740.00119 FEAC/3–2449: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Acting Political Adviser in Japan (Sebald)
110. Subj is Summary FEC Mtg, Mar 17, 1949.
W. W. Butterworth who had been designated to act as US Member in Gen McCoy’s absence was elected chairman.
Access to Jap Technical and Scientific Info in Jap ( FEC–280/14)
US Member requested postponement this item, stating informally his Govt was consulting Tokyo re feasibility of time extension. Indian member pointed out present policy would expire on Mar 31 and inquired, should FEC fail reach decision before Mar 31 if SCAP would allow those Indian technicians now in Tokyo to finish their work were it to take couple of weeks or so more than deadline. US Member stated he would represent to SCAP views of Indian Govt.
Policy Toward Patents, Utility Models, and Designs in Japan ( FEC–284/17)
USSR amendment to substitute Para 4 as it appears in C1–284/3 for text Para 4 in FEC–284/17 lost by vote of 7 opposed, 1 in favor (USSR) and 3 abstentions (Chi, Fr, India). FEC 284/17 was approved by vote of 10 in favor with 1 abstention (USSR). USSR member stated his abstention did not predetermine in any way Sov position this matter at peace settlement with Jap.
Priority for Patent Applications in Jap ( FEC–333/2)
Chi member proposed to delete words “entry of the country of the national concerned into the war” and substitute “the outbreak of hostilities of the country of the national concerned” adoption of which would give Chi priority rights dating back to 1937. Majority of members felt adoption of Chi amendment would introduce element of uncertainty into determination of date of loss of priority rights. Canad member proposed that phrase “effective date of loss of right [Page 689] to file patent applications in Jap” be substituted for Chi amendment. Canad amendment accepted by Chi and approved by Comm by vote of 8 in favor with 3 abstentions (NZ, Phil, USSR). FEC 333/2 defeated by vote of 10 in favor and 1 opposed (USSR). US member expressed regret Comm had been unable deal with matter as it was one of considerable urgency.
Recommendations Re Jap-Owned Patents, Utility Models, and Designs in Territories of Countries at War with Jap ( FEC 311/7)
Chi suggestion to delete Para 4 recd little consideration by other members. FEC 311/7 defeated by vote of 9 in favor with 1 abstention (Chi) and 1 opposed (USSR). USSR member stated he voted against paper on grounds resumption of application of internatl conventions to Jap can be exercised only after conclusion peace treaty.
Trial of Jap War Criminals ( FEC–314/12)
USSR member proposed that for first two lines of paper the fol be substituted: “The FEC decides as a matter of policy,” that in first line of first para, insert the words “in Japan” after “investigations” and in next to last line insert words “in Japan” after “trials”. Item retained on agenda.
Jap Membership in Internatl Convention of Telecommunications ( FEC–334)
NZ member associated himself with Austral views expressed at last mtg and expressed the gravest doubt whether SCAP had power to permit Jap Govt to act externally and also gravest doubt as to what would be the authority that could give such power to Jap Govt. Phil member indicated he was awaiting instrs.
Under other business Phil member made statement on problem of Jap reparations. He pointed out that his country’s concern and that of all countries represented on Comm was problem of Jap in relation to rest of area, in context of crisis that now grips world. Though Comm had been in existence almost three years, it had yet to formulate and implement a working program on econ life of Jap nation. It had not solved problem of reparations because it had, so far, failed to carry out the existing policy decision on level of econ life for Jap. He noted that implementation of Para in the interim directive on econ stabilization providing for “increased production of all essential indigenous raw materials and manufactured products” could not be accurately defined and determined except in relation to comprehensive and detailed econ program for Jap. He pointed out that rehabilitation of many of Jap’s neighbors and former victims depended to a great extent on reparations they expected to get from Jap and cited the Phil as a typical example. While Phil war damage claim against Jap totaled [Page 690] $5,375,000,000, as of Dec 23, 1948 it had recd interim reparations amounting to only $11,390,000. He stated that change in policy on reparations could throw entire Phil industrialization program out of gear. Reparations would be decisive in determining future relationship between Phil and Jap—whether former would revert to its prewar position of being mere supplier of raw materials for Jap’s factories, or achieve measure of self-sufficiency and independence in its industrial needs. He added that Comm must act quickly.
He addressed a special appeal to US to make up its mind on what to do with Jap. He cited as instance of US indecision, delay in removal of aircraft and private munitions plants in Jap and referred to history of inquiries on this matter in FEC. He also pointed out how lack of definitive US policy on final position of Jap had led to indecision on industrial levels to be maintained, extent of destruction of war-supporting industries and machinery to be allocated as reparations “in excess of the peaceful needs of the Japanese economy.”
He referred to vicious circle existing between reparations, level of econ life, comprehensive over-all policy on relation of Japan to her neighbors and changed polit and econ states of Asian nations as well as their plans for future—plans based at least in part on destruction of Jap’s war-making capacity and distribution of some of its industrial machinery as reparations.
Regardless of its effect on Jap economy his Govt held that Jap must be stripped of all war and war-supporting industries, such as aircraft and munitions factories—with respect to non-military items, his Govt held that need of claimant countries should have priority over need of Jap, wherever it could be demonstrated that these countries could take over such machinery to replace what they lost or to raise themselves to level where they would not be subj to the domination of revived Jap industries or to polit and milit threat that would follow such industrial revival. He noted that history in Asia was moving with dynamic force and jet propelled speed and concluded that welfare of peoples and peace of world required that Comm make new and resolute effort to settle problem of Jap without further delay.
USSR member noted that question of labor policy in Jap had been dropped from agenda and protested that no differentiation was made in Terms of Reference between procedural and substantive matters. US member indicated that any member could introduce a subj at will or make any statement under “other business” at any mtg.