Deadlock

The week at the Kaesong conference table ended as it began, in deadlock over the problem of where to draw the ceasefire line. The U.N. stood fast for a buffer along the actual front-line positions; the Reds stuck to their demand for a buffer zone straddling the 38th parallel. Day after day, both sides presented "clarifications" of their aims. Repeating the U.N.'s view that the parallel is an insecure defense line, Admiral Joy three times asked North Korean General Nam II, chief Communist delegate: "Do you or do you not agree that the security of his forces is the responsibility of each commander during a military armistice?" Three times, Nam II dodged the question.

Then Joy advanced a new argument. It is not only the ground positions that should be considered, he said; allied air and naval strength now blanket all of North Korea up to the Yalu. In view of this, the U.N. would actually be justified in demanding a cease-fire line considerably to the north of its forward positions on the ground. The Red radio exaggerated Joy's talking point, made it sound as if the U.N. formally demanded a truce line far north of the front-line positions (which it does not). According to the Peking radio, Nam rejected "any argument which boasts of. . . frenzied bombardment by naval and air forces."

Actually, the exaggeration of the U.N. claim might prove a face-saving gimmick for the Reds. They could knock down the straw man of the "new demand," settle for a truce at the battle line and still make a claim of sorts that it was the U.N. which backed down.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.