PRISONERS IN KOREA

Press, Volume LXXXIX, Issue 27035, 9 May 1953, Page 7

PRISONERS IN KOREA

Objections To Enemy Plan (N.Z. Press Association—Copyright) (Rec. 11 p.m.) NEW YORK, May 8. The Communists’ latest truce proposals were discussed yesterday at a special secret meeting among President Eisenhower and State and Defence Department advisers. The diplomatic correspondent of the “New York Times,” James Reston, quoted officials as saying that the truce terms had been analysed and objections raised on some points. One objection was that the Communists did not set a time limit on how long prisoners of war could be held in Korea. Another was that all the proposed members of the fivenation neutral commission for prisoners had recognised the Peking regime as the legitimate government of China. The “New York Times” said that in spite of two major concessions at Panmunjon, the Communists were trying every trick in their arsenal to get their hands on all prisoners, willing or not. “That is not merely a matter of face-saving; it is a matter of discouraging desertions from their armies in a future war.” Communist Proposals

In handing over the eight-point Communist proposal at Panmunjon, General Nam H, the chief Communist negotiator, said the Communists would stand on their new proposal only if the Allies agreed to all parts of it. If not the Communists would return to their earlier stand that all prisoners resisting repatriation be transported to a neutral country and eventually repatriated. The eight points were:— (1) Prisoners insisting on repatriation must be returned to their own flags within two months of an armistice, with the remainder staying in Korea under a five-nation neutral commission for four months while “explanations” are made to assure them of a "peaceful life” in their own country.

(2) The armistice commission would consist of Sweden, Switzerland, Poland, Czechoslovakia, and India, and would serve as a neutral custodian of prisoners unwilling to return home. (3) The commission should take custody of the prisoners “at the original place of detention”—Korea —with the member nations each providing an equal number of armed troops to take custody. (4) Inside four months the nations to which the prisoners belong should be allowed to send men to “original places of detention” to see the prisoners, eliminate apprehensions and inform them on all matters relating to their return to their homelands. (5) Prisoners who then wanted repatriation would be sent home, and the disposition of any prisoner who still refused repatriation after four months’ explanations should be turned over to a nigh-level political conference.

(6) Prisoners still in the custody of the commission should be disposed of through consultation by a political conference in accordance with Paragraph 60, Article 4 of the armistice agreement. (7) The “nations to which they belong” should pay the custody and travelling expenses of the prisoners. (8) The prisoners should be told of the terms of the proposal and the arrangements rising from it.

John Hightower, diplomatic correspondent of the Associated Press, said the United Nations Command probably would submit counter-proposals to the Communist plan. He said that at the meeting between the President and his advisers, there was apparently a strong objection to the provision which would enable two Communist nations, Poland, and Czechoslovakia, to send troops to South Korea. Criticism from Congressmen

The Communist proposals came in for criticism from influential Congressmen. Several Senators and members of the House of Representatives were opposed to the inclusion of India lon the five-nation commission which would take charge in Korea of 48,500 enemy prisoners who have refused to return to Communist territory. The commission proposed by the Communist truce delegation would consist of Sweden. Switzerland. Poland. Czechoslovakia, and India. Mr Dewey Short, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said that India was the “Trojan horse,” which would hold the decisive vote. “I don’t think India is neutral,” he said. Mr Harold Vorys, a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said the proposed commission “looks like it will be neutral on the Communist side. India has taken the Communist viewpoint on how prisoners should be handled.”

Senator William Knowland, of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said the commission was “a stacked deck. This is only another plan to put India in charge of the prisoners. The result would be the proselytising of the prisoners from only one side—the Communist side.” Senators John Sparkman (Democrat, Alabama) and H. Alexander Smith (Republican, New Jersey), also members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said they regarded India as neutral, but Senator Smith said the Communist satellite nations, Poland and Czechoslovakia, should not be on the commission.

CONSCRIPTION IN SOUTHJKOREA SEOUL, May 7. The South Korean Government will draft into the army all men between 20 and 26, and all others between 17 and 40 into the labour service. Only primary school teachers and railway engineers will be exempted.