F.E.C. 224.

1. At F.E.C. meeting today Soviet member said he was now in
position to accept provision for review of Constitution.

2. McCoy stated that in view of the United States Government it
would be desirable if F.E.C. did not act on paper until after
Constitution had been promulgated. Deferment would be without
prejudice to F.E.C. right to review later and to require that
situation be reviewed by Diet.

3. I asked reason for United States view and McCoy replied that
reason was that it would be harmful to the situation in Japan.

When Berendsen asked McCoy to elaborate this, McCoy fell into
violent temper, saying inter alia that it was easy for Berendsen
to be obstructive since New Zealand did not have any
responsibilities in Japan, that Berendsen had 'consistently thrown
Monkey wrenches into the occupation' that he had maintained
'consistent opposition to MacArthur' and that he never offered
constructive alternatives.

4. I immediately said I associated myself completely with
Berendsen, that Australia and New Zealand had a warm admiration
for MacArthur and had gone out of their way to co-operate with him
and the United States Government, and would continue to do so. I
pointed out that Australia and New Zealand were contributing
troops to the occupation, and therefore it was false to accuse New
Zealand of criticizing without sharing responsibility.

5. Later, after McCoy continued his charges, Bajpai [1] said he
wished to 'protest most strongly against language used by
Chairman'. Soviet member said that, though it was recognised that
the United States had greatest responsibility in Japan, all
members of F.E.C. by virtue of their membership, have some
responsibility, no other member spoke, though sympathy of entire
meeting was with Berendsen.

6. Later, with concurrence of Berendsen, it was decided to expunge
the record from the minutes. Because of tense atmosphere of the
meeting adjourned until special meeting 21st September without
further discussion [of] the review proposal.

I called informally on State Department this afternoon and
expressed concern at suggestion to defer adoption of the review
paper now that Soviet concurred, and pointed out that our attitude
to the Constitution was vitally linked to his. As result, State
Department said it hoped to approve on Saturday.