As well as many other documents, this document shows that USA knew that Liancourt Rocks belong to Japan and that ROK illegally occupied the rocks. But USA didn't want to intervene in the dispute between the two countries. This "neutral" stance is the same today.
DATE: December 9, 1953, 7 pm
TOKYO1387 RPTD INFO 497 FROM DEPT. SEOUL Tokyo’s 1306 repeated 129. Seoul
Department aware of peace treaty determinations and
US administrative decisions which would lead Japanese expect us act in their far [favor] in any dispute with ROK over sovereignty Takeshima. However to best our knowledge formal statement US position to ROK in Rusk Note August 10, 1951 has not rpt not been communicated Japanese. Department believes may be advisable or
necessary at sometime inform Japanese Government US position on Takeshima.
Difficulty this point is question of timing as we do not rpt not wish add
another issue to already difficult ROK-Japan negotiations or involve ourselves
further than necessary in their controversies, especially in light many current
issues pending with ROK.
Despite US view peace treaty a determination under
terms Potsdam Declaration and that treaty leaves Takeshima to Japan, and despite our participation in Potsdam and treaty and action under administrative
agreement, it does not rpt not necessarily follow us automatically responsible
for settling or intervening in Japan’s international disputes, territorial or
otherwise, arising from peace treaty. US view re Takeshima simply that of one of
many signatories to treaty. Article 22 was framed for purpose settling treaty
disputes. New element mentioned paragraph 3 your 1275 of Japanese feeling United States should protect Japan from ROK pretensions to Takeshima cannot rpt not be considered as legitimate claim for US action under security treaty. For more serious threat to both US and
Japanin Soviet occupation Habomais does not rpt not impel UStake military action against nor rpt nor would would Japanese seriously contend such was our obligation despite our public declaration Habomais are Japanese territory. While not rpt not desirable impress on Japanese Government security treaty represents no rpt no legal commitment on part US, Japan should understand benefits security treaty should not rpt not be USSR
dissipated on issues susceptible judicial settlement. Therefore as stated DEPTEL
Pusan365 rptd info 1360 November 26, 1952 and restated DEPTEL Tokyo
1198 US should not rpt not become involved in territorial dispute arising from
Korean claim to Takeshima.
Issue seems less acute at moment so perhaps no rpt no action on our part required. However in case issue revived believe our general line should be that this issue, if it cannot rpt not be settled by Japanese and Koreans themselves, is kind of issue appropriate for presentation International Court of Justice.
SECRET SECURITY INFORMATION
1953 December: SECRET SECURITY INFORMATION by Dulles
After the Installation of Syngman Rhee Line - American documents: Part Five
To follow was written by John Foster Dulles (1888-1959), the 52nd United States Secretary of State, on December 9, 1953.