Evening star., 1951-08-27
sv m. As,oeiut.d Press

FOLLOWING is the tert OF an
exchange OF notes betiDeen the
United States and india, in
sUhich India announces that it
WiI not sign the japanese peace
treaty and the United States er-
presses regrets at the decision:
Indian Note.
August %. 1851.
Embassy Of India,
Washington, D. c.
Dear Mr.. Ambassador,
I am desired to convey to you
the following reply on behalf Of
the government Of India to your
Governments invitation to par
ticipate in a conference to con-
clude a treaty Of peace with Japan
to be convened on September 4,
1851, in San Francisco.
Begins: "The government Of In
dia have the honour to acknowl-
edge with thanks for the receipt
of the reply of the Government Of
the United States Of America to
the representations which they
had made on the japanese peace
treaty in their communication
dated July 80, 1851. They fully
appreciate the consideration given
to their views by the United States
Government and wish to assure
them that the present reply is
conceived in a spirit Of frankness
and sincere friendship for Gov
ernment and people of the United
States Of America.
2.
Throughout the negotiations
that have taken place between the
two governments on the subject
Of the treaty the government of
India have laid emphasis upon two
fundamental detectives:
Cd The terms of the treaty
should concede to Japan a posi-
ton of honour, equality and con-
tentment among the community
Of free nations;
CID They should be so framed
as to enable all countries specially
interested in the maintenance Of
a stable peace in the Far East to-
subscribe to the treaty sooner or
later.
The government of India have
after most careful thought come
to the conclusion that the treaty
does not in material respects
satisfy either of these two criteria.
3.
Condition L.
CAD It is only natural to ex-
pect Japan should desire the
restoration in full of her sover-
eighty over territory of which the
inhabitants have a historical af-
11nity with her own people and
which she has not acquired by
aggression from any other coun-
try. The Ryuko and the Bonin
Islands fully satisfy this descrip-
ton. Nevertheless the treaty pro-
poses that until United States
Government seek and obtain trus-
teeship over these islands they
should continue to be subject to
the legislative and administrative
control Of the United States. It
is apparent to the government of
India that such arrangements
cannot but be a source of dis
satisfaction to large sections of
the Japanese people and must
carry the seed Of future dispute
and possible conflict in the Far
East.
(B) The government of India
recognize that as sovereign ma
ton Japan should have the right
to make arrangements for her
defense as provided in Article s
OF the treaty. If in exercise Of
this right Japan should decide to
enter into defensive agreements
with a friendly power no one could
reasonably object to this. But
the right should be exercised by
the government of Japan when
Japan has become truly sovereign.
A provision in the treaty which
suggests that the present ocupa-
tion force may stay on in Japan
as part Of such defensive agree
ment is bound to give rise to the
impression that the agreement
does not represent a decision
taken by Japan in the full en-
joyment Of her freedom as a