Draft Treaty of Peace With Japan

U.S. Draft made on March 19, 1947

Chapter I - TERRITORIAL CLAUSES

Article 1

1.The Territorial limits of Japan shall be those existing on January 1, 1894, subject to modifications set forth in Articles 2,3.... As such these limits shall include the four principal islands of Honshu, Kyushu, Shikoku and Hokkaido and all minor offshore islands, excluding the Kurile Islands, but including the Ryukyu Islands forming part of Kagoshima Prefecture, the Inland sea, Rebun, Rishiri, Okujiri, Sado, Oki, Tsushima, Iki and the Goto Archipelago.

These territorial limits are traced on the maps attached to the present treaty.

Article 4

Japan hereby renounces all rights and titles to Korea and all minor offshore Korean islands, including Quelpart Island, Port Hamilton, Dagelet Island (Utsuryo) Island and Liancourt Rocks (Takeshima).

FROM:NARA Records of Office of Northeast Asian Affairs, Relating to the Treaty of Peace with Japan — Subject File,1945-51 (Lot File 56 D 527) , Box no.1; Folder No.15

U.S. Draft made on August 5, 1947

Chapter I

TERRITORIAL CLAUSES

Article 1

1. The territorial limits of Japan shall comprise the four principal islands of the Honshu, Kyushu, Shikoku and Hokkaido and all minor islands, including the islands of the Inland sea (Seto Naikai), The Habomai Islands, Shikotan, Kunashiri and Etrofu, the Goto Archipelago, the Ryukyu Islands, and the Izu Islands southward to and including Sofu Gan (lot's Wife). As such, the territorial limits of Japan shall include::

all islands with their territorial waters within a line beginning at a point in 45°45’ N. latitude,140° E. longitude;

proceeding due east through La Perouse Strait (Soya Kaikyo) to 149° 10’ E. longitude;

thence due east through Etorofu Strait to 37° N. latitude;

thence in a southwesterly direction to a point in 23° 30’ N. latitude, 134° E. longitude;

thence due west to 122° 30’ E. longitude;

thence due north to 26° N. latitude;

thence in a northeasterly direction to a point in 30° N. latitude, 127° E. longitude;

thence due north to 33° N. latitude:

thence in a northeasterly direction to a point in 40° N. latitude, 136° E. longitude;

thence in a direction to the east of north to the point of beginning.

2. These territorial limits are indicated on Map No.1 attached to the present Treaty.[1]

Article 4

Japan hereby renounces all right and right to Korea (Chosen) and all offshore Korean islands,

including Quelpart (Saishu To);

the Nan How group (San To, or Komun Do) which forms Port Hamilton (Tonaikai);

Dagelet Island (Utsuryo To, or Matsu Shima);

Liancourt Rocks (Takeshima);

and all other islands and islets to wish Japan had acquired title lying out side the line described in Article 1 and to the east of the meridian 124°15' E. longitude, north of the parallel 33°N. latitude, and west of a line from the seaward terminus of the boundary at the mouth of the Tumon River to a point in 37°30' N. latitude, 132°40' E. longitude.

This line is indicated on the Map NO.1 attached to the present Treaty.

FROM:NARA Records of Office of Northeast Asian Affairs, Relating to the Treaty of Peace with Japan — Subject File,1945-51 (Lot File 56 D 527) , Box no.5; Folder No.13

U.S. Draft made on January 8, 1948

Chapter I

TERRITORIAL CLAUSES

Article 1

1.The Territorial limits of Japan shall comprise the four principal Japanese islands of Honshu, Kyushu, Shikoku and Hokkaido and all adjacent minor islands, including the islands of the Inland sea(seto Naikai), Sado, Oki retto, Rsushima, the Goto Archipelago, the Ryukyu Islands north of 29°N. Latitude, and the Izu Islands southward to and including Sofu Gan (lot's Wife).

Article 4

Japan hereby renounces in favor of the Korean people all rights and titles to the Korea (Chosen) and offshore Korean islands,

including Quelpart (Saishu To);

the Nan How group (San To, or Komun Do) which forms Port Hamilton (Tonaikai);

Dagelet Island (Utsuryo To, or Matsu Shima);

Liancourt Rocks (Takeshima);

and all other islands and islets to which Japan has acquired title lying outside the line described in Article 1 and to the east of the meridian 124°15' E. longitude, north of the parallel 33°N. latitude, and west of a line from the seaward terminus of the boundary at the mouth of the Tumen River to a point in 37°30' N. latitude, 132°40' E. longitude.

This line is indicated on the map attached to the present Treaty.

FROM:NARA Records of Office of Historian. Japanese Peace and Security Treaties,1946-1952 (Lot File 78 D 173) , Box no.4; Folder No.1

U.S. Draft made on September 7, 1949

Chapter I

Territorial Clauses

Article 1

1.The Territorial limits of Japan shall comprise the four principal Japanese islands of Honshu, Kyushu, Shikoku and Hokkaido and all adjacent minor islands, including the islands of the Inland sea(seto Naikai), Sado, Oki retto, Etorofu, Kunashiri, the Habomai Islands, Shikotan, Tsushima, the Goto Archipelago, the Ryukyu Islands north of 29°N. Latitude, and all other islands of the East China Sea east of longitude 127° east of Greenwich and north of 29°N. Latitude, and the Izu Islands southward to and including Sofu Gan (lot's Wife).

2.These territorial limits are indicated on the map attached to the present treaty.

Article 3

Japan hereby renounces in favor of the Korean people all rights and titles to the Korea (Chosen) and offshore Korean islands, including Quelpart (Saishu To), the Nan How group (San To, or Komun Do) which forms Port Hamilton (Tonaikai), Dagelet Island (Utsuryo To, or Matsu Shima), Liancourt Rocks (Takeshima), and all other islands and islets to which Japan has acquired title lying outside the line described in Article 1 and to the east of the meridian 124°15' E. longitude, north of the parallel 33°N. latitude, and west of a line from the seaward terminus of the boundary at the mouth of the Tumen River to a point in 37°30' N. latitude, 132°40' E. longitude. This line is indicated on the map attached to the present Treaty.

FROM:United States National Archives and Records Administration(NARA), Records of Office of Northeast Asian Affairs, Relating to the Treaty of Peace with Japan — Subject File,1945-51 (Lot File 56 D 527) , Box no.6; Folder No.2

U.S. Draft made on November 2, 1949

Chapter II

TERRITORIAL CLAUSES

Article 3

1. The Territorial of Japan shall comprise the four principal Japanese islands of Honshu, Kyushu, Shikoku and Hokkaido and all adjacent minor islands, including the islands of the Inland sea(Seto Naikai), Sado, Oki retto, Tsushima, the Goto Archipelago, the Ryukyu Islands north of 29°N. Latitude, and the Izu Islands southward to and including Sofu Gan (lot's Wife), and all other islands within a line

beginning at a point in 45° 45' N. latitude, 140° longitude east of Greenwich, proceeding due east through La Perouse Strait (Soya Kaikyo) to 146° E. Longitude;

thence by a rhumb line in a direction to the west of south to a point in 43° 45' N. latitude, 145° 20' E. longitude;

thence by a rhumb line in a southeasterly direction to a point in 43° 20' N. latitude, 146° E. longitude;

thence due east to a point in 149° E. longitude;

thence due south to 37° N. latitude;

thence by a rhumb line in a southwesterly direction to a point in 29° N. latitude, 140° E. longitude;

thence due north to a point in 33° N. latitude;

thence by a rhumb line in a northeasterly direction to a point in 40° N. latitude, 136° E. longitude;

thence by a rhumb line in a direction to the east of north to the point of beginning.

All islands within said line, and all islands, islets and rocks traversed by the said line, should there be such, with a three-mile belt of territorial waters, shall belong to Japan.

2. This line of allocation is indicated on the map attached to the peace treaty.

Article 4

1. Japan hereby renounces in favor of the Korea all rights and titles to the Korean mainland territory and all offshore Korean islands, including Quelpart (Saishu To), the Nan How group (San To, or Komun Do) which forms Port Hamilton (Tonaikai), Dagelet Island (Utsuryo To, or Matsu Shima), Liancourt Rocks (Takeshima), and all other islands and islets to which Japan has acquired title lying outside the line described in Article 3 and to the east of the meridian 124°15' E. longitude, north of the parallel 33°N. latitude, and west of a line from the seaward terminus of the boundary approximately three nautical miles from the mouth of the Tumen River to a point in 37°30' N. latitude, 132°40' E. longitude.

2. This line is indicated on the map attached to the present Treaty.

FROM:NARA Records of Office of Northeast Asian Affairs, Relating to the Treaty of Peace with Japan — Subject File,1945-51 (Lot File 56 D 527) , Box no.6; Folder No.3

Summary Comment by The Acting Political Adviser in Japan (Sebald) to the Secretary of State on November 14, 1949

Article 6: Recommend reconsideration Liancourt Rocks (Takeshima). Japan's claim to these islands is old and appears valid. Security considerations might conceivably envisage weather and radar stations thereon.[2]

Detailed Comment by The Acting Political Adviser in Japan (Sebald) to the Secretary of State on November 17, 1949

[...]

Article3 It is admitted that this Article offers a practical and convenient of describing the territories which Japan gives up those which Japan retains. It is believed, however, that the method of delineation employed in this Article has serious psychological disadvantages. If possible, it is recommended that another method of description be employed which avoids circumscribing Japan with a line even if it is necessary to enumerate a large number of territories in an annex. We suggest that the practicability be explored of defining Japan territorially in positive terms, altering Article3 approximately as follows: retain the first six lines of the draft of paragraph 1; name further islands as necessary off the coasts of Japan; continue with the words "and all other islands nearer therefrom to the home islands within the area described, with a three-mile belt of territorial waters, shall belong to Japan". In any event, the omission of paragraph 2 and or map is recommended. Following such a revised Article3 an article might advisably be inserted stating that Japan hereby cedes and renounces all territory, mandate, and concession rights, and claims outside the territorial area described in Article3. (It is noted that in the November 2 draft the principle of renunciation by Japan without direct cession to a new sovereign is recognized in Article 8 thorough12.)

[...]

Article 4 through 12. We suggest that in the treaty Article 4 through 12 of the November 2 draft be omitted, and that in a document subsidiary to the treaty among the signatories other than Japan the disposition of the treaties formerly under Japanese jurisdiction be agreed upon. the necessity of direct cession would thereby be removed from the treaty proper and Japan would not rest under the necessity of being a party to it.

[...]

With regard to the disposition of islands formerly possessed by Japan in the direction Korea it is suggested that Liancourt Rocks (Takeshima) be specified in our proposed Article3 as belonging to Japan. Japan's claim to these islands is old and appears valid, and it is difficult to regard them as islands off the shore of Korea. Security considerations might also conceivably render the provision of weather and radar stations on these islands a matter of interest to the United States.

Boggs's proposal about the territorial clauses on Dec 8 , 1949

I have also attempted to telescope into one article, along the lines suggested by Mr. Sebald, all of what was embodied in Articles 4 to 12 inclusive of the November 2 draft. This is given below as Article 4. Chapter II, Territorial Clauses, would thus contain only Articles 3 and 4.

Article 4

Japan hereby [cedes and] renounces all territory and all mandate, and concession rights, titles and claims outside the territorial area described in Article 3, and accepts the disposition of these territories that has been made or that may be made by the parties concerned, or by the United Nations in accordance with the trusteeship provisions of Articles 77, 79, and 85 of the Charter of the United Nations.

Territorial Clauses & Agreement Respecting the Disposition of Former Japanese Territories by the bureau of far eastern affairs on Dec 15, 1949

Territorial Clauses

Article4

1. Japan hereby renounces on behalf of itself and its nationals all territorial and mandate rights, titles and claims outside the territorial area described in Article 3. 2. The Allied and Associated Powers retain their rights in respect to disposition of the territories referred to in the preceding paragraph which were under Japanese sovereignty, pending conclusion of an agreement or agreements among them providing for disposition of such territories.

Agreement Respecting the Disposition of

Former Japanese Territories

The Allied and Associated Powers party to the treaty of peace concluded with Japan on____________, 1950,dispose of the territories renounced in this favor by Japan in that Treaty in the following manner :

Article1

The Allied and Associated Powers agree that the following territories shall be returned in full　sovereignty to China: The island of Taiwan (Formosa)and adjacent minor islands,　including Agincourt (Hoka Sho),　Crag (Menka Sho), Pinnacle (Kahei Sho),　Samasana (Kasho To),　Botel Tabago (Koto Sho),　Little Botel Tabago (Shokoto Sho),　Vele Reti Rocks (Shichisei Seki), and Lambay (Ryukyu Sho); together with the Pescadores Islands (Hoko Shoto); and all other islands to which Japan had acquired title within a line beginning at a point in 26゜N. latitude, 121 ゜E. longitude,　and proceeding due east to 122゜30´E. longitude; thence due south to 21゜30´N. latitude; thence due west through the Bashi Channel to 119゜E.　longitude; thence due north to a point in 24゜N. latitude; thence northeasterly to the point of beginning. This line in indicated on the map attached to the present Agreement.

Article2

The Allied and Associated Powers agree that the island of Sakhalin(Karafuto)　south　of 50 ゜N.　latitude, and adjacent islands,　including Totamoshiri (Kaiba To ,or Moneron),　and Robben Island (Tyuleniy Ostrov, or Kaihyo To)　^{and the Kuril Islands} shall be transferred　to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in full sovereignty.

Article3

The Allied and Associated Powers agree that there shall be transferred in full sovereignty to the Republic of Korea all rights and titles to the Korean Mainland territory and all offshore Korean islands, including Quelpart　(Saishu To), the Nan　how group (San To,　or Komun Do) which forms port Hamilton (Tonaikai),　Dagelet Island (Utsuryo To,　or Matsu Shima),　Liancourt Rocks (Takeshima),　and all other islands and islets islets to which Japan had acquired title lying outside … and to the east of the meridian 124゜15´E. longitude ,　north of the parallel 33゜N.　latitude,　and west of a　line from the seaward terminus of the boundary approximately three nautical miles　from the mouth of the Tumen River to a point in 37゜30´N. latitude,132゜40 ´E. longitude. This line is indicated on the map attached to the present Agreement.

Opinion about the Territorial Clauses & Agreement Respecting the Disposition of Former Japanese Territories by Legal Adviser of the Department of State on Dec 19, 1949

Since territorial dispositions are generally matters of considerable importance to the various nations concerned, most nations would doubtless desire that the disposing document be of the same dignity, namely, a treaty. Hence, two documents would need to be ratified. Where the intended recipient is agreed upon, and no important matters call for outside action, it would be a matter of some difficulty to explain to other nations the necessity for the departure from practice, unless a substantial reason appeared. It is our understanding that the reason advanced for separate documents in the case of cession of Japanese territory is that the absence of “cession to” clauses in the Treaty of Peace will be of psychological benefit to Japan.

U.S. Draft made on December 29, 1949

U.S. Draft made on December 29, 1949

ChapterII

Territorial Clauses

Article 3

1.The Territory of Japan shall comprise the four principal Japanese islands of Honshu, Kyushu, Shikoku and Hokkaido and all adjacent minor islands, including the islands of the Inland sea(seto Naikai); Tsushima,Takeshima (Liancourt Rocks), Oki retto, Sado, Okujiri, Rebun, Riishiri and all other islands in the Japan Sea (Nippon Kai) within a line connecting the farther shores of Tsushima, Takeshima and Rebun; the Goto archipelago, the Ryukyu Islands north of 29° N. Latitude, and all other islanls of the East China Sea east of longtude 127° east of Greenwich and north of 29°N. Latitude; the Izu Islands southward to end including Sofu Gan (lot's Wife) and all other islands of the Philippine Sea nearer to the four principal islands than the islands named; and the Habomai group and Shikotan lying to the east and south of a line extending from a point in 43°35' N.Latitude, 145°35' E. logitude to a point in 44°N. latitude, 146°30' E. longitude, and to the south of a line drawn due east on the parsllel in 44° N. Latitude. All of the islands identified above, with a three-mile belt of territorial waters, shall belong to Japan.

Article 6

Japan hereby renounces in favor Korea all rights and titles to the Korean mainland territory and all offshore Korean islands, including Quelpart (Saishu To), the Nan How group (San To, or Komun Do) which forms Port Hamilton (Tonaikai), Dagelet Island (Utsuryo To, or Matsu Shima), and all other offshore Korean islands and islets to which Japan had acquired title.

Memorandum by Mr. Robert A. Fearey of the Office of Northeast Asian Affairs on December 29, 1949

Attached is a new draft of the treaty. The principal changes, comparing it with the November 2 draft, are as follows:

3. The Habomais and Shikotan and Liancourt Rocks have been include within the new Japan

(Drafts embodying Sebold's proposal for a very brief territorial chapter in which Japan would simply renounce all rights and titles to areas which it is not to keep and the Allied and Associated Powers would dipose of those areas in a separate agreement, were prepared and considered, but it was decided after talking with Mr. Fisher that this arrangement would weaken our hold on Fomasa, Sahalien, and the Kuriles if the Chinese and Soviets did not participate, and the idea was accordingly dropped.)

Commentary on Draft Treaty by the Department of State on July, 1950

The Islands of the Inland Sea, Oki Retto, Sado, Okujiri, Rebun and Rishiri – These islands and lesser islands in the Japan Sea east of Tsushima, Takeshima and Rebun are almost exclusively populated by Japanese, have long been recognized as Japanese, were not “ taken by violence and greed”, and are closer to Japan than to any other nation. None has been claimed by another power and Japan’s right to retain them is not likely to be questioned in the treaty negotiation. In 1948 the population of Oki Retto was 44,000, of Sado 125,000, of Okujiri 7,000, of Rebun 9,000, and of Riishiri 20,000.

Takeshima (Liancourt Rocks) – The two uninhabited islets of Takeshima, almost equidistant from Japan and Korea in Japan Sea, were formally claimed by Japan in 1905, apparently without protest by Korea, and placed under the jurisdiction of the Oki Islands Branch Office of Shimane Prefecture. They are breeding ground for sea lions, and records show that for a long time Japanese fishermen migrated there during certain seasons. Unlike Dagelet Island a short not appear ever to have been claimed by Korea. The islands have been used by U.S. forces during the occupation as a bombing range and have possible value as a weather or radar station site.

U.S. Draft made on August 7, 1950

U.S. Draft made on August 7, 1950

CHAPTER II

SOVEREIGNTY

2. Subject to the provisions hereof and of any other relevant treaties, the Allied and Associated Powers accept the full sovereignty of the Japanese people, and their freely chosen representatives, over Japan and its territorial waters.

CHAPTER IV

TERRITORY

4. Japan recognizes the independence of Korea and will base its relation With Korea on the resolutions ,adopted by the United Nations Assembly on December _, 1948.[3]

Memorandum by Mr. Robert A. Fearey of the Office of Northeast Asian Affairs on 1950 (UNDATED)

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY THE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT

3. "territory."

(a) More precise information concerning the disposition of former Japanese territories, e.g., the Paracel, Volcano and Marcus and Izu Islands, is requested.

It is thought that the islands of the Inland Sea, Oki Retto, Sado, Okujiri, IRebun, Riishiri, Tsushima, Takeshima, the Goto Archipelago, the northernmost Ryukyus, and the Izus, all long recognized as Japanese, would be retained by Japan. [4]

U.K. Draft made on April 7, 1951

Part I. - Territorial Clauses

ARTICIE l

Japanese sovereignty shall continue over all the islands and adjacent islets and rocks lying within an area bounded by a line from latitude 30°N, in a north-westerly direction to approximately latitude 33°N. 128 ° E. then northward between the islands of Quelpart, Fukue-Shima bearing north - easterly between Korea and the island of Tsushima, continuing in this direction with the islands of Oki-Retto to the south-east and Take Shima to the north-west curving with the coast of Honshu, then northerly skirting Rebun Shima passing easterly through Soya Kaikyo approximately 142° E., then in a south-easterly direction parallel to the coast of Hokkaido to 145° 30’ E. entering Numero Kaikyo at approximately 44° 30’ N. in a south-westerly direction to approximately 43° 45' N. and 145° 15' E., then in a south-easterly direction to approximately 43° 35' N. 145 ' 35' E., then bearing north-easterly to approximately 44° N., so excluding Kunashiri, and curving to the east and then bearing south-westerly to include Shikotan at 147° 5' E., being the most easterly point, then in a south-westerly direction with the coastlin6 towards the Nanpo Group of Islands curving south to include Sofu-Gan (Lot's Wife) at 29° 50' N., veering to the north-west towards the coast of Honshu, then at approximately 33° N. turning south-westerly past Shikoku to 30° N. to include YakuShima and excluding Kuchino Shima and the Ryuku Islands south of latitude 30° North. The line above described is plotted on the map attached to the present treaty (Annex I).(') In the case of a discrepancy between the map attached to the textual description of the line, the latter shall prevail.

FROM:The National Archives of the United Kingdom FO371/92538,FJ1022/222

Joint U.S.-U.K. Draft made on May 3, 1951

U.S. – U.K. Meeting on April 25, 1951

SECRET

Anglo - American Meetings on Japanese Peace Treaty.

Summary Record of First Meeting held in Washington at 10.30 a.m. on the 25th April.

Present were:

United Kingdom

Mr. C.H. Johnston

Mr. G.G. Fitzmurice

Miss Dennehy

Mr. F.S. Tomlison

Mr. K.R.C. Pridham

United States

Mr. John M. Allison

Brig. Gen. Conrad Snow

Mr. Robert A. Fearly

Mr. Noel Hemmendinger

Mr. C. Arnold Fraleigh

Mr. Douglas Overton

[...]

CHAPTER II.

Mr. Allison said that the American View was that our defining of the Japanese boundaries would have a bad psychological effect on the Japanese and emphasize the contraction of their country. The Americans would prefer a wording which emphasized the full sovereignty of Japan such territory as we should leave her and, exclude by name from her sovereignty and only such territory and islands as might be necessary to avoid confusion.

FROM:The National Archives of the United Kingdom FO371/92545, FJ1022/342

U.S. – U.K. Meeting on May 2, 1951

SECRET

1076/357/510

Anglo - American Meetings on Japanese Peace Treaty.

Summary Record of Seventh Meeting held at 10.30 a.m. on the 2nd May, in Washington

Present were:

United Kingdom

Mr. C.H. Johnston

Mr. G.G. Fitzmurice

Mr. F.A. Vallat

Mr. F.S. Tomlison

Mr. K.R.C. Pridham

United States

Mr. John M. Allison

Brig. Gen. Conrad Snow

Mr. Robert A. Fearly

[...]

UNITED STATES CHAPTERII

Mr. Fitmaurice suggested that the United States Article 2 might well omitted, since it might be taken to imply that Japan's sovereignty depended upon the present treaty, which was not the case. Mr. Allison said he would consider this point.

UNITED STATES CHAPTER III

Both Delegations agreed that it would be preferable to specify only the territory over which Japan was renouncing sovereignty. In this connection, United States Article 3 would require the insertion of the three islands Quelpart, Port Hamilton and Dagelet. It was left undecided whether the sentence in British Article 2 requiring Japan to recognize whatever settlement the United Nations might make in Korea should be maintained or not. It was agreed that further consideration should be given to the drafting of the sentence dealing with Japan’s renunciation of her mandates.

[...]

BRITISH EMBASSY,

WASHINGTON, D. C.

2nd May, 1951

FROM:The National Archives of the United Kingdom FO371/92547,FJ1022/376

Joint U.S.-U.K. Draft made on May 3, 1951

CHAPTER II

TERRITORY

Article 2

Japan renounces all rights, titles and claims to Korea (including Quelpart, Port Hamilton and Dagelet)', [Formosa and the Pesca-dores]; and also all rights, titles and claims in connection with the mandate system, [or based on any past activity of Japanese nationals in the Antarctic area]. Japan accepts the action of the United Nations Security Council of April 2, 1947, in relation to extending the trusteeship system to Pacific .Islands formerly under mandate to Japan. (U.K. reserves position onwpassages between square brackets.)

[5]

Commentary on Draft Treaty by the Department of State on June 1, 1951

New Zealand

"In view of the need to ensure that none of the islands near Japan is left in disputed sovereignty, the New Zealand Government favours the precise delimitation by latitude and longitude of the territory to be retained by Japan as suggested in Article 1 of the United Kingdom's draft. The adoption of this device could for example make it clear that the Habomai Islands and Shikotan at present under Russian occupation will remain with Japan."

(Comment-In the discussions at Washington the British agreed to drop this proposal when the U.S. pointed to the psychological disadvantages of seeming to fence Japan in by a continuous line around Japan. The Japanese had objected to the British proposal when it was discussed with them in Tokyo. U.S. willingness to specify in the treaty that Korean territory included Quelpart, Port Hamilton and Dagelet also helped to persuade the British. As regards the Habomais and Shikotan, it has seemed more realistic, with the USSR in occupation of the islands, not specifically to stipulate their return to Japan.)[6]

Reviced U.S.-U.K. Draft made on June 14, 1951

Reviced U.S.-U.K. Draft made on June 14, 1951

CHAPTER II

TERRITORY

Article 2

(a) Japan, recognizing the independence of Korea, renounces all right, title and claim to Korea, including the islands of Quelpart, Port Hamilton and Dagelet.[7]

Memorandam by Mr. Boggs on July 13, 1951

2. Liancourt Rocks

The Liancourt Rocks (Takeshima) were among the islands to which, in a 1949 draft treaty, Japan would have renounced claim Korea. In a Japanese Foreign Office publication, entitled “” Minor Islands Adjacent to Japan Proper”, Part IV, June 1947, Liancourt Rocks are include. It may therefore be advisable to name them specifically in the draft treaty, in some such form as the following (Article2):

(a) Japan, recognizing the independence of Korea, renounce all right, title and claim to Korea, including the islands of Quelpart, Port Hamilton, Dagelet, and Liancourt Rocks.

Memorandam by Mr. Boggs on July 16, 1951

2. Liancourt Rocks

By one 1949 draft treaty with Japan, the Liancourt Rocks (Takeshima) were to have been renounced to Korea; by another draft at about the same time they were to be named as being retained by Japan. A Japanese Foreign Office publication, entitled "Minor Islands Adjacent to Japan Proper" Part IV, June 1947, includes "Liancourt Rocks(Takeshima)" and says:

It should be noted that while there is a Korean name for Dagelet, None exists for the Liancourts Rocks and they are not shown in the maps made in Korea.

If it is decided to give them to Korea, it would be necessary only to add "and Liancourt Rocks" the end of Art. 2, par. (a).

Requests From Korea on July 19, 1951

The Korean Ambassador to the Secretary of State

[...]

1.My Government requests that the word “renounces” in Paragraph a, Article Number 2, should be replaced by “confirms that it renounced on August 9,1945, all right, title and claim to Korea and the islands which were part of Korea prior to its annexation by Japan, including the island Quelpart, Port Hamilton, Dagelet, Dokdo and Parangdo.”

[...][8]

U.S. – R.O.K Meeting on July 19, 1951

SECRET

[Washington,] July 19, 1951

Subject: Japanese Peace Treaty

Participants: Dr. Yu Chan Yang, Korean

Ambassador

Mr. Pyo Wook Han, First Secretary, Korean Embassy

Ambassador John Foster Dulles Mr. Arthur B. Emmons, 3rd, Officer in Charge, Korean Affairs

[...]

After reading the Ambassador's communication, Mr. Dulles discussed the three points contained therein. With regard to the first point, Mr. Dulles was in doubt that the formula confirming Japan's renunciation of certain territorial claims to Korea, could be included in the treaty in the form suggested by the ROK. He explained that the terms of the Japanese surrender instrument of August 9, 1945 did not, of themselves, technically consititute a formal and final determination of this question. He added, however, that the Department would consider including in the treaty a clause giving retroactive effect to the Japanese renunciation of territorial claims to August 9, 1945. The Korean Ambassador replied that if this were done he believed that the point raised by his Government would be met satisfactorily.

Mr. Dulles noted that paragraph 1 of the Korean Ambassador’s communication made no reference to the Island of Tsushima and the Korean Ambassador agreed that this had been omitted. Mr. Dulles then inquired as to the location of the two islands, Dokdo and Parangdo. Mr. Han stated that these were two small islands lying in the Sea of Japan, he believed in the general vicinity of Ullungdo. Mr. Dulles asked whether these islands had been Korean before the Japanese annexation, to which the Ambassador replied in the affirmative. If that were the case, Mr. Dulles saw no particular problem in including these islands in the pertinent part of the treaty which related to the renunciation of Japanese territorial claims to Korean territory.

[...][9]

Memorandam by Mr. Boggs on July 31, 1951

In response to your telephone requests for information regarding to Dokdo and Parangdo, two islands which Korea desires to have Japan renounce in favor of Korea in the treaty of peace, we have tried all resources in Washington which we have thought of and have not been able to identify either of them.

[...]

Since it is difficult to find the name equivalents in the various languages, I am listing below the principal islands in which Korea is interested, in three columns giving the names in European, Japanese and Korean forms.

H.O.Pub.No.122B(1947) page	European Name	Japanese Name	Korean Name
606	Quelpart	Saishu To	Cheju Do
584	Port Hamilton	Tonai Kai	Tonae Hae
534	Dagelet	Utsuryo To Matsu-shima(?)	Ullung Do
535	Liancourt Rocks	Take-shima	(none)
	?	?	Dokdo
	?	?	Parangdo

Memorandam by Mr. Robert A. Fearey and Mr. Boggs on August 3, 1951

In his attached memorandum, Mr. Boggs states that although he has "tried all resources in Washington" he has been unable to identify Dokdo and Parangdo, mentioned in the Korean Embassy's note. On re-ceiving Boggs's memo. I asked the Korean desk to find out whether anyone in the Korean Embassy officer had told him they believed Dokdo was near Ullengdo, or Takeshima Rock, and suspected that Parangdo was too. Apparently that is all we can learn short of a cable to Muccio.

Telegram to Muccio from Dulles on August 7, 1951

For MUCCIO from DULLES.

Neither our geographers nor Korean Embassy have been able locate Dokdo and Parangdo Islands. Therefore unless we hear immediately cannot consider this Korean proposal to confirm their sovereignty over these islands.

Diplomatic note by Dean Rusk on August 10, 1951

With respect to request of the Korean Government that Article 2(a) of the draft be revised to provide that Japan "confirms that it renounced on August 9, 1945, all right, title and claim to Korea and the islands which were part of Korea prior to its annexation by Japan, including the islands Quelpart, Port Hamilton, Dagelet, Dokdo and Parangdo," the United States Government regrets that it is unable to concur in this proposed amendment. The United States Government does not feel that the Treaty should adopt the theory that Japan's acceptance of the Potsdam Declaration on August 9, 1945 constituted a formal or final renunciation of sovereignty by Japan over the areas dealt with in the Declaration. As regards the island of Dokdo, otherwise known as Takeshima or Liancourt Rocks, this normally uninhabited rock formation was according to our information never treated as part of Korea and, since about 1905, has been under the jurisdiction of the Oki Islands Branch Office of Shimane Prefecture of Japan. The island does not appear ever before to have been claimed by Korea. It is understood that the Korean Government's request that "Parangdo" be included among the islands named in the treaty as having been renounced by Japan has been withdrawn.

Final text of the treaty on September 8, 1951

Chapter I. Peace

Article 1

(b) The Allied Powers recognize the full sovereignty of the Japanese people over Japan and its territorial waters.

Chapter II. Territory

Article 2

(a) Japan recognizing the independence of Korea, renounces all right, title and claim to Korea, including the islands of Quelpart, Port Hamilton and Dagelet.

---

From

U.S. NARA(The National Archives and Records Administration)

• Confidential U.S. State Department Special Files, Japan 1947-1956）
• Records of Office of Northeast Asian Affairs, Relating to the Treaty of Peace with Japan — Subject File,1945-51 (Lot File 56 D 527)
• Records of Office of Historian. Japanese Peace and Security Treaties,1946-1952 (Lot File 78 D 173)

United States Department of State / Foreign relations of the United States, 1949. The Far East and Australasia (in two parts) Volume VII, Part 2 (1949)[10]

United States Department of State / Foreign relations of the United States, 1950. East Asia and the Pacific Volume VI (1950)[11]

United States Department of State / Foreign relations of the United States, 1951. Asia and the Pacific (in two parts) Volume VI, Part 1 [12]

The National Archives of the United Kingdom

• FO371/92547, FJ1022/376
• FO371/92538, FJ1022/222
• FO371/92545, FJ1022/342