Memorandum of Conversation with Secretary of State Dean Acheson, Secretary of Defense Robert Lovett, Admiral William Fechteler, Admiral Ruthven Libby, and U. Alexis Johnson

INFORMATION Copon to 7985 km 5134 DECLASSIFIED DEPARTMENT OF STATE E. O. 11652, Sec. 3(E) and 5(D) or 0% 3-10-20 Dept of State letter, Memorandum of Conversation 129 0959 SECT WITTE-22 Bay. NLY. He . NARS Data 32877 DATE:September 17, 1952 SUBJECT: Future Tactics in Korean Armistice Negotiations 279 PARTICIPANTS: The Secretary of State The Secretary of Defense Admiral Fechteler Admiral Libby FE - U. Alexis Johnson 3 COPIES TO: FE G UNA S/P u. s. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-61120-1 At the meeting held today from 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.M. in the Office of the Secretary of State, the foregoing persons discussed the next step in the Korean armistice negotiations with particular refer- ences to the differences in point of view that developed yesterday in the meeting between representatives of the Department of State and the JCS. The points of view expressed may be summarized as follows: The Secretary of Defense stated that, at the request of the President, he together wi th the Service Secretaries of the JCS had met on Monday with the President to reply to certain questions from the President concerning the general military situation in Korea as well as the armistice negotiations. He stated that all those present had expressed to the President complete unanimity of view (contrary to, for example, such matters as Formosa) on the strength of our military position in Korea and the undesirability of making any further concessions to the Communists in the armistice negotiations. To Mr. Lovett's request, Admiral Fechteler outlined what had been stated to the President concerning differences in point of view between State and Defense on future tactics in the armistice négotiations. Admiral Fechteler stated that (1) there was agreement between State and Defense that a unilateral indefinite recess of the negotiations should be called pending receipt of a constructive pro- posal from the Communists, (2) Defense did not agree with State's view that prior to the declaring of such a recess a "new offer" be made to the Communists and (3) Defense did not agree with State that if such n INFORMATION