U.S. Halt In Taking Industrial Plant a From Japanese

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXXVI, Issue 22946, 14 May 1949, Page 5

U.S. Halt In Taking Industrial Plant a From Japanese

WASHINGTON, May 12. The United States today ordered a halt in further removals of Japanese plants as war reparations. Major-General Frank McCoy fold the Far Eastern Commission that Japan needed even industrial plants classed as “primary war facilities” to hasten her economic recovery. General McCoy said the United States authorities were convinced that there should be no ceiling on Japanese production for peaceful purposes- “ The problem facing us is not one of limitation of Japan’s peaceful industries, but of reviving these industries to provide the people’s barest wants," said General McCoy. He recalled to the commission that the Potsdam declaration said reparations from Japan should be “in a form which would not impair the ability of the Japanese people to support themselves.”

War-Making Plant Destroyed He said all of Japan’s “specialised war-making facilities” had been destroyed. He added that Japanese economy could be made to bear additional economic burdens beyond those directly relating to its own requirements only by prolonging or increasing the staggering costs born by the American taxpayer. Because of disagreement over the share each country should receive the Far Eastern Commission, which comprises Allies who fought Japan, has never worked out a schedule of final payments. Pending agreement on -final reparations the United States as the principal occupying Power, has been making advance deliveries to the Philipines, China, Netherlands and Britain. Today’s announcement by the United States means that these advance deliveries must cease. The latest decision marks the full turn of the wheel in United States thinking of Japanese reparations. The. original report on the subject was made soon after the war by Mr. Edwin Pauley, President Truman’s special representative on the reparations Commission.

Heavy Reparations Urged Mr. Pauley’s report declared that Japan’s industrial capacity was considerably more than the country’s peaceful needs and he recommended reparations on a proportionately-heavy scale.

Subsequent reports by two missions reduced the volume of industrial equipment considered in excess of Japan’s needs. The United States policy now apparently is based squarely on the report of the latest mission which said that Japan’s economy could bear no unnecessary burdens and that Japan could attain a self-supporting condition only if her internal conditions were improved and her foreign trade expanded. It is pointed out that the United States would be entitled to take the latest action without reference to the Far Eastern Commission, because a directive authorising advance transfers came unilaterally from the United States which now would be merely rescinding the previous decision-