790.5/10–2951
The Assistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs (Rusk) to the Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs (Nash)
Dear Mr. Nash: Perhaps it would be useful to the Department of Defense for me to outline the present views and plans of the Department of State on the procedural and timing aspects of certain questions affecting our future relations with Japan. Since these matters involve important responsibilities of the Department of Defense and of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, your comments would be much appreciated.
A. Ratification by the United States of the Japanese Peace Treaty and the U.S.–Japan Security Treaty
The President has asked Mr. John Foster Dulles to accept responsibility for the presentation to the Senate of the four Treaties signed in connection with the recent San Francisco Conference, namely, the Japanese Peace Treaty, the U.S.-Japan Security Treaty, the U.S.–Philippine Mutual Defense Treaty and the Tripartite Security Treaty with Australia and New Zealand. Mr. Dulles has accepted this responsibility and will call upon the Departments and agencies of the Executive Branch for such assistance as he might need to accomplish his task.
The President has indicated his wish to send these four treaties to the Senate for consideration as a first item of business at the beginning of the next session in January 1952. On this basis, it is estimated that hearings might be concluded and Senate action taken by about March 1, 1952. The Japanese Peace Treaty will come into effect as provided in Article 23 of the Treaty itself. Since it is known that a number of Governments expect to take up the question of their ratification only after both Japan and the United States have ratified, it cannot be accurately forecast as to just when the Japanese Peace Treaty will come into effect. However, this might occur during the month of March 1952, and our own planning should be based upon that possibility. The Department of State understands that there will be consultation between our two Departments as to the timing of the deposit of the United States ratification.
[Page 1387]B. Administrative Agreement with Japan pursuant to Article 3 of the U.S.–Japan Security Treaty
The Administrative Agreement with Japan will require the closest collaboration at all stages between the Departments of State and Defense, careful consultation with the key Congressional Committees, and imaginative handling with the Japanese Government and Japanese public opinion. As for timing, it is believed that we should allow the Japanese Diet to complete its ratification of the Peace Treaty and the Security Pact before public steps are taken looking directly to the negotiation of the Administrative Agreement. It is now expected that the Diet will have completed this ratification process by about November 10–15, 1951. On the other hand, the Department of State believes that the Administrative Agreement should be concluded with the Japanese in advance of our own ratification of the Peace Treaty and Security Treaty; it is assumed that the Department of Defense strongly concurs in this desire.1
In view of the above factors, the Department of State has in mind the following schedule with respect to the Administrative Agreement:
- a.
- Before November 10, 1951: State–Defense identification of the precise issues with respect to the proposed Administrative Agreement requiring resolution, as well as identification of the more important problems concerning the physical arrangements for our forces in Japan in the post-treaty period.
- b.
- Approximately November 10, 1951: Visit to Tokyo by a State–Defense group, headed by myself, to discuss the Administrative Agreement and related arrangements fully with General Ridgway and to have such preliminary discussions with the Japanese as then seems wise.
- c.
- Approximately January 10, 1952: Consultation with the key Congressional Committees on the Administrative Agreement and related arrangements.
- d.
- Approximately January 20, 1952: Negotiation of a final text of the Administrative Agreement and related arrangements with the Japanese Government.
In order to carry out the difficult schedule outlined above, the Department of State will make me available for full time responsibility for the Administrative Agreement preparations and negotiations. It would be greatly appreciated if the Department of Defense would indicate those who will represent it in interdepartmental discussions in Washington and who will be available to accompany and assist me in the negotiating aspects.
[Page 1388]C. Final Arrangements for the Ryukyus and Other Islands referred to in Article 3 of the Japanese Peace Treaty
Article 3 of the Japanese Peace Treaty clearly envisages further United States action with respect to permanent arrangements for the Ryukyus and other islands named therein. The Department of State believes that it would be a mistake to move so promptly on this matter as to inject the Ryukyus into debates on ratification of the Japanese Peace Treaty either in the United States or in other countries. Further, it would be undesirable to have the Ryukyus come before the present session of the General Assembly. Lastly, it would be undesirable to discuss the Administrative Agreement and the Ryukyus with the Japanese in such a way as to permit the use of one for bargaining on the other.
The Department of State believes that the President should constitute an inter-Departmental Committee, of which a Representative of the President would be Chairman, and on which the Departments of State and Defense would each have a senior Representative. The task of this Committee would be to recommend to the President a precise proposal for carrying out Article 3 of the Japanese Peace Treaty. It would be assumed that, prior to final action by the President on the Committee’s proposals, the Departments of State and Defense would have an opportunity to provide the President with their views on the Committee’s recommendations. It is also assumed that, in the development of its proposals, the Committee would consult continuously with the Departments concerned.
The Foreign Relations and Armed Services Committees of the Congress will have an important interest in the Ryukyus question and should be fully and frequently consulted by the inter-Departmental Committee. Although it might be desirable to ask Congressional leaders to constitute a specific group for this purpose, it is considered preferable not to take such action now and thereby draw premature attention to work on this matter. On the other hand, it would be highly desirable if representative members of the Congressional Committees referred to could find an opportunity to visit Japan and the Ryukyus before the middle of January 1952 in order to get a first-hand impression of the nature of the problem.2
As for timing, the Department of State believes that the inter-Departmental Committee should be in position to make its final recommendations by about March 15, 1952, to be followed by final [Page 1389] consultations with Congressional Committees and such negotiations with the Japanese as might be required.
Sincerely yours,
- In telegram C 53336 to the Department of the Army, October 19, CINCFE had stated in part: “To insure that satisfactory provisions are made for the security troops that are to be stationed in Japan, all arrangements pertaining to the administrative agreement between the U.S. Government and the Japanese Government should be completed prior to effective date of peace treaty.” (Lot 60D330)↩
- A memorandum of October 17 by Mr. Battle follows in entirety: “The Secretary spoke to the President this afternoon about the proposed Congressional Commission on the Ryukyus. The President approves the proposal and we may go ahead with it.” (Lot 53D444)↩