Foreign Relations of the United States: Diplomatic Papers, 1945, The British Commonwealth, The Far East, Volume VI

740.00119 Control(Japan)/11–245: Telegram

The Ambassador in the Soviet Union (Harriman) to the Secretary of State

Moscow, November 2, 1945—2 a.m.
[Received 11 a.m.]

3734. Molotov asked me to call tonight⁹⁴ in order, he said, to clarify certain points of the proposals set forth in your 2234, October 26 [27] and 2235, October 27 which were not clear to him and his associates. He said he was not prepared to state his Govt’s position.

A. Allied Military Council:

1. Where would be the seat of the Allied Military Council? I answered I was sure it was Tokyo. Please confirm.

2. He pointed out that the document was headed “proposal concerning control machinery for Japan” but nowhere in the document was control machinery mentioned. He asked whether the Allied Military Council was in fact the control machinery. I explained that the control machinery was the Supreme Commander in consultation with the Allied Military Council. He then specifically asked whether in some manner the word “control” could be inserted in paragraph 1. I agreed to obtain an answer to this question.

3. With respect to the second sentence of paragraph 3 he asked a number of questions on the manner of consultation of the Supreme Commander with the Council. He seemed satisfied that the Supreme Commander should decide questions of an urgent character but appeared to have in his mind that on matters which were not urgent, if there were disagreement, the subject should be referred to the Govts for agreement. He referred to the revised text of the Hungarian Control Commission⁹⁵ to the effect that policy directives should be issued only after agreement. I pointed out that Stalin had agreed that the Supreme Commander should have the final voice and I was sure my Govt would not deviate from this position and also pointed out that the questions of policy would have been decided in the Far Eastern Commission which was not the case in Hungary. He asked whether MacArthur, in the event of disagreement on nonurgent matters, would refer the matter to his Govt and whether then these questions might be discussed on a govt level. He suggested as an example question of the composition of the Jap Govt. I told him that I had no information on this subject but agreed to ask for it.

4. He asked whether it had been decided that the occupation forces would be all American. I told him that I knew there had been consideration of forces of the other Allies being included in the occupation on the basis that they would be under General MacArthur’s command. I said I had no other information on this subject and did not know whether or not a decision had been reached. He made no further comment.

B. Far Eastern Commission:

1. Molotov asked where the Commission would meet. I explained in Washington in the first instance but that it could meet in Tokyo or elsewhere later if the Commission so desired. The matter rested with the Commission.

2. He asked what nations would be represented on the Commission. I told him the original list submitted and also India. He asked whether India had already been invited and I told him that I understood India was already participating. As he had been informed the British had requested India’s inclusion and she had subsequently been invited. He made no further comment.

3. He asked for an explanation of the relationship between the FEC (Far Eastern Commission) and the AMC (Allied Military Council). I read to him the information given in paragraph 3 of Dept’s 2243, October 29. After considerable discussion he asked no further questions.

4. He asked why there had been a change in the wording of II (A). I explained that this had been done as the present proposal contemplated that the Commission should be a decisive body rather than an advisory body and pointed out that it was now intended that the Commission should formulate policies rather than make recommendations on the formulation of policies. He made no further comment.

5. He asked for clarification of the change in wording in II (A) specifically the words “as between the participating governments”. After some discussion he did not appear fully satisfied and I agreed to request additional information on this subject.

6. Molotov asked for information on the “policies already announced by the United States Government” referred to in II (C). He stated that his Govt should have full information of these policies before it could accept them as binding. I explained that these and also the directives already sent to the Supreme Commander would no doubt be laid before the Commission now meeting in Washington and suggested that if the Soviet Govt agreed to send representative he would be fully informed. Molotov stated, however, that his Govt should be fully informed of those policies before he could accept this provision and asked for this information now. I agreed to refer his request to my Govt.

7. Molotov asked about the voting procedure. I explained that I understood that this procedure had been worked out as a result of a British proposal and that I would be glad to have any comments that he might wish to make. He suggested, speaking personally, that it might be better to have two instead of three of the principal Allies vote with the majority but that he had not given the matter full consideration.

Molotov gave me no impression as to what his Govt’s attitude would be on the proposals but indicated that answers to the specific questions that I have set forth above would be necessary before his Govt could give a reply. I request, therefore, urgent answers to those points as explained above where I was unable to give a satisfactory reply to his questions.

Harriman

94. November 1.
95. For statute of the Allied Control Commission for Hungary, see vol. iv, p. 845.