the composition of committees and sub-committees, but I would like to state that your reasons are hardly convincing.
COUNSELLOR TAKANO:
In the meantime, wouldn't it be convenient for both sides to appoint liaison officers to handle liaison business as we are doing now for convenience' sake.
MR. CHIN:
Agreeing to your opinion in general, I thick that for such liaison business as we are doing, Now, Counsellor Choi will attend such meeting for the Korean side.
COUNSELLOR TARANO
How about having liaison officers from both sides?
COUNSELLOR CHOI:
As we had in the past, 1 have no particular objection from convenience sake.
COUNSELLOR CHOI:
What would it be the agenda for second plenary session?
COUNSELLOR TAKANO"
We have proposed that the chief delegate Sawada reads "general statement" and then the adoption of agenda for the 4th Korea-Japan overall talks, decision on procedural matters, and composition of committees and so forth will follow. Regarding the "general statement", as I understand very well personally your position, I am trying to convince other Japanese delegates with your view to meet the wish of the Korean side. There are several delegates who are still insisting that the general statement be read by Japanese chief delegate at the second plenary session.
COUNSELLOR CHOI:
When can I expect to have your definite answer in this regard?
COUNSELLOR TAKANO:
I will try my best to give you a definite answer as soon as possible.
COUNSELLOR CHOI:
Since our proposal concerning the composition of committee and the setting of sub-committee under the claims committee are logical and reasonable, I sincerely hope that your side will recosider your position regarding the composition of committees so that we can start actual works of plenary session and thus things be placed on the line through the second plenary session scheduled on April 22, 1958 As you know, the problem on return of vessels was dealt with separately from the first Korea-Japan conference. It was fully discussed in October, 1951 to implement the SCAP instructions. There won't be any further argument on this matter. We will just put into practice what SCAP ordered Japan to do. Thus, the problem will be simply handled by experts at a sub-committee under the committee on Korean claims aganist Japan. The nature of the vessels problem belongs to the claims problem, and we could realistically and logically put this problem under the claims committee.
Furthermore, after December 31, 1957, the situations have been quite changed from the situation in the previous Korea-Japan conferences Therefore. we should adopt an improved measure for handling the vessels problem in a most effective and practically may by means of setting up a sub-committee under the claims committee. We should find out a constructive way for solving this problem. I can hardly understand the Japanese argument, since it is only concerned with internal situation of Japan.
MR. CHIN:
How about, in the meantime, to study the wordings in naming of 3 committees, namely, basic relations. fisheries, and status of Korean residents, leaving the question regarding the claims committees and setting up of sub-commithees for later discussions?
MR. SUGANUMA:
No objection.
MR. CHIN:
I would like to propose that the names of the above three committees be as follows; Committee on Basic Relations, Committee on Fisheries problem and Peace Line, and Committee on Legal Statue or Korean Residents in Japan.
MR. SUGANUMA:
There will be no question regarding the naming of basic relations committee. When we are to use the word of "Peace Line", they should be placed with quotation as was the ease in the Agreed Minutes signed December 31. 1957. I will study further regarding the naming of 3 committees and will give you definite answer at next meeting.
The meeting was adjourned upon decision that next meeting will be held at one p.m. on April 19. 1958.

- The end -