Foreign Relations of the United States, 1955–1957, Japan, Volume XXIII, Part 1

209. Telegram From the Embassy in Japan to the Department of State¹

Tokyo, August 17, 1957–2 p.m.

466. Re Embtel 464.² Pass Defense. This joint message from Ambassador MacArthur and General Smith.

Japanese-American Committee on Security held first meeting afternoon August 16. Atmosphere at meeting was cordial. Highlights of meeting were:

1. Exchange of brief opening addresses.

2. Agreement upon working arrangements for committee.

3. Discussion of problems arising from withdrawal US forces.

Following is summary of meeting. Full report with texts of principal statements follows by pouch.³

I. At opening of meeting Foreign Minister Fujiyama and I made brief prepared statements, stressing importance of committee and desire of both our governments to contribute to its successful functioning. Foreign Minister in addition outlined his views on principal tasks of committee: 1. to exchange views on security problems to further mutual understanding; 2. to contribute to smooth operation of Security Treaty; and 3. to study future adjustments of security system consonance with wishes of peoples in both countries. In connection with future adjustments, Foreign Minister stated that these have to be handled with utmost precaution although committee cannot escape facing problem.

In response to Foreign Minister, my statement (approved by General Smith) emphasized that committee must first concentrate on making present treaty function smoothly and that future adjustments take time and very careful preparation. We took this line in order to discourage tendencies toward early consideration of Security Treaty revision.

II. Committee then agreed upon working arrangements as formally proposed by me. Working arrangements are as set forth in Embtel 413⁴ with exception of following additional sentence in final paragraph “E”: “discussions will be confidential”.

III. Foreign Minister and Director General of Defense Agency made separate statements on second agenda item, problems arising from withdrawal US forces. Foreign Minister, after expressing appreciation for recent announcements of withdrawal First Cavalry and Third Marine Divisions, requested information “well in advance” on details of these withdrawals and on other further reduction of US forces due to impact of redeployment in Japan. Foreign Minister explained such advance information needed to permit Japanese Government to arrange for:

1. Assumption of defense responsibility by Japan Defense Force without jeopardizing defense setup.

2. Transfer to Defense Agency of facilities desired by it in face of requests for such facilities for non-military pruposes. (In this connection, Fujiyama also expressed hope for consultation on major facilities in which Japan “especially interested”).

3. Measures to cope with prospective unemployment created by reduction in USFJ Japanese labor force.

4. Meeting decline in dollar expenditures and consequent impact on Japan balance of payments (Fujiyama mentioned hope that this decline might be cushioned by maintenance and expansion of OSP and military assistance). Foreign Minister concluded by proposing that program of disposition and redeployment US forces be communicated to and discussed by Committee on Security and that announcements on movement of US forces and release of facilities be made through mutual arrangements with view to avoiding public speculation on these matters.

Defense Director General reiterated major points made by Foreign Minister, stressing that transfer of defense responsibilities to Self Defense Forces depended on three factors:

1. Activation and training of required Japanese forces.

2. Stationing of such forces at appropriate locations.

3. Appropriate equipment of these forces.

He stated Japanese ground forces adequately trained and equipped to assume reponsibilities due to US assistance but complicated domestic procedures involved in stationing Japanese forces at appropriate locations. He explained his staff instructed to develop plan for phase-over but plan meaningless unless coordinated well in advance with US plans for facility releases. Finally Tsushima inquired about recent press reports implying drastic changes in MDAP policy (i.e. reports that US had proposed Japan purchase military equipment from US with yen, with yen proceeds being used by US to purchase equipment in Japan for other Asian countries).

General Smith and I then commented on statements by both Ministers. I explained in broad terms redeployment of US forces involved complicated considerations which often made early notification to Japanese Government difficult. I also questioned whether, as matter of procedure, information should not be made available to Japanese Government through established channel as soon as we receive it rather than waiting for meeting of Committee on Security, as suggested by Foreign Minister. Finally I gave Mr. Tsushima assurances as set forth in Deptel 311⁵ that no proposal for changing our aid program as reported in press has been made by US Government.

General Smith first expressed Admiral Stump’s regrets for inability to attend first meeting and his hope to attend meeting in near future. He assured Ministers that we are fully cognizant of impact on Japan of US redeployment and of need for advance notification, and that we intend to continue to provide information through existing machinery as soon as it is available. He then described existing procedures for providing information on facility releases and his hope to be able to provide Japanese Government with information for facility releases as soon as available and possibly by September 1. He also presented current estimate on labor force reduction for next 10 months, i.e. 18,000 out of current 126,000 master labor contract employees. Committee discussed procedures for notifying Japanese Government of US redeployment plans. During discussion, Japanese representatives stressed:

1. Desire for information and discussion in committee on comprehensive US withdrawal plan.

2. Great concern about lack of notification on major withdrawals sufficiently in advance of public announcements such as in case First Cavalry Division.

3. Agreement that individual movement of troops and facility releases should continue to be handled through established channels with as much advance warning as possible. I reiterated our intention to project our planning as far in advance as possible and to give information to the Japanese Government as soon as we receive it without withholding such information until meeting of committee. Because I felt Japanese presentation might carry with it possible implication that committee and not US would decide on US withdrawal plans, I emphasized that once decisions were reached by US on withdrawal of US units we were not in a position to alter them. I also expressed regret at lack of sufficient advance notice on announcements of First Cavalry and Third Marine Division withdrawals but pointed out that these announcements made quickly in order to give immediate substance to undertakings made by President and Prime Minister Kishi in Washington and that US had no wish to embarrass or create problems for Japanese Government by such prompt action. Foreign Minister expressed appreciation for our zeal and intentions to implement undertaking in joint communiqué promptly.

IV. Meeting agreed to press release (Embtel 464).

V. It was agreed at conclusion of meeting that I would discuss with Foreign Ministry plans for next meeting. I hope to assure that arrangements for next meeting are made sufficiently in advance so that Admiral Stump can attend.

MacArthur

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 794.5/8–1757. Confidential; Priority. Repeated to CINCPAC POLAD for Admiral Stump.
2. In telegram 464, August 16, the Embassy transmitted the text of a joint Embassy-Foreign Ministry press release concerning the meeting described in telegram 466. (Ibid., 794.5/8–1657)
3. Despatch 219 from Tokyo, August 21, not printed. (Ibid., 794.5/8–2157)
4. Dated August 12, not printed. (Ibid., 794.5/8–1257)
5. Dated August 8, not printed.(Ibid.,794.5–MSP/8–557) See footnote 5, Document 223.