740.00119 Control (Japan)/7–2748: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Acting Political Adviser in Japan (Sebald)
281. Re press articles on deliberations in FEC on program for replacement of lost cultural objects, Chairman of FEC on July 15 made following statement to press: [Page 835]
“A committee of the FEC is now considering the draft of a document regarding the replacement of cultural goods lost through Japanese acts of aggression. This draft is in a very early stage of discussion, most of the governments concerned have not yet stated their definite views, and it cannot yet be conjectured what decision the FEC shall finally take in this matter. All unauthorized statements in the press regarding this question at the present time are premature and should be disregarded.”
At meeting of Steering Committee on July 20, no vote taken on SC–273/15, US substitute proposal on Conduct of Trade with Japan, in view of lack of instructions on part of Philippine and Australian members and USSR reservation on para 6 regarding port and service charges. Re SC 293/6, Travel Outside Japan of Japanese Commercial Representatives, Australian, Chinese and Philippine members still had no instructions on either paper or Soviet amendments. Re SC 309, Travel of Japanese Abroad, informal poll showed majority opposed to paper. Re UK statement on removal of aircraft and private munitions plants from Japan, Australian and Chinese members associated themselves with views of UK member.
At FEC meeting, July 22, Chinese member suggested that some numerical limitation be placed on Japanese traveling abroad under FEC 240/16, interchange of persons between Japan and other countries for cultural purposes.
The Netherlands and Chinese members expressed their appreciation for action taken by Chairman in making statement to press on consideration in FEC of document on replacement of lost cultural objects. Netherlands member expressed hope that SCAP would be informed of statement and that he would communicate it to Japanese press. USSR member criticized unilateral action of Chairman in by-passing Commission. Chairman took position that he was under general authorization by Commission to make such statements on his own responsibility.
At close of meeting US member referred to application of Pakistan and Burma for membership in the FEC and stated that he was now authorized by his Govt to recommend that the procedure earlier proposed by him be so modified as to provide that the views of each Govt be deposited with the Secretary General of the FEC either by its member on the Commission or by the head of its mission in Washington through normal diplomatic channels. Upon receipt of all the Governmental views the Secretary General would inform the Commission of the results and the Commission might then, if acceptance were unanimous, authorize the Chairman or Secretary General of the FEC to issue an invitation to the applicant country.