UT Te

Wess A ate el alae: pk Hea

IB ig!

Abridged text “th the speech haa at

‘the San Francisco conference by

ANDRE GROMYKO, Soviet delegate

~ 2 Pg

ie Goyie delegation considers it necessary at the very outset to

ane the importance of the question pertaining to the .peace treaty
Japan. The importance can be seen from the fact. that’ many of

uagiany represented at the present conference were the object of »
Japanese aggression, not to speak of the

Chinese People’s Republic,

_ the people of which during a long period of time inal to struggle
single-handedly against the eae aggressors. '

The Japanese arnry invaded
Manchuria in 1931. After a six-
year occupation of Manchuria,
which was converted’ by Japan
into a military base for further
aggression on the Asian _conti-
ment, militarist Japan in 1937 in-
-vaded Central China and occupied
vitally important centers. The

Chinese people, in the struggle’

against the Japanese aggressor,
suffered severe losses both in hu-
aman lives and in material values.

In 1938 Japan invaded the Sov-
jet Union, in the Vladivostok
region at Lake Hasan. Although
repelled, the Japanese militarists
did not abandon their aggressive
plans in regard to the Soviet Un-

fon. In 1939 Japan again attack-
ed Soviet territory in the region
of the Mongolian People’s Repub-
lic, at Halhingoh,

Again repelled, the Japanese
militarists nevertheless did not
abandon their aggressive plans
in respect to the ‘Soviet Union,
did not conceal the fact they set
as their aim seizure of the Sov-
iet Far East.

A number of other states in

Asia and the Far East, including —

India, Burma, Indonesia and the
Phillippines. have suffered from
Japenese aggression.

Finally, the people of the United
States also know! what Japanese
aggression means, since the at-
tack on Pearl Harbor. is. still
fresh in their memories. This
attack widened the scope of Jap-
anese aggression. After this at-
tack the Japanese militarists in-
vaded a number of other countries
in Asia and the Far ‘East. The
war enveloped all Asia. It was

“necessary for the powers to exert

united effort in order to save
the independence of the countries
attacked by the Japanese aggres-
sor and to create conditions for
the establishment of a durable
peace in the Far East. Many

countries of Asia and the Far

East suffered great losses while
fighting for their national’ inde-
pendence against the Japanese
militarists.

4

All this goes to show that it
is high time to make use of ‘the

conditions created as a result of ©

. the defeat of the Japanese agegres-

sor to establish peace in the Far
-East. Guided by this fact the
Soviet Union has repeatedly pro-
posed to undertake practical
‘steps providing for the solution
of this task. In the course of
recent years it proposed to ac-
celerate the conclusion of a peace
treaty with Japan.

It goes without saying that the
Soviet Union has always proceed-
ed, and is proceeding, from the
fact that peace should be demo-
cratic, conforming to the inter-
ests of the people, and not imper-
ialistic, profitable only for certain
circles of insatiable imperialists,

Hence, we should consider. such
a peace treaty and such a'peace
settlement with Japan as would
not permit the rebirth of Japan-
ese militarism and would provide
for peace and security for all
countries of. Asia and the Far
Hast, 7

Interested in this are‘not only
countries which have suffered
from Japanese aggression, but
the Japanese people itself, which
is paying for the crimes com-
mitted by Japanese. militarists.
The national interests of the
Japanese people require that
there should exist peaceful re-

4

pirate abl a TT

lations between Japan and other |

nations, and first and foremost
with its | neighboring. countries, |

In considering the question ‘of
the peace treaty with Japan, first
of all arises the ‘question—What
are the principles ‘which should
serve as a basis for this treaty?
How to provide for the preven-
tion of Japan being again con-
verted into an aggressive state?
How to achieve that the fate of
Japan should’ not again fall into
the hands of militarists who are
already raising their heads un-
abashedly, openly declaring their
plans for revenge?

This task can be successfully

‘ resolved if the conference parti-

cipants will proceed from the
principles which found. their ex-
pression in well known interna-
tional agreements. This concerns
first of all such agreements as
‘the Cairo Declaration of 1943, the
Potsdam Declaration of 1945, and
the Yalta Agreement of 1945, un-
der which the \U:S., Britain, China
and the Soviet Union undertook
specific obligations both as re-
garded completion of the war
with Japan and the transfornia-
tion of Japan ~ into a maacetul
democratic state. ; :

This concerns also such, agree-
ments as the United Nations De-
claration of January 1, 1942, un-
der which the UN undertook obli-
gations not to conclude a sep-
arate peace with enemy states,
including Japan, and the decis-

ions of the Far Eastern | Com- *

mission—having as its members
the Soviet Union, Britain, the
United States, China, France, The
“Netherlands, Canada, - Australia,
New Zealand, India and the Phil-:
ippines—on the basic policy with
regard to Japan to be adopted
after the end of the war.

The Potsdam Declaration sit
the resolutions of the Far East- ;
ern Commission on the basic

- policy in regard to Japan pro-

vide for eradication of Japanese
militarism and prevehtion of con-—
ditions which would permit the

CO TE TG
P, ’

OUELLETTE tt Tr Tt Tin Ti

rebirth of militarism in. Japan.

The Far Ea8tern Commission
decision of June 19, 1947, “Basic
Policy in Regard to Japan After
its Capitulation,” imposes on Ja-
pan, for example rigid restric-
tions’ in’ respect to. its armed
forces,

The Potsdam Declaration
points out the necessity to elimi-
‘nate the power and influence of
thosé who deceived and misled
the people of Japan. It also shows
the necessity to take measyres
to prevent Japan from rearming
and sion foliowang es path of
conquest.

‘varanasi

y the Soviet Union didn’t si
the Japanese ‘teeatel

e rie
PUL ELLIE LLU ORL IC OUI anti Met nei et Tee emanennpANN NN anne Onn :
ft ‘

Thus, demilitarization is one of

the principal tasks which should
be resolved by the peace treaty
with Japan. This. first -of all
means that the treaty should in-
Clude provisions restricting the
strength of Japan’s armed forces
—land, naval and air.

It goes without ‘saying "that
after conclusion of the peace
treaty, all occupation troops
should be withdrawn from Japan
and her territory should not be:
used for the maintenance of for-
eign military bases. Absence ‘in
the peace treaty of ‘a specific and
clear indication to that effect
would contradict the very aim
of a peace settlement with Japan
which should lead to the re-estab-
lishment of her sovereignty, and
would also contradict the inter-

ests of the fonin tenance of race
in the Far East.

@.

The above-mentioned agree-
ments of the powers provide for
transformation of Japan into a
democratic state.
dam . Declaration

it is directly

. Stated that “the Japanese govern-

ment shall remove all obstacles”
to the revival and strengthening
of democratic tendencies among
the Japanese people.” It is also
said there * that “there shall be
establishedy ‘freedom. of speech,
religion and thought, as well as-
respect for the fundamental hu-
man rights.”

In the decisions of the Far
Eastern Commission it is stated ”
that “the Japanese people shall
be encouraged to develop its, in-
clinations for individual freedoms
and respect for the fundamental
human rights,especially the free-
dom of religion, assembly and as-
sociation, speech and of the press.
It shall. also be encouraged to
form democratic and representa-
tive organizations.”

Such is the second vital task.

- set -by the powers already during

*

the time of war with Japan—the
task of the democratization of
Japan. The purpose for ‘setting
this task is ‘quite clear. Militar-.
ist Japan was ruled by a reaction-~
ary clique. The entire political
and .social life was undér the
control of this clique and the big
Japanese trusts—Mitsubisi, Mit-
sui and others which sprpon ed
it.

It follows, therefore, Fiabe the
task of the demilitarization of {
Japan and the prevention of the —

‘rebirth of Japanese militarism is

closely interlinked with the task
of the. democratization of the
political ‘and social life of the
country, with the task of estab-
lishing in Japan a democratic or- .
der under which the fate of the
country would not depend on the
arbitrariness of a group of: re-
actionary militarists.

In the, Pots-_

’ cheap labor of the Japanese work

like form of redeeming the dam-_

_ since these countries have a SUR

PACIFIC TRIBUNE _ SEPTEMBER by, 1981 — PAGE < :

_ Japan and the. development %%

claims of a number of states t0

be much easier for Japan to 40

i

’

Of great importance in rae
nection with preparation of AP
peace treaty are the question
pertaining ‘to the development ©
Japanese economy. It is known Pies
that in the past this economy —
served the purposes of pe
circles. Its development was dir-
ected in such a way as to prepare 4
the Japanese industry and agth :
eulturesto satisfy war needs. The .
basic resources of the industry
and agriculture were used for ie ne
production of armaments, am es
strategic material, and not f0F
the needs of the civil population. rig

This means the Japanese peace
treaty must not place ee
in the path of the developmen”
of. peaceful Japanese economy: fe
This principle has already been
formulated in the Potsdam De
claration.

Is it necessary to awell at
length on the fact that providing
for an unlimited ‘development 4

its foreign trade is corresnondiake ;
‘not only to the interests of th@
maintenance of peace in the Far
East and establishment of good-
neighbor relations between Japan
-and other states, particularly
those neighboring with it, DU
also corresponds to the interest he
of the Japanese people? Such 2.
development of Japan’s economy ie
would for the ‘first time open
before the Japanese people oe
- opportunity for an improve
of its welfare.
Objection to including stich
clauses in the treaty can only
come from those who try ths st
strangle Japanese economy: Be
make it dependent on the inter
ests of foreign. monopolies. Ob-
jection to inclusion of such
clauses can only come from thos?
who strive to direct the develop
ment of Japanese economy 20%
for the satisfaction of eee
, Tequirements of normal economic »
relations of Japan with other —
states, but for the militarization -
of Japan, for the adaptation of .
its economy. to the cherished
plans of certain great powers 10h i
a new war in the Far East.
AS healthy, peaceful ‘Japanes?
economy would permit Japan
satisfy easily the legitimate —

compensate for damage calnsel
by Japanese aggression. It woul

this than to pay for the damage
by directly using the labor of
the Japanese population, as it is!
provided for by the American
British draft. . oun
-It is not difficult to understand
what ihas prompted such a pro>
posal. It has been prompted: bY ©
the desire to make use of the —

er and peasant, without any Te
gard to the’ fact that this slavery”

age caused ‘by Japan would divert
a “considerable part of its. pro--
ductive forces., It is profitable
not for the countries. which are
legitimately claiming redemptio? | —
for damages jnflicted on them —

plus of manpower. But it Jai
profitable to certain great powers ©
which want to benefit at the
expense of Japan’s cheap labor. —

The peace treaty with Japao
should naturally, resolve a num —
ber of territorial, questions. py
this respect as well the United —
States, Britain, China and the

Continued on next page