894.628/7–146
The Political Adviser in Japan (Atcheson) to the Secretary of State
No. 481
[Received July 15.]
Subject: Extension of Japanese Fishing and Whaling Areas.
Sir: I have the honor to refer to this Mission’s despatch No. 464, June 12 [18], 1946,35 entitled, “Sixth Meeting of Allied Council for [Page 263] Japan, June 12, 1946”, and to enclose a copy of a memorandum of June 4, 1946,36 from the Acting Chief of Staff, General Headquarters, SCAP, to the Allied Council for Japan, requesting comments of the Council concerning a partial staff study pertaining to authorizing fishing and whaling by the Japanese, and a copy of the pertinent portions of the verbatim minutes of the sixth meeting of the Council covering discussion on this subject. There are also enclosed copies of a directive, Scapin 1033, June 22, 1946, to the Japanese Government on the subject, “Area Authorized for Japanese Fishing and Whaling”, of a letter dated June 20, 1946, from Lieutenant General K. N. Derevyanko, Member for the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics of the Council on this subject, and of my reply, June 24, 1946, as Chairman of the Council.
General Derevyanko’s questions in the Council meeting were principally designed to elicit information on technical details, such as: the volume of estimated excess of the fish-catch and destinations of such exportable excess; detailed comparisons of the Japanese fishing fleet by types of vessels at the beginning of the war and at present; information regarding new construction of fishing vessels, especially steel vessels; numbers of fishing personnel and their registration; and the possibility of distributing fishing vessels among the Allied Powers. As a preliminary opinion, General Derevyanko stated during the Council meeting of June 12: “in principle I have no objections to permitting the Japanese to conduct fishing and whaling in the suggested area as a temporary arrangement”.
In his letter of June 20, General Derevyanko indicated that his Government had reversed him and was opposed to the extension of existing Japanese fishing areas. The reasons advanced were that (1) the present area allotted to the Japanese is sufficient to fulfill internal Japanese demands, and (2) the extension of fishing areas for Japan is related to the creation of a large ocean-going fishing fleet, the size of which is subject to discussion by the Allies and the Far Eastern Commission. In my reply of June 24, I mentioned that the estimated catch mentioned in the Council meeting was largely speculative and based upon the average catch during pre-war years when the Japanese fishing industry was in far better condition than today. I also stated that I could perceive no connection between the size of the post-war Japanese fishing fleet and the temporary emergency measure under discussion.
The Soviet attitude toward this problem is difficult to reconcile with the realities of the food situation in Japan today. The reversal of General Derevyanko’s preliminary approval by the Soviet Government may be an indication of continued Soviet opposition to constructive measures undertaken by SCAP to alleviate the serious food [Page 264] shortage. In the light of the discussion concerning this problem which took place in the sixth meeting of the Council, the reasons advanced in General Derevyanko’s letter appear specious and suggest a continued Soviet desire to hamper the policies of the Occupation in Japan.
Respectfully yours,