サンフランシスコ平和条約には、日本の領土に関係の有る、以下の条文がある。 サンフランシスコ平和条約 the treaty on September 8, 1951
- 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.
この文章がどの様な変遷・検討を経て確定したのかを関連文書を追って見ます。
Memorandum by Mr. Robert A. Fearey of the Office of Northeast Asian Affairs on 1950 (UNDATED) オーストラリア政府に対しての質問回答で、現竹島は日本に含まれるとの回答をする。
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
1950.11.24.Principles on Japanese Peace Treaty set force by the U.S. government (Nov. 24, 1950) 1951.02.03. Provisional Memorandom (日米事務レベル折衝(第三回)にて、ダレス特使より受領)Territory Japan would
renounce all rights and titles to Korea, Formosa and the Pescadores, and
accept a United Nations tるs手絵師pウィthてぇUnited States as administering
authority over the Ryukyu Islands south of 29' north latitude, the
Bonin Islands, including Rosario Island, the Volcano Islands, Parece
Vela and Mercus Island............ (「日本外交文書 サンフランシスコ平和条約 対米交渉」外務省2007 P230) 1951.03.12 The British Foreign Ministry informs the United States of its views on the peace treaty with Japan. The British, after consulting with the Commonwealth nations (Australia, Canada, New Zealand), proposed that Japanese territory be defined as the four main Japanese islands and a few adjacent minor islands, as suggested in the Potsdam Declaration. The British proposal (as suggested by New Zealand) was to have Japanese territory and territorial waters be defined by an exact delimitation in latitude and longitude. The British Commonwealth nations were concerned about territorial disputes with Japan, and insisted on this item. The U.S. State Department later dissuaded the British of this idea. http://dokdo-research.com/mlovmo/page9.html
1951.03.23.Provisional U.S. draft of a Japanese Peace Treaty (Mar. 23, 1951)The Allied Powers recognize the full sovereignty of the
Japanese people over Japan and its territorial waters
Article 3 terriroty Japan renounces all rights, titles and claims to Korea, Formosa
and the Pescadores; and also all rights, titles and claims in
connection with the mandate system or deriving from the
activities of Japanese nationals in the Antarctic area. …
( Foreign Relations of the United States, 1951, Asia and the
Pacific, Volume VI, Part 1 p945)
1951.03.27 PM5:00 Siebold から吉田茂首相が受領した仮草案(Provisional Draft of Japanese Peace Treaty(Sugegstive Only)ChapterⅢ Territory、
3.Japan renounces all rights, titles and claims to Korea のみの掲載となっております。P333~334
1951年3月付け米国草案(サンフランシスコ平和条約)に対する韓国側意見書 http://ja.wikisource.org/wiki/FRUS#Request_From_Korea_1951.08.02 SECRET
Comments on Korean Note Regarding U.S. Treaty Draft
(Numbers correspond with those pencilled in the margin of the note)
- 1. Korea should be specifically designated an Allied Power--Korea's
status as an Allied Power will of course be made clear if it is
decided to include Korea in the list of potential signatories in the
Preamble of the May 3 draft.
- 2. Korea should be permitted to sign the treaty,as Poland was the
Versailles Treaty--On examination Korea's case for participation in the
treaty does not again much support from the example of Poland after
World War Ⅰ. The Polish National Committies set up in Paris in 1917
under Paderewski was "rerecognized" and dealt with by all the principal
western Allies. Although I have been unable to nail(?) down the fact
that it declared war on Germany it was set up for the purpose of
fighting Germany and liberating Poland and can therefore be assumed to
have done so. When Germany surrendered the Committes and the Regancy
Council, which had been set up by the Central Powers at Warsaw, got
together and formed a Provisional Government of Poland which was
recognized as such by the Powers before the Versailles Conference was
convened. Poland had an army fighting in France even before 1917.
1951.03.27 Provisional Draft of a Japanese peace Treaty (Suggestive Only)
Chapter ⅢTerritory
3.Japan renounces all rights, titles and claims to Korea, Formosa and the Pescadores; and also all rights, titles and claims in connection with the mandate system or deriving from the activities of Japaanese nationals in the Antarctic area..... (「日本外交文書 サンフランシスコ平和条約 対米交渉」外務省2007 P334)
1951.04.04 3/27の仮草案に対する、井口次官からシーボルトに出された日本側の意見書この朝鮮の放棄の件に関しては特に意見は書かれていません。P351
1951.04.07日付イギリスによる草案( U.K. Draft made on April 1951) では、日本の主権が残る島と、日本が放棄する領土の間を緯度、経度を用いて線を引く事を記載している。 (内容から考えると、竹島は線よりも韓国側に記載) 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
原貴美恵氏:四月に作成された3次草案(注:4/7草案)について、 対米交渉用に作られたものであり、“添付の注意書きには、「英連邦諸国の合意文書ではなく、連邦諸国政府の見解
表現とみなされるものではない」旨が記されていた。”と述べていて、これがイギリス連邦諸国政府の公式見解ではないことに注意を喚起 5/4/11 23:08
1951.04.17 米国務省北東アジア課・フィアリーから外交局において内示された英国案第一章 領域条項
「第一条 日本の領土として残る地域を東西南北にわたつて緯度と軽度で作定する。注意すべきは、南西諸島は北緯三十度(米案は二十九度)できり、又、北方では、色丹が日本に属する事を明記してある。頗る精密な長い条文である。
「第二条 朝鮮に対する主権の放棄」 のみ記されているだけの様です(ただし英文文書が見つからず) (「日本外交文書 サンフランシスコ平和条約 対米交渉」外務省2007 P374-375)
1951.04.20 井口次官から米国務省北東アジア課フィアリーに対する、4/17付英国案に関する日本側意見(388)「英国案は、全文に最も明確に出ているように、無条件降伏した敵国に対し戦勝国の課する講和条約の性質を有する。 「かのような条約は、必ず、日本国民に深い失望感をもたせ、先日のダレス氏の総理に対する話の様にベルサイユ条約の経験を繰り返すこととなり、折角米国案によって喚起された、連合国と合携さえて国際の平和と安全の維持に寄輿せんとするその意欲をスポイルするであろう、(以下略) として、米国案が望ましい旨を意見しています。
1951.04.21 西村局長から米国務省北東アジア課フィアリーに対する「英国の平和条約案に対するわが方の逐条的見解について」396-397第一篠、 「英案の如き緯度経度による詳細な規定振は、日本国民に対し領土の喪失感を強く印象付けるので感情上面白くない」 「附属地図をつけることも、国民感情に輿える影響に対する考慮から反対」 「本条は、一般に米案の方が望ましい」としています。 第二篠 「朝鮮に対する素権の放棄に関する規定があるが、わが方は意義は無い」との意見を送っています。
1951.4.23. 韓国政府の平和条約署名問題に関するわが方見解
(吉田・ダレス会談(第二回)で米国側に交付)
(「日本外交文書 サンフランシスコ平和条約 対米交渉」外務省2007 P413)
1951.04.27.韓国政府が米国に「対馬領有権の主張の公文書」をおくる?1951.05.03日付アメリカとイギリスの合同委員会による草案(Joint_U.S.-U.K._Draft_made_on_May_3.2C_1951) U.S. – U.K. Meeting on April 25, 1951
1951.04.25日付のアメリカとイギリスの会談において、アメリカ側のMr.Allisionは、日本の境界を定義することは、日本に心理的な影響を与えるため、又混乱を避けるために日本が放棄する領土のみを地名を用いて記載するよう提案する、
- 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.
1951.04.25日付のアメリカとイギリスの会談で、日本が放棄する領土は済州島、巨文島、鬱陵島であることが提案される。 (竹島は日本が放棄する領土に含まれていない。) 両代表団は、日本が放棄する領土を特定し記載することが望ましいことで合意した。
- 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.
上二つの会談を元に、1951.05.03日付、アメリカとイギリスの合同委員会においての草案が作られる。(ここでも現竹島は日本が放棄する領土に含まれなかった。)
- 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 ownpassages between square
brackets.)
- 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
- 訳:
- 「日本の近くのどの島にも領有権論争が残されないことを確実とする必要とする観点から、ニュージーランド政府はイギリスの草案の第1条で提案されているように、日本によって保持されるべき領域を緯度と経度によって正確に境界を画定することを支持します。
- 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
1951.06.28 平和条約の修正案文 (6828午前、及び午後、アリソン公使より井口次官が受領)
特に朝鮮や竹島に関する修正案はなし。 (「日本外交文書 サンフランシスコ平和条約 対米交渉」外務省2007 P466) (「日本外交文書 平和条約の締結に関する調書 第三冊 Ⅳ外務省2007 P83)
1951.07.03. DRAFT JAPANESE PEACE TREATY
(1951.07.07 シーボルト大使から西村局長が受領)
- CHAPTER II
- TERRITORY
- (a)Japan, recognizing the independence of Korea, renounces all
right, title and claim to Korea, including the island of Quelpart, Port
Hamilton, and Dagelet
- (「日本外交文書 サンフランシスコ平和条約 対米交渉」外務省2007)
1951.07.09.USDOS
1951t, "Memorandum of Conversation: Japanese Peace Treaty ", 1951/7/9
(USNARA/694.004/7-951) see also USDOS, "Outgoing Telegram by Mr,Dean
Acheson (Secretary of State)" 1951/7/9 (USNARA/694.001/7-951 CS/H) 1951.07.09.
アメリカと韓国の会談 Dulles-Yang Yu Chang. 竹
島と鬱陵島、対馬、Parangdoを韓国領土にくわえるよう、アメリカに要請
1951.07.12 Joint U.S.-U.K. draft Peace Treaty with Japan (Jul. 12, 1951)http://aboutusa.japan.usembassy.gov/e/jusa-usj-chronology.html 1951.07.03. DRAFT JAPANESE PEACE TREATY 英米合同草案 (1951.07.03 夜 シーボルト大使から西村局長が受領) 1951.07.12 公表 (現竹島は日本が放棄する領土に含まれなかった。)
- CHAPTER II
- TERRITORY
- (a)Japan, recognizing the independence of Korea, renounces all right, title and claim to Korea, including the island of Quelpart, Port Hamilton, and Dagelet
- (「日本外交文書 サンフランシスコ平和条約 対米交渉」外務省2007 P529)
(「日本外交文書 平和条約の締結に関する調書 第三冊 Ⅳ外務省2007 P540/556)
(1951.07.06:Scapin 2160 FOR : JAPANESE GOVERNMENT Liancourt Rocks (Take-Shima)
(1951.07.07 シーボルトから西村局長に渡された、「平和条約案および宣言文の交付に関する連合国宛米国覚書」 添付した対日平和条約及び日本国による二箇の宣言の草案は、合衆国政府 及び連合王国の陛下の政府が、(1)日本国に対する戦争にもつとも密接な関係 を持つた諸国の政府に対して三月の後半に厄付した合衆国の條約草案、(2)こ れと独立に起草されてほぼ同時期に英連邦諸国に回付した連合王国の草案 並びに(3)前期の二草案に関して関係諸政府から受領した所見および意見に基い て起草された。 添付した草案には、日本国との平和を達成するのに連合国にとつてひろく受 諾しうる條件を具体的に現わしたものであると信じられる。 を受けた政府が、添付された草案に対してさらに意見をもつことがあ る場合には、一九五一年七月二十日またはその頃に合衆国政府及び連合王 国の陛下の政府の共同の発起の下に、特別の事情が存在する場合を除き、日 本国と戦争状態にあるすべての国の政府に、ここで要請した意見から生ずる 修正を加えた草案を、これら諸国のゆうすることある所見の提出要請並びに千 九百五十一年九月三日又はその頃に_______において開催しうるよう 希望される平和条約の最終的審議および調印のための会議への招請とともに、 正式に回付する予定であることを念頭におかれて、できる限りすみやかにそ れらの意見を合衆国政府に提出されるよう要請する。草案は、日本国に対す る戦争に、関係した度合がより密接でない連合国に千九百五十一年七月九日 に非公式に 府されることになる。 條約草案及び宣言は、一九五一年七月十二日に公表される予定になつ ている。それまでの間、草案の機密扱いを厳重に守られたい。
1951.07.13日付Boggのメモ Memorandam by Mr._Boggs on_July 13.1951で、現竹島のことが質問される。1949年の草案において日本が放棄する領土に入っていたが、日本政府の Minor Islands Adjacent
to Japan Proper”, Part IV, June 1947,」に記載されていたので、日本が放棄する領土に含まれるのか含まれないのかきちんと特定するように提言がある。 Subject: Sprately Island and the Paracels, in Draft Japanese Peace Treaty The following information and suggesting are furnished in response to your telephone request this morning.
1.Sprately Island and the Paracel Islands2. Liancourt Rocks
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
These rocky islets are described as follows in the U.S. Hydrographic Office publication no. 123A, Sailing Directions for Japan, Volume I (1st ed., 1945):
Take Shima (Liancourt Rocks) 37"15'N., 131"52'E. H.O.Chart 3320) consists of two barren , guano-whitened, and uninhabited rocky islets and several rocks, which appear to be steep-to. They lie near the streamer track leading from Tsushima Strait to Vladivostok and to Hokkaido, in a position 85 miles northwestward of the Oki Retto, and as they have no navigational side they present a hazard to mariners navigating in their vicinity at night or in thick weather. Both islets are cliffy, and the western and highest has a pointed summit, which rises 512 feet. They are usually visited by seal hunters in July and August (P.597)
1951.07.16付BoggのFearey宛のメモ。(*2011/10/10) ここで、(仮に)竹島を韓国領土とするならば、”Liancourt Rocks”をArticle2に書き加えることが必要です、と述べている。((つまり条約の起草側は是を書き加えなかったので、日本領土とみなしている) Oppekepe氏 http://www.kjclub.com/jp/exchange/theme/read.php?uid=9955&fid=9955&thread=1000000&idx=1&page=1&tname=exc_board_11&number=6874
DATE: July 16、 1951
TO: NA - Mr. Fearey
FROM: OIR/GE - Mr. Boggs
Subject: Sprately Island and Parcels, in Draft Japanese Peace treaty
2.LiancourtRocks
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 4、 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 sgown 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)
These
rocky islets are described as follows in the U.S. Hydrographic Office
publication no. 123A, Sailing Directions for Japan, Volume I (1st ed.,
1945):
Take Shima (Liancourt Rocks) 37"15'N.,
131"52'E. H.O.Chart 3320) consists of two barren , guano-whitened, and
uniinhabited rocky islets and sereral rocks, which appear to be
steep-to. They lie near the streamer track leading from Tsushima Strait
to Vladivostok and to Hokkaido, in a posision 85 miles northwestward of
the Oki Retto, and as they have no navigational side they present a
hazard to mariners navigating in their vicinity at night or in thick
weather. Both islets are cliffy, and the western and highest has a
pointed summit, which rises 512 feet. They are usually visited by seal
hunters in July and August (P.597)
1951.07.19日付け韓国大使から米国務省への要求 Requests From Korea on July 19, 1951 で済州島、巨文島、鬱陵島、 現竹島、波浪島を日本が放棄する領土に含むよう要求する - 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.”
Dulles
国務長官は、韓国大使Yu Chan
Yangに対して、現竹島と波浪島の位置を訪ねMrHanはそれはたぶん日本海に有り、鬱陵島の近くだと回答する。また、Dullesはこれら二島が併合
前に朝鮮領土であったのならば、日本が放棄する領土に含むことは問題がないと回答する。 - 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.
1951.07.20 米国が、各国に、7/20日付けの草案を送付。CHAPTERⅡ:TERRITORY ARTICLE 2 については、 July.3 1951の草案と同様。現竹島は日本が放棄する領土に含まれなかった。
- CHAPTER II
- TERRITORY
- (a)Japan,
recognizing the independence of Korea, renounces all right, title and
claim to Korea, including the island of Quelpart, Port Hamilton, and
Dagelet
- (「日本外交文書 サンフランシスコ平和条約 対米交渉」外務省2007)
1951.07.20 Invitation letters for Peace trerary conference to 50 Allied force countries
The Government of the United States of America and His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom have the honor to enclose herewith two copies of the draft of the peace treaty with Japan, of two declarations by Japan and of the protocol.
The draft peace treaty and the two declarations have been prepared on the basis of earlier drafts and observations thereon by the countries which actively were concerned in the Japanese War.
The draft protocol which is open for signature at any time has been proposed y His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom and is circulated for information and comment of those countries whose domestic law permits them to sign it.
It is believed the enclosed draft treaty and the declarations combine and reconcile, as far as is practicable, the point of view of all Allied powers which were at war with Japan and will establish with Japan a just and durable peace.
The Government of the United States of America and His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom will be happy to receive comments on the enclosed draft which should be addressed to the Government of the United States of America as promptly as it is convenient. After receipt of those comments, they propose to circulate the final text of the peace treaty on August 13, 1951
The Government of the United States of America has the honor to invite your Government to a conference for conclusion and signature of the treaty of peace with Japan on the terms of that text.
Concurrent and identical invitation is being sent to the other Allied powers at war with Japan except where special circumstances exist.
The Government of Japan advised the Government of the United States of America it will be represented at San Fransisco by duly accredited delegates empowered to sign the treaty and declarations on behalf of the Government of Japan.
It wiill be appriciated if your Government will in due course notify the Government of the United States of America at Washington , .C. whether it accepts this invitation.
Any inquiries relationg to the organization of the conference and provision of facilities for duly accredited delegates, their advisers and staff may be addressed to the Devision of International Coferences, Department of State, Washington 325, D.C."
(「日本外交文書 平和条約の締結に関する調書 第三冊 Ⅳ外務省2007 P177) (石丸和人『戦後日本外交史I 米国支配下の日本』(三省堂1983年)p.270-271)
平和条約草案が最終草案として確定したのは、五一年八月一六日であった。
米政府が七月二〇日招請状とともに各国に送ったのは、 七月二〇日草案と、英国の提案になる契約、時効の期間、流通証券ならびに保険契約の問題を律するための「議定書」と、平和条約に関連して
日本政府 が行なう「国際条約への加盟」と「戦死者の墳墓」に関する二つの宣言草案であった。
平和条約の七月二〇日草案は、 七月一二日に発表された七月三日草案に、日本などの意見を取り入れて、一八か所を修正したものだが、例えば第二章領土・第三
条の「北緯二九度以南の琉球諸島」うんぬんとあるのを「北緯二九度以南(琉球諸島および大東諸島を含む)南西諸島」とするなど 字句的な修正が大部分で実質
的な修正はほとんどなかった。米国が軍事的理由から確保しようとしていた北緯二九度以南の島々には琉球諸島のほか奄美大島など大東諸島に属する島々がある
が、琉球諸島という表現だけでは、大東諸島に属する島々が入らないため、四月以来、日本政府が指摘していたものであった。
米政府は、七月二〇日草案に対する関係各国の修正提案の期限を八月一三日と定めていた。この間の修正のもっとも大きなものは、インドネシア、パキスタンの
提案した日本の主権回復承認条項であった。これは第一章平和・第一条Aの戦争状態の終結条項に続いて、Bとして、「連合国は、日本およびその領水に対する
日本国民の完全な主権を承認する」と付け加えることになったのである*。
この主権承認条項は、米政府の三月草案には、同じ文言が第二章主権・第二条としてあったが、五月三日の米英共同草案以来、前文に「連合国および日本は、両者の関係が、今後主権を有する対等のものとして……」とあるところから削除されていた。それが再び復活したのだった。
(後略)
*原注:「朝日新聞」1951年8月17日付 http://www.geocities.jp/uso888/kouwa2.html(石丸和人『戦後日本外交史I 米国支配下の日本』(三省堂1983年)p.270-271) 日本は、この草案を7月20日午後6時、シーボルト大使より受領した正式招請状に添付委された7月20日付け平和条約((「日本外交文書 サンフランシスコ平和条約 対米交渉」外務省2007 P564)
1951.08.02.
Request fromYOU CHAN YANG Korea to Acheson
KOREAN EMBASSY
WASHINGTON,D.C.
August
2, 1951
Your Excellency,
I have the honor to refer Your Excellency to my communication to you
for Jury 19, 1951 with
reference to requests by the Korean
Government
for the consideration of the Department of State of certain suggestions
in connection with the revised draft of the Japanese Peace Treaty.
Further instructions from my Government enable me to convey to Your
Excellency the following suggestions with respect to the revised
Treaty, looking towards their incorporation in the document:
1.Article 4: Japan renounces property of Japan and its nationals
against Korea and its nationals on or before August nine, Nineteen
hundred Forty-One.
Article 9: The MacArthur Line shall remain until such agreements be
concluded.
Article 21: And Korea to the benefits of Articles 2,9,12, and 15-a of
present Treaty.
Please accept, Excellency, the renewed assurances of my highest
consideration.
YOU CHAN YANG
His Excellency
Dean G. Acheson
Secratary of State
Washington D C
1951.0 8.03付Mr.Robert A FeareyとMr.Boggのメモ Memorandam by Mr. Robert A. Fearey and Mr. Boggs on August 3, 1951 Mr.Boggはワシントンに証拠を照会したが、韓国大使が言うDokdo(現竹島)と波浪島が何処か確認できなかった。韓国局に Dokdoは鬱陵島の近くにあり、竹島巌であり、波浪島もそうであると回答を得た。 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 Ulleungdo, or Takeshima Rock, and suspected that Parangdo was too. Apparently that is all Korean short of a cable to Muccio.
1951.08.04 「日本国との平和条約草案の解説」が公表される。
http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/annai/honsho/shiryo/bunsho/h18.html#7
7月12日に公表された平和条約草案に基づいて外務省が作成したもので、国会議員に配布されるとともに、8月4日、報道機関に公表されました。 前書き 終戦からすでに満六年・・・・(省略))・・・・・去る七月十二日、米英両国政府から公式に対日平和条約草案が発表され、さらに二十日には、米国務省から中国を除く関係50カ国に対して九月四日にサンフランシスコで開かれる対日平和条約の招請状が発せられ、また会議に提出される最終草案は八月十三日に発表される旨明らかにされた。...(省略) とりあえず、七月二十日発表された草案(七月二十日にに若干の変更があった)について一応の文理的解説を試みることにする (中略) 三、領域(第二章第二一四条) 日本は,すでに降伏の際、日本の領域が本州、北海道、九州及び四国のほか、 連合国の決定する「諸小島」も局限される事を認めた。この章はその範囲をさらに明確にしたものである。第二条で、日本が全ての権利、権原及び請求権を放棄しなければならない地域について述べる。この地域は六つにわけれれて居る。(A)から(c)までの朝鮮、台湾及び澎湖諸島、千島及び南樺太は、 これまで日本の領土の一部であつたところである。 (省略) 第一のこれまでの日本の領土の一部であったうち、朝鮮については、その独立を承認することになつている。 それ以外の地域については、日本は、その権利、権限及び請求権をほうきするだけであつて、権利放棄後の帰属については言及されていない。 なお、朝鮮の範囲は、済州島、巨文島及び鬱陵島がふくまれることになつているが、これらは 終戦前も朝鮮総督府の行政管轄下にあつた島である。とあります。 (日本外交文書 サンフランシスコ平和条約・対米交渉 外務省編 P674) (現在の竹島は、終戦前に朝鮮総督府の行政管轄下にあった島ではない。)1951.07.20
1951.08.10日付け米国務次官補Dean Ruskによる外交書簡 Diplomatic note by Dean Rusk on August 10, 1951 において、現竹島は日本の領土であると回答。 Yu chang Yang宛 I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your notes of July 19 and
August 2, 1951 presenting certain requests for the consideration of the
Government of the United States with regard to the draft treaty of peace with Japan.. 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.
1951.08.15 平和条約・宣言・議定書の最終案が 午後七時半 フィン書記官より西村局長が受領。 1951.08.16 公表 (英米共同最終草案) CHAPTERⅡ:TERRITORY ARTICLE 2
(a) Japan, recognizing the independence of Korea, renounces all right, title and claim to Korea, including the island of Quelpart, Port Hamilton and Dagelet とあります。つまり、これにも現在の竹島は日本が放棄する領土に含まれませんでした (「日本外交文書 サンフランシスコ平和条約 対米交渉」外務省2007 P622) (「日本外交文書 平和条約の締結に関する調書 第三冊 Ⅳ外務省2007 P719)
このようにして、最終的に、サンフランシスコ平和条約において「現竹島は日本が放棄する領土に含まれないことが確定した」のである。この事実は、その後様々な文章で、韓国が竹島を侵略して問題となった時に再確認がなされているが、それについては後述する。 条約の解釈の仕方は、 Oppekepe氏のサイト サンフランシスコ平和条約 1. 国際法における条約解釈 1.1 条約の解釈の基本原則 が詳しいのでそちらの解説を参照してください。http://takeshima.cafe.coocan.jp/wp/?page_id=371
サンフランシスコ平和条約 the treaty on September 8, 1951- 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.
また、このサンフランシスコ平和条約において、「竹島は日本が放棄する領土」に含まれなかったため、日本政府とアメリカ政府は、竹島を、日米行政協定における米軍の爆撃訓練地として指定する協定を結んだのである。 1952.02.28.Administrative Agreement under Article III of the Security Treaty between Japan and the U.S. (Feb. 28, 1952) 官報 1952年7月26日 行政協定に基づく日本国政府とアメリカ合衆国政府との間の協定1952年7月26日署名・発効 日本国とアメリカ合衆国の間の安全保障条約第3条に基づく行政協定第2条第1項に基づき、日本国がアメリカ合衆国に提供する施設及び区域
附表2 空軍訓練区域 9 竹島爆撃訓練区域 (一)北緯37度15分 東経131度52分の点を中心とする直径10マイルの円内 (二)演習時間毎日24時間
|