The Key West citizen. [volume] (Key West, Fla.) 1879-current, 1953-01-27
The World Today
By JAMES MARROW

In Korea, Wnere the truce talks
have stopped dead On the question
of prisoners.
The Communists demand the
United Nations hand back all pris-
oners, whether or not the pris-
oners want to return or say they're
afraid to return. The U. N. says
| it will send back no prisoners
against their will.
Some day the two sides may re-
sumo the peace talks. Or Eisen-
hover may try, by force of arms,
to win the war. But as of now
the prisoner question is at the
heart of the deadlock. It has a
long background.
After World War Russia'S Boil
shevik government signed a num-
Der of peace treaties. Former
Secretary of State Acheson has
cited II in which:
Russia agreed all prisoners of
war should be returned to their
homeland but only if they wanted
to go. One treaty. for example,
said: Repatriation ought not to
be enforced; it is left to the free
choice of the prisoners"
There were two ideas involved:
| az that as soon as a war was
over, all prisoners who wanted to
return home should be returned
at once; but (2) if they were
afraid to return, they shouldn't be
forced to.
This was not a novel idea. II
was simply in keeping with the
long-established principle of asy-
lum" among nations. Meaning:
If man fled from Country A
to Country B because, for instance,
he said he feared persecution for
his political beliefs in his own
country, A, then Country B could
let him stay and refuse to force
his return to A.
Soviet Russia liked this principle
so much that it was embodied in
the Soviet Constitution of 1896 in
a clause providing asylum for
political fugitives.
After World War II Russia was
accused of deliberately holding
back prisoners it had captured
particularly German and Japanese
who wanted to return to their
homelands.
This was contrary to previous
understandings among nations
about war prisoners-that once the
war was over they should be re-
turned home at once, if they want
ed to go.
And there had been several in
ternational agreements that priS-
oners who wanted to return home
after a war should be sent home
at once. For example, there was
such an agreement made at Gene
va in 1929.
So in 1949 there was another
meeting at Geneva, to revise the
1929 agreement. made there. The
United States and Russia took part.
One sentence agreed to in 1919
later became very much a sore
point in the Korean War.
This sentence, part of what is
called Article 1l8, says simply
Prisoners of war shall be re.
leased and repatriated without de-
lay after the cessation of active
hostilities. -
When the United Nations re-
fused in Korea to send back to
the Communists prisoners who
didn't want to 90, Russia's For
eign Minister Andrea Vishinsky.
pointed to that Article 11S, agreed
to in 1919. and said in effect:
The U. N. stand is direct viola
ton of Article lis.
The United States argues this
way: Refusing to return prisoners
who are afraid to return does not
violate Article 1lS because, for one
thing, it doesn't say prisoners who
don't want to return have to be
returned.
Further the u. S. argument goes,
the agreements reached at Geneva
were all done for humanitarian
reasons. That is, to protect pris-
oners of war and keep captur ma
tons from retaining them against
their will.
And. says the U. S., it would
be inhuman to make prisoners,
who feared for their lives if sent
back to the Communists, return
to what might be certain death
for them.
So. the U. S. says. Vishinsky's
argument is entirely legalistic and
inhuInan.
There are some people in this
country who. while very anti.Com-
munist, contend the U. S. should
stick strictly to Article lis and re-
turn the prisoners in Korea.
In England. the practice of hold
inc "rakaesf ntnr dnad hssat,