09-151.pdf

cations themselves. In contrast, Sweden and Switzerland chose to rely
on support from the armistice’s parties. 21
The first meeting was held on August 1, 1953. At this time, there
was hope that the “temporary” ceasefire within a few months would be
replaced by a political solution, that is, formal peace. In fact, the
Armistice Agreement was intended to be a temporary agreement.
Since preparations for the teams’ travel plans to and from the ports of
entry, security measures, relations with the two sides, weapons - the
Swedish and Swiss officers did not want to carry weapons while the
Czech and Polish wanted to - and so on were difficult, the Commission
was not ready to dispatch the teams until all the problems were solved
on August 12. The completely unarmed teams began their work a
week later. Daily meetings were held throughout August onwards but
from February 1954 twice a week, after the most complicated procedural
matters had been solved. Since June 1954, meetings were held
at least once a week with the presidency rotating.
The inspection teams that in August were dispatched to North
Korea were prevented from undertaking their tasks, in violation of the
Armistice Agreement, Paragraph 43, guaranteeing “...full convenience
of movement...” However, the agreement contains neither a proper
mechanism for overseeing compliance nor effective means for enforcing
sanctions for violations, disabling any counteraction. According
to Mueller-Lhotska (1997), only the Manp’o railway station and the
21_ Bruzelius, “Korea - krig och stillestånd: Svenska insatser 1950-1978,” Jorden Runt
50, no. 11 (1978), p. 599; Grafström, Anteckningar 1945-1954 (Stockholm: gotab
Stockholm, 1989), p. 1123; Mueller-Lhotska and Millett, op. cit., p. 24; Weilenmann,
Die neutrale Überwachungskommission in Korea: Hat sie ihren Auftrag erfüllt?
(Männedorf, 2004), p. 50.
The Foundation of the MAC and the NNSC and the First Turbulent Years
27