Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, China and Japan, Volume XIV, Part 2

694.95B6/10–152: Telegram

No. 603
The Ambassador in Japan (Murphy) to the Department of State¹

secret
priority

Tokyo, October 1, 1952—2 p.m.

1079. No distribution outside Department. Clark announced establishment “sea defense zone” in waters contiguous Korea in short press release issued September 27. At same time, he ordered COMNAVFE maintain zone inviolate and prevent entry “in accordance current blockage instructions”.² This order was repeated to Embassies Pusan and Tokyo with request we relay information to governments concerned.

Zone as established completely envelopes Korean peninsula and would appear to make all contiguous waters out of bounds. The short press release issued by FEC has brought sharp reaction from Japanese fishing and shipping circles. Foreign Office has sent note to Embassy asking for detailed info re zone, its legal effect and method of administration. Korean press is reported to have claimed this as victory for ROK and to have indicated that Clark has endorsed the “Rhee line”.

In view of this and in view of my reservations about method of Clark’s action, I have refrained temporarily from sending any official notification to JG and am exploring nature of defense zone with Clark and staff of FEC. This action was hastily taken and not well conceived. Our Navy authorities seem to consider the zone impossible to administer as an area of total prohibition and they have not yet issued any patrol changes to implement its terms. No implementing regulations have been prepared by FEC. It is hoped that the zone will be administered in liberal fashion and that it be used principally as a threat to prevent smuggling and for security purposes. At same time, its very existence, even without enforcement, should give satisfaction to Rhee and should temporarily at least calm his fears re Jap fishing exploitation.

I have discussed matter informally with Clark who realizes now that there are political and economic issues involved which may cause some difficulties. I have emphasized that question of fishing rights in these waters is matter under negotiation between Japanese and Koreans and that stated policy of US is not to prejudice these negotiations. I have told him that JG is opposed in principle to establishment of any line to govern fishing and pointed out that Koreans may interpret this action as an indirect endorsement of “Rhee line” which is of course unacceptable to JG.³

Murphy

1. Repeated for information priority to Pusan.

2. Substance of this order was relayed to the Department of the Army in CX 55874 from Tokyo, Sept. 27; it reads:

   • “1. A sea defense zone for the purpose of preventing attacks on the coast, securing the UNC sea lines of command preventing the introduction of contraband or the entry of enemy agents into ROK territory is hereby established in waters contiguous to Korea within the area bounded by the following points: 42–05 north 130–47 east, 38–00 north 130–00 east, 35–15 north 130–00 east, 33–00 north 126–47 east, 3300 north 126–00 east, 34–00 north 125–00 east, 36–00 north 125–00 east, 39–37 north 124–00 east.
   • “2. It is desired that COMNAVFE, within capabilities and with assistance of other action adees, endeavor to maintain inviolate the status of this area by warning vessels of zonal restrictions imposed and denying entry in accordance with current blockade instructions.
   • “3. It is requested that info adees inform appropriate governmental authorities of the establishment of this area.” (Attached to Document 678.)

3. Ambassador Murphy set forth his position on the problem at greater length in two letters to General Clark dated Oct. 1. In the first of these, he made it clear that he agreed with the establishment of a sea defense zone but was objecting to the manner in which establishment was effected. (Attached to letter from Murphy to Johnson, Oct. 1, 795.5/10–152)