795.00/4–1853: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Embassy in the Soviet Union1
priority
782. You should not seek interview with Molotov for purpose making points mentioned Dept’s 7802 but as set forth therein should do so only if opportunity offers casually in course general conversation.
Re questions raised second paragraph your 1491.3 We consider Switzerland most logical and acceptable “neutral state” for this purpose but as indicated in Harrison’s letter we do not exclude possibility of other non-Soviet bloc state able and willing conscientiously carry out proposed function. We have no other particular state in mind but such states as Sweden or Norway would be acceptable. We would not want suggest India but if custody is to be taken in Korea and terms of reference clear for ultimate disposition remaining prisoners resisting repatriation we probably would not oppose India. For your confidential information Menon has indicated to UNDel NY that “if US is friend of India” it will not suggest India for “neutral state”. Do not know whether this is Indian Government view and have no other indications of Indian attitude. However, for Switzerland or any other similar small country to accept full custody all non-repatriates will present serious manpower problems requiring in the order of 6,000 officers and men. Therefore as practical matter we would hope arrangements could be worked out so that neutral state would take control of camps exercising such control through existing UNC machinery for POW camps.
Your assumption with regard meaning “peaceable disposition” correct. By “peaceable” we mean “non-forcible”.