The Ambassador in Japan (Allison) to the
Japanese Foreign Minister (Okazaki)
My Dear Mr. Minister: I am writing this letter in connection with our recent discussions on the defense measures which the Japanese Government is planning to take in the current fiscal year. I should like to refer specifically to the exchange of notes between us on April 6, 1954,1 recording agreement to a reduction in expenditures by Japan, as provided in paragraph 2(b) of Article XXV of the Administrative Agreement under Article III of the Security Treaty, by an amount of Japanese currency equivalent to $7,000,000 for the current fiscal year.
In connection with the exchange of notes referred to above, I should like to set forth the understanding of my Government that the defense program received from representatives of the Japanese Government, including the defense plan received on January 26, [Page 1629] 1954, will be substantially carried out in the Japanese fiscal year 1954.
The said program will involve:
- Increase of the strength of Japan’s defense forces in the
Japanese fiscal year 1954 including inter
- Overall personnel increases by about 41,000 of whom about 31,000 would be uniformed. These increases will be in the Headquarters of the National Safety Agency and the ground, naval and air forces thereunder.
- Ground forces: Expansion from four to six regions (divisions) and corresponding support.
- Naval forces: Construction of about 12,000 tons of naval vessels including construction authorized by the budget for the Japanese fiscal year 1953, and initiation of naval air program.
- Air forces: Establishment of Third Staff, and flying and technical schools. Included are 66 training aircraft (T 34) in the Japanese fiscal year 1953 and 30 more in the Japanese fiscal year 1954.
- Reserve: Establishment of a reserve system initially comprising approximately 15,000 persons.
- Budget appropriations of 78.8 billion yen for the National Safety Agency and of 58.5 billion yen under Article XXV of the Administrative Agreement. In addition, eight billion yen as authorization for contracts outside the budget for defense purposes, and ten billion yen through reappropriation of the uncommitted balance in the security reserve account for purposes connected with the relocation of the United States armed forces.
- In addition to the defense expenditures and contract authorizations listed in paragraph 2 above, there is about a 20 billion yen carry-over from Japanese fiscal year 1953 to the Japanese fiscal year 1954 for the National Safety Agency. It is also noted that the Japanese Government assumes the rental value of national property used by the United States armed forces under Article II of the Administrative Agreement to be about 20 billion yen and in addition anticipates an expenditure of 4.7 billion yen for the support of coast-guard activities of the Maritime Safety Bureau. It is further noted that the total of the direct defense expenditures, contract authorizations and the two other items mentioned immediately above approximate 200 billion yen for the Japanese fiscal year 1954.
- Japan will make arrangements as soon as possible for effective combined planning by its defense forces with the United States armed forces in Japan.
I should appreciate, Mr. Minister, your confirmation of the general understanding described above.
I should also like to propose that our representatives meet at an early time to consult regarding United States military assistance and detailed measures for the development of Japan’s defense forces in the Japanese fiscal year 1954 and further to consider, on the basis of future Japanese defense requirements, the contribution [Page 1630] which the United States may deem appropriate with respect to such requirements. Your views on this proposal would also be appreciated.2
- For text, see TIAS 2963; 5 UST 742.↩
- In a reply of the same date Okazaki stated that he wished to confirm generally the understanding of the U.S. Government as set forth above, but added that the Japanese Government would have to seek enabling legislation and budgetary appropriations and, on obtaining them, would be able to put the program into effect. In conclusion the Foreign Minister stated that the proposal put forward at the close of the Ambassador’s letter was acceptable. (794.5 MSP/4–654)↩