Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume XXIX, Part 1, Korea

56. Telegram From the Embassy in Korea to the Department of State¹

Seoul, June 23, 1965, 1300Z.

1369. Ref: Deptel 1312, Saigon 2993,CINCPAC unn, COMUSMACV unn.² Subj: Support and Allowances for ROK Troops in RVN.

1. On June 18 Korea Times reported Minister of National Defense (MND) Kim Song-un had on previous day told National Assembly Defense Committee “U.S. had agreed to provide the additional troops (i.e. 400 men to reinforce ROK troops already in South Vietnam) with munitions and the same overseas service allowances as granted to the Korean forces already stationed there.” Ambassador called on Kim same day and reminded him of written agreement between his Ministry and ourselves that fact U.S. was paying overseas allowances for the two thousand Korean troops in Vietnam would be held secret.

2. Minister said he had not realized we were concerned about keeping this secret and was sorry if he had caused any embarrassment. Ambassador said matter would come up again and asked him to avoid any mention of our contribution in future if conceivably possible, and, if not, to play it down as much as possible.³ Memcon pouched.⁴

3. Ambassador also expressed hope that there would be no public discussion of any arrangements with respect to despatch of division to South Vietnam until Min of Natl Defense, FonMin, PriMin, General Beach and Embassy had all agreed on same story and same way of putting it to public. Minister said he fully agreed and would try to avoid or play down reference to our support for units now in Vietnam. He said he was sorry he had caused trouble and would certainly be in touch with us in advance about anything that was said about larger unit.

4. ROK JCS has now prepared and submitted agenda for discussion between MND and COMUSK containing long list ROKG requests in regard not only allowances but combat pay and logistic support in RVN of ROK division requested by GVN. COMUSK meeting with MND afternoon June 23 and will report in separate message⁵ and in detail on ROK stated requirements.

5. Comment: With despatch of ROK forces in division or even RCT strength it will be difficult if not impossible to conceal extent to which U.S. will presumably be paying expenses in RVN, already many Koreans seem to take for granted that U.S. footing bill and that sending troops to RVN is “good business” for ROK. So far we have detected no particular public or press criticism this feature ROKG support in RVN.

6. We realize degree to which we can maintain privacy of arrangements for ROK combat forces will depend on nature of arrangements still to be worked out. Would appreciate having Dept’s comments on this aspect after our recommendations have been received and studied.

Brown

1. Source: National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1964–66, DEF 19 KOR S-VIET S. Secret; Limdis. Repeated to Saigon, CINCPAC for POLAD, and COMUSMACV.
2. Telegram 1312 to Seoul, June 21, authorized the Embassy to inform the ROKG of the allowances to be paid to a Korean division in Vietnam. The source of funding was still to be determined. (Ibid.) The Embassy informed Washington that the Country Team in Seoul preferred payment in the present form, namely, “direct cash payment to MND outside normal aid channels.” The Country Team did not want payments to interfere with U.S. policy for Korean stabilization and development and wanted to avoid discussions about funding that “could range all the way from charges that ROK forces are being used as mercenaries to complaints that ROKG not being adequately compensated for services rendered.” (Telegram 7 from Seoul, July 2; ibid., POL 27–3 VIET S)
3. The Embassy in Saigon concurred with this strategy, pointing out that release of information about U.S. payments to Korean troops would have a “detrimental effect both within VN and internationally.” In the Embassy’s view, release of that information would make Vietnam more vulnerable to charges that its government was merely a “U.S. puppet” and undercut U.S. claims that the Vietnam effort had the support of international forces. (Telegram 23 from Saigon, July 2; ibid., DEF 19 KOR S-VIET S)
4. Not found.
5. Not found.