61. Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in Japan0
1734. For MacArthur. State–Defense message. Secnog 10.1 Have had lengthy State–Defense discussions on exchange of notes re Residual Sovereignty. Serious concern expressed that exchange of notes reaffirming Japanese residual sovereignty over Article III islands linked with suggestion that islands may at future time fall under new Treaty will give rise to false hopes and increased pressures on part of Japanese public and Ryukyuans for early return of administration of islands to Japan.
Recognize that exchange of notes proposed as tactic to enable Kishi resist opposition when new treaty before Diet. However, since exchange might be interpreted as indicating that return Article III islands was considered during treaty negotiations, Kishi might well be subjected to criticism for not pressing for early return of islands.
In view of foregoing, request you explore with Kishi means of meeting Diet opposition other than through proposed exchange of notes. One possible means to reaffirm Japanese residual sovereignty is by your making public statement along lines Eisenhower–Kishi communiqué of 1957. If question arises in Diet whether islands would fall within treaty area should their administration be returned to Japan, Kishi could reply affirmatively, pointing out that treaty specifically speaks of territory under the administration of Japan which would include Article III islands if they are returned to Japan’s administration while treaty still in force. Foregoing approach would follow line Kishi has taken before Diet and public that there is no connection between negotiations for new treaty and return of administrative control of islands.
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 794.5/5–1659. Confidential; Niact; Limit Distribution. Drafted by William E. Lang, DOD, and Sneider; cleared by Parsons; and approved by Robertson. Repeated to CINCPAC exclusive for POLAD and Admiral Felt and to COMUS/Japan exclusive for General Burns.↩
- Document 54.↩