COMMENTS ON PCPS D/14 OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENCE

[matter omitted]

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 [2] 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