Your 363 and 368. [1]

Japanese participation in international relations.

We have now received a Note from the United States Embassy here
communicating text of proposal put to F.E.C. and quoting the same
arguments in its favour. Australian Government's support is
requested.

2. In your 363 you indicated you were bringing proposal to the
attention of the Minister. Has he expressed any views? It is
desirable we should have his views before replying to United
States Note.

3. Our own view is that United States proposal in its present form
is undesirable and quite unnecessary, and that United States
arguments in its favour are unconvincing. Proposal would in our
view result either in Japanese Government exercising wide degree
of responsibility in international affairs, which is undesirable
so long as technical state of war obtains, or in Japanese
Government becoming simply the mouthpiece of S.C.A.P. and United
States Government at international conferences. Furthermore, to
allow Japan to handle its own international affairs might furnish
an embarrassing precedent as regards Germany. Admittedly the
Japanese peace settlement has been delayed longer than was
anticipated, and there may be some case for Governments
represented on F.E.C. to consider carefully whether at this stage
Japanese Government might be allowed to exercise limited
responsibility as a member of such purely technical international
bodies as I.T.U. and U.P.U. [2] But as regards international co-
operation in broader political and economic fields we consider
that participation where necessary by S.C.A.P. observers assisted
by Japanese technical advisers, as already provided for under
F.E.C. policy, should be quite adequate for present purposes.