In addition to these essential aspects of the material and psycholog- ical situation of the Japanese people after the war, it is essential to
36 chapter one
understand the nature of the American occupation so as to grasp the reality of the postwar situation and its recovery in Japan. An important part of the overall success of the postwar Japanese recov- ery is due to the successful policy of the American occupation. Several reasons for this achievement can be given:
First, the content of the policy objectives of the occupation must be pointed out. The key policy objectives with which General Douglas MacArthur, the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers, arrived in Japan were ‘democratization’ and ‘demilitarization’. They were clearly stated in President Harry S. Truman’s policy statement of 6 September 1945 entitled ‘Early US policy toward Japan after its capitulation’.1 The two objectives corresponded well with the basic
psychology of the Japanese people as described above and this for- tunate matching of basic policy orientation became the basis of the successful occupation.
Second, the wisdom of ‘indirect governance’ has to be mentioned. As early as August 1942, Japanese experts at the State Department began their work to consider the modality of the postwar Japanese occupation.
Up until 1944 however, America was envisaging a policy similar to what was applied to Germany after its capitulation, namely a joint occupation of Allied Powers and an introduction of direct military control to implement US policy objectives in a straightforward manner. After President Roosevelt passed away in April 1945 and some tension arose in US relations with the Soviet Union, President Truman adopted a more flexible approach based on advice given by Japanese experts of the State Department, that “Japan should be democra- tized but the punishment and demolition of their moderate political forces should be kept to a minimum and Japan should be restored as a friendly nation to the United States.”2 The Potsdam Declaration,
which acknowledged the role of the Japanese government in the postwar period, was already a reflection of that flexible policy approach. Thus the Japanese government itself could and did play an impor- tant role in furthering democratization and demilitarization effectively and smoothly during those critical years of American occupation.
1 Ikei, op. cit., p. 232. The title of this policy statement was translated from
Japanese by the author.
after the war: new values and the peace treaty 37 Third, it was noteworthy that the occupation was implemented primarily by the Americans, different from Germany and different from Korea. Japan did capitulate early enough to give sufficient authority to President Truman to implement an American occupa- tion and not a joint occupation by the Allied multilateral forces. Stalin proposed Soviet occupation of the northern part of Hokkaido and there were other plans such as a quadrilateral occupation of Japan by America, Britain, China and the Soviet Union. But the emergence of Cold War tension and the difficulty already experi- enced in the German quadrilateral occupation were enough reasons for President Truman to reject all these plans, and with a symbolic involvement of Commonwealth forces, the occupation was primar- ily implemented by the American forces. Thus, effective and smooth governance through the coordinated and unified policy implemen- tation of the American command was ensured throughout the country. Fourthly, there was the humanitarian and reconstruction aid America provided from the beginning of the occupation up to the conclusion of the Peace Treaty in 1951, which we are going to see in a little more in detail in Chapter 10. During the days immediately follow- ing the end of the war, the American help became the key element for Japanese survival. In general it was highly appreciated by the people.
It is sometimes asked why Japan as a whole became so pro- American after the war. As we are going to see in Chapter 2 and 12, there was certainly strong vocal public opinion which criticized American ‘imperialism’ and ‘expansionism’. But in general, for a country with which it had fought war for four years with all these civilian casualties, the Japanese people became extremely friendly towards America. The convergence of values, successful policy guid- ance and American assistance could be included as reasons for this. There are increasing voices lately in Japan that resent the Japanese behaviour in the postwar period, which ‘blindly’ followed American directions, accepting as an inevitability the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki;3 the carpet-bombing of major cities which
caused so many civilian casualties;4 the results of the trial in the
3 The death toll of Hiroshima was 201,990 and Nagasaki 93,967 (H. Takeuchi,
Ano sensouha ittai nandeattaka (What was that War?), Harashobou, 1997, pp. 207–208).
4 The death toll of Tokyo was 97,031 and of 63 other cities 86,336 (Peter Duus,
38 chapter one
IMTFE and Article 9 of the Constitution enacted by General MacArthur. It is only hoped that these views will bring a fair and objective view of the history, and not an emotional explosion of ultra-nationalism.