Memorandum of Conversation with Hume Wrong, Peter Campbell, U. Alexis Johnson, and Mr. Henkin
Images (4)
दस्तावेज़
| id |
id
519785566
|
|---|---|
| contentType |
contentType
document
|
| source |
source
import
|
Source image fields (6)
Extracted text
OCR Page 1 of 4NLT (KOREA/SD) 565 st
Boak
Copy
2 of 9 copies
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
(31)
Memorandum of Conversation
TOP SECRET SECURITY INFORMATION
DATE: December 24, 1951
SUBJECT: Proposed Statement on Greater Sanctions in Korea
PARTICIPANTS:
Ambassador Hume Wrong of Canada
Mr. Peter Campbell, Canadian Embassy
Mr. Johnson, FE
Bureau of
Mr. Henkin, UNP
Fan EASTERN AFFAIRS
DEC
SECRETARY
COPIES TO:
DCR
Department of State
S/S
DECLASSIFIED
G
FRUS 1951 Val.VII Part
EUR
Authority
(PP.1429-1431)
FE
UNA
By
DER
NLT
Date 3-13-85
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
16-61120-1
Ambassador Wrong called today to present his government's reaction
to the proposed sixteen power statement on Korea, and left with me the
attached memorandum. He noted that his government agreed to join in the
proposed statement and was generally satisfied with the text which had
been prepared. The Canadian Government preferred the British version of
the final paragraph, but since the United Kingdom was prepared to accept
the compromise draft which the Department had offered, the Canadian Govern-
ment would also acquiesce.
Ambassador Wrong explained his government's suggestion for a change
in the last two sentences. They thought that the reference to the renewal
of an aggression was perhaps provocative and that it might be deemed to
imply that a new finding of aggression might have to be made by the Security
Council or the General Assembly. That sentence also left some doubt as
to whether the statement was limited to a new attack in Korea, and con-
tained no limitation as to the time for which this statement was to be
effective. His government therefore suggested a reference to a "breach
of the armistice" which would make it clear that we were speaking of renewal
of hostilities in Korea during the life of the armistice.
I indicated to Ambassador Wrong that there was no difference between
us and the Canadian Government as to what was intended, and that the
drafting problem which concerned his government had troubled us also.
We had been reluctant to use the phrase "breach of the armistice" because
it
TOP SECRET SECURITY INFORMATION
Relations
belongs_to
belongs_to