No.17

Tokyo, August 22, 1957

Excellency:
1. I beg to acknowledge with appreciation the receipt of Your Excellency's letter No.92 of last week.
2. As has been reported in succession, there has been little progress in the current preliminary talks with the Japanese side on the reciporcal release of the detainees and possible resumption of the formal talks. In such situation, at the request of the Japanese side, a meeting was called into session at 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Tuesday, August 20. Our side was represented at the morning session by Minister Yiu and the afternoon session by Counselor Choi, while the Japanese side by Asian Bureau Director Itagaki and Counselor Miyake at the respective sessions.
As briefly reported by cable, the Japanese side at this meeting presented our side its counter-proposal to our proposal for revision centering on the property claim issue, consisting of the following two alternatives:
a. In Article 4 of the agreed minutes (concerning the property claim issue), the first half and the latter half be reversed in order, thus putting emphasis on the clause: "In such case, the Japanese side has no objection to discussing for settlement such Korean claims with sincerity" (only the order will be reversed without change in wording).
b. In case our side finds the above unacceptable, the Japanese side suggests that the preliminary talks be held alongside with the formal talks, to enable simultaneous discussion of the Korean property claim and the reciporcal release of the detainees.
Our side immediately refusted the above counter-proposal of the Japanese side for the following reasons;
First, the mere change in order of the expression has no effect on the substance of the matter and, therefore, the proposal does not contain necessary revision as proposed by our side. Secondly, the idea to hold simultaneous discussion of our property claim and the reciporcal release of the detainees is contrary to the principle in which the current preliminary talks are held and, therefore, it is not acceptable to us.
The Japanese side, nevertheless, requested that our side refer this matter to our Government for its official reaction.
3. In this regard, it is observed that the following factors underlie the above-mentioned counter-proposal by the Japanese side:
a. They wanted to set back on the track the preliminary talks which appear to have developed into a snag.
b. They intended to induce our side to make some new proposal to break the deadlock on the property claim issue.
c. As Foreign Minister Fujiyama is scheduled to leave on September 14 for the UN General Assembly and talks with US leaders during his US stay, they figured it wise to show the US officials that they are doing their best to settle the pending issue (by making suggestion to hold the so-called formal conference simultaneous with the talks on the detainee issue).
4. The Japanese side, at the outset of the Tuesday meeting, made it clear that our original revision proposal (particularly on the US memorandum issue) is not acceptable. Judging from the past negotiations this stand of the Japanese seems still unchanged. It seems to me that the Japanese side intends to launch a diplomatic offensive on our side by making the so-called new suggestion.
In view of the above situation, it is deemed highly necessary for our side to be fully prepared to face the Japanese side in future meetings. I would, therefore, be grateful, if the Government instructs me, taking into consideration the above-mentioned situation.
With sentiments of loyalty and esteem, I remain,
Most respectfully,
/s/
Yu Taik Kim