PEACE SETTLEMENT WITH JAPAN

British Commonwealth Conference
Representatives of the following British Commonwealth countries
will meet at Canberra on 26th August to discuss the question of a
Peace Settlement with Japan:- Australia, United Kingdom, Canada,
New Zealand, South Africa, India, Pakistan and Burma.

Provisional Agenda
As it stands at present the provisional Agenda of the conference,
as agreed after the exchange of views between the Governments, is
as follows:

(1) Procedural questions.

(2) Basic objectives.

(3) Control or supervision of Japan.

(4) Territorial provisions.

(5) Disarmament and demilitarisation.

(6) Political provisions.

(7) Economic and financial provisions.

(8) Reparations.

My notes on the Agenda are submitted for the consideration of
Cabinet. They are necessarily subject to modification in the light
of discussions at the Conference, but in principle they are in
accord with the policies already outlined in Cabinet and also in
the House of Representatives from time to time. [1]

American Sponsored Conference
The United States Under Secretary of State proposed at a meeting
of the eleven countries represented on the Far Eastern Commission
that a conference of representatives from the eleven states should
meet on 19th August, to discuss the Peace Treaty for Japan. This
meeting was to consist of deputies and experts, and was to take
place at or near Washington or San Francisco.

The Australian view of this proposal was as follows: Australia
accepted the principle that the eleven countries represented on
the Far Eastern Commission who had been active belligerents in the
Pacific war should meet to discuss the preliminary stage of the
Japanese Peace Conference, if possible during this year. Each
country, however, should be free to determine its representation
at this preliminary stage, and Australia, for its part, would wish
to be represented by the Minister for External Affairs. A meeting
of experts or deputies would not be in order until the principles
and directions had been decided at the highest level. 19th August
was an impracticable date in view of the arrangements for the
Canberra Conference. San Francisco or Pearl Harbour were
considered preferable to Washington. Australia agreed to the
United States suggestion that the voting procedure should be by
simple 2/3rds majority.

Indications now are that the Conference convened by the United
States will be held early in September, possibly September 10, and
that it will take place in Washington. All the countries
represented on the Far Eastern Commission have agreed to the
United States proposal with the exception of the U.S.S.R., which
has made a counter proposal for a preliminary meeting of the
Council of Foreign Ministers to discuss the Japanese Settlement.

The Soviet reply is being treated by the U.S. State Department as
'non-acceptance' rather than 'refusal'.

General Policy
The general policy in relation to the Japanese settlement which
has been followed up to date may be summarised as follows:-

1. There should be no delay in going ahead with the Japanese Peace
Conference. In the absence of a peace settlement there will be
increasing tendencies for major matters of permanent importance to
be dealt with on a piecemeal basis or to be postponed.

2. Australia's war effort entitled her to be recognised as a party
principal in the peace settlement. Australia has earned this
position by her war effort which, in General MacArthur's words,
'contributed immeasurably' towards Pacific Victory.

3. Australia accepts the democratic principle that despite their
varying contributions to the common victory all nations which
played any substantial part in the Pacific war should be
represented at the peace conference.

4. The voting procedure suggested by the United States (i.e. two
third majority) is just and democratic and any attempt to apply
the veto system would be unjust and must be resisted.

5. The peace settlement for Japan need not be a long drawn out
affair but could be completed in 1948. Indeed its fundamentals
have already been accepted in the basic policy formulated in the
Far Eastern Advisory Commission and later confirmed in substance
by the present Far Eastern Commission which was a development of
the broad principles of the Potsdam declaration. The foundations
of the peace have also been laid through the constructive pioneer
work already performed in Japan by General MacArthur, as a result
of which military disarmament is now practically completed.

6. The basic policy of the Far Eastern Commission prescribed
certain measures which were the physical disarmament of Japan, the
removal of militarist and Fascist elements, the trial and
punishment of war crimes and the destruction of Japan's capacity
to wage war.

7. The basic policy of the Far Eastern Commission also laid
emphasis upon the positive tasks of building a peaceful and
democratic Japan. This called for reform of the social, political
and economic life of Japan. For example trade unions should be
actively encouraged and the educational system liberalised. These
positive tasks are necessarily long-term in character.

8. The settlement must take account of South and East Asia and the
Pacific as a whole. A peace should be established in accordance
with the objectives of the United Nations Charter-a peace which
should give security from future aggression and at the same time
help to raise the standards of living of all the peoples of South
and East Asia and the Pacific. The gradual economic development of
Japan should be part of a general plan for the economic betterment
of East and South East Asia and the Pacific as a whole. It would
be unjust if her population obtained privileges and benefits
denied to the countries which she has devastated.

9. In order to achieve these objectives, an Allied supervisory
authority should be established in the treaty of peace in order to
consolidate the important gains already made and ensure a bona
fide observance of the treaty provisions and especially to prevent
any re-establishment of a war potential. In addition, the
supervisory authority should have as one of its functions, the
coordination of the Japanese economy with those of the Pacific and
East Asiatic regions.

10. The future of Japan depends first upon the determination of
the Allied power to pursue vigorously the objectives laid down by
the Far Eastern Commission, and secondly upon the energy,
sincerity and cooperation of the Japanese themselves in carrying
out the great reforms already planned.

11. The peace treaty should therefore be not vindictive but just
and firm. Australia desires to achieve by democratic procedures of
peacemaking a stable and lasting peace in the Pacific based on
security from aggression and the welfare of all Pacific peoples.

This great objective will be assisted if the peace conference is
expedited, thereby furnishing an example of Allied cooperation
which should also assist in the final European settlement. [2]

H.V. EVATT
Minister for External Affairs