THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES Monday, December 17, 1945. CONTROL OF JAPAN

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26028, 17 December 1945, Page 4

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES Monday, December 17, 1945. CONTROL OF JAPAN

Only two months ago the United States Secretary of State, Mr Byrnes, announced the formation of a Far Eastern Advisory Council, in which nine nations were invited to participate. The functions of this council, as then laid down and accepted, are to make recommendations on the “ formulation of policies, principles and standards by which the fulfilment by Japan of its obligations under the instruments of surrender may be determined,” and bn the steps and machinery required to secure that purpose. The council is, as its title implies, advisory only, with no administrative authority, and on military matters it was insisted by Mr Byrnes that the discretion of General MacArthur, as commander of the occupation forces, should be unfettered. The suggestion for the formation of this council caine from the Soviet Government, and the United States scheme was actually accepted by Russia in August, some time before an official announcement was made, this being delayed until the other Great Powers had agreed to join. The urgent note in Moscow radio’s present demand—for such it amounts to—for the establishment of joint Allied control in Japan is, in view of the extent to which Russian wishes have been met, indicative of some measure of concern at the present system of administration under General MacArthur. It is very questionable whether there is justification for such an attitude. The difficulties which have been experienced in establishing control in Japan have been both numerous and complex. It is very likely that, as has been" stated with some pungency by critics and commentators, the Japanese, while making an agreeable show of collaborating in their own humiliation, have in some particulars succeeded in evading the full and intended discipline which General MacArthur has sought to impose. It may be that they are, as the Moscow radio asserts, attempting to preserve the legend of their “ invincibility ” as a nation of fighters. But it has still to be shown that, in spite of failures, the occupation administration is an inadequate instrument when the peculiar problems, for which no close parallels exist, are taken into account. The United States plan, as set before the Japanese Government, is clear-cut. It requires the breaking up of industrial monopolies, the encouragement of labour unions, the instituting of women’s suffrage, a liberalised education system, and the abolition of all repressive policy and of restrictions upon the freedom of the people. And insofar as can be judged, the military and civil authorities under American .control are meeting with some success in inaugurating the new regime. The question seems to be not irrelevant, in view of. the problems of Allied control in Germany, whether a 'joint council in Japan would be an improvement, especially if the membership represented in the advisory council, which comprises ten nations, including New Zealand,. were retained. It can be presumed, since Moscow radio is unlikely’ to have spoken without prompting, that Russia intends to raise the matter during the coming Big Three talks. There it can perhaps be considered in its proper setting, in relation to the experience of four-Power control in Germany, and to the carrying out of the terms of the Sino-Russian treaty provisions. affecting Manchuria.