Word: truce
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...allies are pledged, 90 days after a truce is signed at Panmunjom, to sit down at a political conference with the North Korean and Chinese Communists. The Panmunjom conferees, unable to agree on an agenda for the political conference, wrote it down months ago only as "the Korean question, etc." The "etc." seems likely to stretch over all the complex problems of the Far East. In a general settlement, what might the U.S. give and take...
...high official had done some thinking put loud, had been led on by questions into speculative comments. At no point had he laid down his observations as Administration decisions; he had, however, reflected the indecision and uncertainty of the Administration as it faces up to the sequel of a truce at Panmunjom. The Times's Leviero, not present at the meeting, wrote his story from the notes of a colleague who had attended...
...since the Korean truce talks opened at Kaesong in July, 1951 had Communist negotiators said, "I agree to your proposal," so often in such a short time. After several days of rapid progress last week, Rear Admiral John C. Daniel, chief of the U.N. liaison group, came triumphantly out of the wooden, Red-built conference house at Panmunjom, announcing that the U.N.-Communist agreement on exchange of sick & wounded prisoners had been signed. Photographers persuaded the admiral to perform his exit a second time, waving the agreement in his hand...
Meanwhile, North Korea's Nam II, who had not been seen in the flesh since October, dispatched a letter to the U.N. calling for full-scale resumption of truce talks. Nam echoed Chou En-lai's line that 1) no Communist prisoners are really unwilling to accept a return to Communist control; 2) if some seem unwilling, because of "intimidation and oppression," they should be put in custody of a "neutral" country pending final disposition. There was no doubt that this vague proposal could lead to difficulties-if the Communists wanted it to. The basic question was whether...
...committee's vice chairman, reported that its own staff and the Administration's economic advisers are agreed that "direct identifiable expenditures on Korea account for only 10% of military spending, or $4-$5 billion a year . . . Private investment plans should not be altered by a Korean truce from the [present] high levels, [and] there is no evidence of excess capacity in industries where additional investment is now planned, e.g., electric power . . . Present inventories are not considered excessive relative to rates of sales, [and] consumer expenditures seem likely to continue stable to rising...