740.00119 Control (Japan)/9–2948: Telegram
The Acting Secretary of State to the Acting Political Adviser in Japan (Sebald)
334. At meeting Steering Committee Sept. 21, Soviet member introduced amendments to SC–277/11, Principles for Jap Farmers Organizations, almost identical those introduced working committee and [Page 854] defeated there. Paper retained on agenda as Chinese, French, Philippine and UK still had no instructions.
Conduct of Trade with Jap, SC–273/17, US member stated his Govt had no objection deletion para 1 b 2 as proposed by Chinese member but pointed out US in originally accepting para had in mind interest those areas Far East devastated as result Jap aggression, believing revival Jap economy and its beneficial effect on development trade and production in Far East would contribute to essential well-being all areas there and that interpretation that keynote this paper is limitation of Jap foreign trade is not in accord with FEC policy or Potsdam Proclamation. US member proposed para 1 c be amended as follows:
“c. Insure competitive conditions in trade free of contracts or arrangements which restrict competition, limit access to markets or foster monopolistic controls and to prevent excessive concentration of economic power and monopolies in foreign trade.”
NZ member made long, heated attack on US for its frequent shifts in position on question concentration economic power in Jap. NZ position supported by Australian member. USSR member implied US had changed and was changing position on question.
Australian member proposed withdraw SC–309, Travel of Jap Abroad, on understanding FEC would be regularly and promptly supplied info on subject. However, subject retained on agenda view Soviet objection.
Re Suzuki interview, USSR member described statements as destructive and libelous attacks on Allied policy in Jap. NZ member concluded Suzuki’s statements definitely constituted propaganda. Australian member stated disappointed US had as yet no explanation to offer and pointed out there was need of assurance by US that Jap would not make such statements in future. Chinese proposed FEC should pass more comprehensive paper on subject.
In view US statement in FEC on level economic life, SC–297/7, Policy Towards Jap Shipbuilding and Shipping, retained on agenda. However, UK member could not see why US reply on SC–312, Removal of Aircraft and Private Munitions Plants from Jap, should be deferred on general grounds as this was specific matter and had no connection with general attitude US on Level of Economic Life. Chinese member stated would appreciate info on subject as he considered destruction or removal aircraft and private munitions plants from Jap mandatory.
At meeting FEC, Sept 23, 1948, Australian member stated he was now prepared to vote in favor FEC 293/8, Travel Outside Jap of Jap Commercial Representatives. Philippine member requested postponement. [Page 855] US member stated he could agree to Chinese proposal that para 1 c be deleted but pointed out US Govt continues support policy Jap trade should be expanded to level consistent with her peaceful needs as defined by FEC. USSR member opposed deletion. NZ member proposed “only that” be inserted after “deemed” and “in FEC–106/1” at end of para. Paper was referred to working committee.
Re Labor Policy in Jap (FEC–318), Chinese member stated his Govt could not express final views on issue until it knew how Article 4 FEC policy decision on Principles for Jap Trade Unions had been implemented. NZ member broadened inquiry to include not only what has taken place but also what may be expected to take place in course of amending Natl Service Law. He thought it appropriate for FEC to see draft of such amendments. While he reserved comment on general issue, he stated his Govt took view Jap ordinance contrary FEC policy on trade unions. US member made statement temporary character Jap ordinance and fact that permanent legislation now in preparation for submission to Diet and review by SCAP make it unprofitable for FEC engage at this time in extended consideration subject. He added his Govt regards Soviet proposal as based on erroneous interpretation of facts with which it purports to deal, and finds it unacceptable.
Ind member emphasized distinction between ordinary civil servants and workers in Govt enterprises, and stated that latter should have right to strike. NZ member referred to US statement and stated he was afraid substance of interim ordinance might tend become that of permanent legislation. If he could be convinced ordinance purely temporary he would favor dropping issue. In view Mr. Sebald’s statement FEC policy on trade unions does not apply Govt workers, he could not agree with premises on basis of which US would review legislation.
Re FEC–242/32, Level of Economic Life
in Japan, Soviet Amb read statement to effect objective of Allied
Powers should be not limitation of Japan’s peaceful industry but
prevention development in Jap of war industry, as well as prevention
creation of conditions under which Jap militarism and Jap aggression
can revive. Objective, it was stated, could be attained if
appropriate control in Jap for certain period in order prevent
revival or creation Jap war industry. Such control, established for
period several years and exercised by powers most interested
preventing new Jap aggression, should be provided for in peace
treaty with Jap, the preparation and conclusion of which is long
overdue. He proposed adoption of fol policy decision:
FEC–245/10, Civil Aviation in Japan, retained on agenda.
USSR member protested slanderous statement made by Suzuki against Allies in Japan and also asked for more complete report than was given on leaks on Replacement of Lost Cultural Objects paper. Chinese and Australian member also expressed concern over Suzuki incident.