Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, China and Japan, Volume XIV, Part 2

611.94/6–1052

No. 571
Memorandum by the Director of the Office of Northeast Asian Affairs (Young) to the Assistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs (Allison)

top secret

[Washington,] June 10, 1952.

Subject:

• Informal Defense Comments on State Department Draft¹ of NSC Policy Paper

Mr. Sullivan has now made available to me on an informal basis comments of the various staff officers in the Department of Defense. The major differences in Defense and State policies are summarized for your information.

1. While State took the position that the United States should not interfere in Japanese domestic affairs unless internal developments gravely threaten United States security interests, Defense proposes United States intervention “to prevent internal developments from gravely threatening United States security interests.” Defense also takes the position that the security of Japan is of such importance to the United States position in the Pacific area that the United States would not only fight to prevent hostile forces from gaining control of any part of the territory of Japan but also “would take necessary steps to reduce Communist influence and infiltration in Japan’s domestic affairs.”

2. Defense proposes the deletion of any reference to an agreement with the Japanese Government with respect to the disposition of the Ryukyus, providing instead simply United States retention on a long-term basis of such bases in the Ryukyus, etc., as are essential to United States security interests.

3. Defense proposes the deletion of any reference to United States participation in the development of collective security arrangements in the Pacific area.

4. a. Defense proposes that present Japanese export controls be maintained not merely until a satisfactory settlement of the Korean War has been achieved but so long as there is Communist aggression in the Far East and while the United Nations is taking action against such aggression.

b. Defense discards the possibility of Japan’s membership in COCOM and calls for the organization of a Far East Economic Defense committee.

NA has serious reservations on the first three points mentioned. United States intervention unless carefully limited could have serious effects on Japanese political life, Japan–United States relations, and the willingness of Japan to contribute effectively to United States security objectives in the Far East. Failure to take into consideration Japanese political and psychological interests in the Ryukyus will keep alive a touchy issue in United States-Japanese relationships. It is impossible to envisage the creation of any effective security arrangement in the Pacific without United States participation.

With reference to 4 (a) above, NA can accept a policy calling for the maintenance of Japanese export controls as long as there is Communist aggression in the Far East and while the United Nations is taking action against such action provided some flexibility is permitted Japan with respect to the levels of its export controls. With reference to 4 (b), NA proposes to limit the policy statement to a provision that export controls to be maintained by Japan in the post-aggression period should be determined through multilateral agreement among the free nations principally interested in trade with the Far East areas of the Soviet bloc without mentioning the specific organization by which the policy should be implemented.

NA intends to discuss these and the various minor Defense revisions with Mr. Sullivan with a view to reducing the points at issue before transmitting the paper to the NSC Staff.

1. In his memorandum to the Acting Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense dated Feb. 20, 1952, subsequently circulated to NSC as part of NSC 125 of Feb. 21, President Truman directed the preparation of a policy paper on Japan. The draft mentioned here, dated May 5 and prepared in S/P and NA, bears extensive annotation by staff officers of the Department of Defense (as of June 6) as described and quoted above. (NA files, lot 58 D 529) Other drafts prepared in April, May, and June are in PPS files, lot 64 D 563. Additional information on the drafting process is in file 611.94 for the spring and summer of 1952. For a description of NSC 125, see footnote 1, Document 512.