COMMENTS ON PCPS D/14 OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENCE
3. In regard to the question of occupation forces, the previous conclusion of the Defence Committee, conveyed to you in my memorandum of 17th July as representing a military opinion on the subject, was that the forces in Japan should be adequate to ensure that the directions of the Supervisory Commission were complied with. It will be noted from paragraphs 6(c) and 7 of the attached Minute  that the Defence Committee has modified its earlier view and now considers that for the support of the Supervisory Commission in its task of keeping Japan disarmed and cooperative the two main factors on which we must rely are the control of imports and exports, and the predominance of American military power in the Pacific. The enforcement of the terms of the Peace Treaty, after the withdrawal of the Occupation Forces, should therefore be effected by the imposition if necessary of economic sanctions supported by naval blockade. The forces required should be United States Naval Forces not held solely at the 'disposal' of the Supervisory Commission but available on request by the Commission. The Committee considers that if land forces were required by the Supervisory Commission for the maintenance of internal order, the size of the forces and the degree of assistance to be provided would depend on the situation and it would be unrealistic to attempt to state them now. If the forces required were in excess of available United States resources, the provision of additional forces would be a matter for consultation between the Signatory Powers.
(F.G. SHEDDEN) Secretary