Japan, July-August 1945

[Merlin Dorfman]

(1) I had understood that the overtures from Japan to Russia to help
mediate a negotiated peace were completely unofficial and had no approval,
and perhaps even no knowledge that it was happening, by the government
(the cabinet, the Supreme War Council, and the Emperor). But recently I
have read something that says that Ambassador Sato's discussions with the
Foreign Ministry in Moscow were known to, and approved by, the SWC and the
Emperor. Is this correct?
(2) What was the nominal structure of the Japanese government? In
effect, it was a military dictatorship and had been for at least ten
years, through terror and assassinations. But on paper, there was a
parliament (Diet) and a Cabinet. Was the Diet elected by the people of
Japan? Was that process controlled by the military to keep popular views
from being represented? Was the Cabinet nominally selected by and from
the Diet, and did the military control that? Did the Cabinet advise the
Emperor, who had the final decision, or was there some actual power in the
Diet and the Cabinet? How did the Supreme War Council fit into the
structure, on paper?
(3) Is it true that every man, woman, and child in Japan had been
"drafted into the army," and that there were, thus, legally no civilians
in the country?

[GFH]

Post by Merlin Dorfman
(1) I had understood that the overtures from Japan to Russia to help
mediate a negotiated peace were completely unofficial and had no approval,
and perhaps even no knowledge that it was happening, by the government
(the cabinet, the Supreme War Council, and the Emperor). But recently I
have read something that says that Ambassador Sato's discussions with the
Foreign Ministry in Moscow were known to, and approved by, the SWC and the
Emperor. Is this correct?
(2) What was the nominal structure of the Japanese government? In
effect, it was a military dictatorship and had been for at least ten
years, through terror and assassinations. But on paper, there was a
parliament (Diet) and a Cabinet. Was the Diet elected by the people of
Japan? Was that process controlled by the military to keep popular views
from being represented? Was the Cabinet nominally selected by and from
the Diet, and did the military control that? Did the Cabinet advise the
Emperor, who had the final decision, or was there some actual power in the
Diet and the Cabinet? How did the Supreme War Council fit into the
structure, on paper?
(3) Is it true that every man, woman, and child in Japan had been
"drafted into the army," and that there were, thus, legally no civilians
in the country?

Do not overlook the Three Week War between Japan and the USSR.

[Rich Rostrom]

Post by Merlin Dorfman
(2) What was the nominal structure of the Japanese government?

A constitutional monarchy with a parliamentary government.

However, the constitution was flawed, so that the civilian
government had no actual control of the armed services.

The Army and Navy Ministers had to be serving officers. If
no officer would serve, then no ministry could be formed.
Thus the armed services had a veto over the civilian
political authority. Furthermore, serving military were
exempt from civil law. This provided military assassins of
civilian figures with immunity from arrest or punishment.

Post by Merlin Dorfman
In effect, it was a military dictatorship and had been for at least ten
years, through terror and assassinations.

It might be more correct to describe it as _two_
military dictatorships, operating in the same country.
The Army and the Navy each did whatever they wanted,
without regard to the civilian government or each
other. If this sounds insanely disruptive and
inefficient - it was. The two services cooperated when
they felt like it, which was most of the time, but
there was no one who could order them to cooperate or
resolve conflicts except by negotiation.

Post by Merlin Dorfman
But on paper, there was a parliament (Diet) and a
Cabinet. Was the Diet elected by the people of
Japan?

Nominally, yes. I have heard that there was an election
in Japan during the war.

Post by Merlin Dorfman
Was that process controlled by the military
to keep popular views from being represented?

I think (don't know) that the political sphere was
policed by the Kempeitai - the Army police which had
expanded to be the security force all through Japan.

Thus civilians ran for the Diet, but anyone who openly
criticized the war policy could be arrested or murdered.

Post by Merlin Dorfman
Was the Cabinet nominally selected by and from the
Diet...

The Cabinet was formed by agreement among senior
civilian members of the Diet. As in many other
countries in wartime, the ministry was a coalition
of all acceptable factions; its membership was
rubber-stamped by the Diet.

Post by Merlin Dorfman
and did the military control that?

Between the refusal-to-serve veto and the threat
of assassination, the civilian politicians had
been broken to harness. Only those who endorsed
the armed forces' war policy were allowed in.

However, even the most fanatical militarists
recognized that civilian Japan still had to function.
The civilians in the cabinet represented that, and
could at least comment on the military's demands and
decrees.

Post by Merlin Dorfman
Did the Cabinet advise the Emperor, who had the
final decision...

In theory, yes. However, by long-standing tradition,
the Emperor never acted. Until the Meiji Restoration,
the Emperor was a figurehead for the Shogun. The
"restored" Emperor Meiji was a boy, and a figurehead
for the "Genro", a cabal of elder statesmen who
actually ran the country. He remained confined to a
ceremonial role even after his majority, until his
death in 1912.

His successor, Taisho appears to have been simple-
minded. It's certain he had serious neurological
problems. He never exercised any authority.

Thus Hirohito was raised to be yet another figurehead.

He rarely attended meetings of the Cabinet or Supreme
War Council, and never spoke out, though a spokesman
might do so for him. Thus his intervention at the
council of 6 September 1941 was shocking. However,
despite his questions, the Army and Navy leaders were
united in favor of war, and he did not order them to
stop.

During the war, he sometimes questioned the military
leaders' policies, and made specific suggestions about
war policies and even occasional tactical directives -
but never gave an order.

He supported the general war policy (which was
supported by all the ministsrs) until mid-1945, when
he began to suggest making peace, but not in any
official statement.

This eventually led to the cabinet and Council
meetings of 9-10 August. Hirohito was silent through
many hours of discussion, until Prime Miister Suzuki
broke precedent by asking him to speak. He then pushed
for surrender.

Post by Merlin Dorfman
or was there some actual power in the Diet and the
Cabinet?

In theory, yes. In practice the Army and Navy ran
everything they wanted to run.

Post by Merlin Dorfman
How did the Supreme War Council fit into the structure, on paper?

The SWC, like similar bodies in Britain and France
in WW I, was an "inner cabinet" established to
discuss war policy questions, and decide them as
much as the armed services would allow. The SWC
was where Army-Navy disputes were brokered.

Its members were all military, except the Foreign
Minister, and at times the Prime Minister. Decisions
of the SWC could be overridden by the full Cabinet,
but in practice the SWC was indeed "supreme". No
one was in the Cabinet who would dissent.

[m***@netMAPSONscape.net]

Post by Rich Rostrom

Post by Merlin Dorfman
(2) What was the nominal structure of the Japanese government?

A constitutional monarchy with a parliamentary government.
The Army and Navy Ministers had to be serving officers. If

This was not the case originally; the change was forced through by the
military after Suzuki (I believe) put together a government the heads
of the Army did not approve of. After that, it was as you said.

Post by Rich Rostrom
no officer would serve, then no ministry could be formed.
Thus the armed services had a veto over the civilian
political authority. Furthermore, serving military were
exempt from civil law. This provided military assassins of
civilian figures with immunity from arrest or punishment.

With the exception of the 2/26/36 Incident, they were largely unpunished
anyway.

Post by Rich Rostrom

Post by Merlin Dorfman
Cabinet. Was the Diet elected by the people of
Japan?

Nominally, yes. I have heard that there was an election
in Japan during the war.

1943 vaguely rings a bell for me.

Post by Rich Rostrom
I think (don't know) that the political sphere was
policed by the Kempeitai - the Army police which had
expanded to be the security force all through Japan.
Thus civilians ran for the Diet, but anyone who openly
criticized the war policy could be arrested or murdered.

Mikasa gave a speech in the Diet in 1944 severely criticizing the conduct
of the Imperial Army in China. Had he not been the youngest of the former
Emperor, he would undoubtedly have been arrested, at least. Instead, the
Army suppressed all copies of the speech, but one, which resurfaced in
1994.

Post by Rich Rostrom
In theory, yes. However, by long-standing tradition,
the Emperor never acted. Until the Meiji Restoration,
the Emperor was a figurehead for the Shogun. The
"restored" Emperor Meiji was a boy, and a figurehead
for the "Genro", a cabal of elder statesmen who
actually ran the country. He remained confined to a
ceremonial role even after his majority, until his
death in 1912.

Meiji was a bit more active than that; he was very instrumental in breaking
up the old daimyo system, for example.

Post by Rich Rostrom
His successor, Taisho appears to have been simple-
minded. It's certain he had serious neurological
problems. He never exercised any authority.

And Hirohito was named regeant in his stead.

Post by Rich Rostrom
Thus Hirohito was raised to be yet another figurehead.
He rarely attended meetings of the Cabinet or Supreme
War Council, and never spoke out, though a spokesman
might do so for him. Thus his intervention at the
council of 6 September 1941 was shocking. However,
despite his questions, the Army and Navy leaders were
united in favor of war, and he did not order them to
stop.

He actually forced the resignation of the first Tanaka Cabinet for its failure
to rein in the Army, and threatened to personally lead troops against the
rebels of the 2/26/36 Incident, which the Army and Navy were letting play
out. He also ordered their executions; previous assassains and rebels had
sometimes been given pro forma sentences, because their actions were
intended to be "for the good of the country".

Post by Rich Rostrom
During the war, he sometimes questioned the military
leaders' policies, and made specific suggestions about
war policies and even occasional tactical directives -
but never gave an order.
He supported the general war policy (which was
supported by all the ministsrs) until mid-1945, when
he began to suggest making peace, but not in any
official statement.

He was also influential in getting Suzuki named PM again, and Suzuki
was known to be opposed to the war.

Post by Rich Rostrom

Post by Merlin Dorfman
or was there some actual power in the Diet and the
Cabinet?

In theory, yes. In practice the Army and Navy ran
everything they wanted to run.

Which, as they didn't really have a clear idea what they wanted,
and (as you noted) didn't work together, resulted in the very strange
situation that Japan never went to a full war-time economy. The zaibatsu
continued to do almost what they wanted to do, so long as they were seen
to cooperate with the military.

Mike

[Chris Morton]

In article
<rrostrom.21stcentury-***@mx05.eternal-september.org>, Rich
Rostrom says...

Post by Rich Rostrom
Thus the armed services had a veto over the civilian
political authority. Furthermore, serving military were
exempt from civil law. This provided military assassins of
civilian figures with immunity from arrest or punishment.

To clarify, since the military could withhold Army or Navy ministers, they could
prevent the formation of any government, causing that government to collapse,
and causing new elections to be held... ad nauseum until the Army or Navy got
what it wanted.

It was a fatal flaw in the Meiji constitution that only manifested itself when
the earlier generation of truly emperor centered elites in government and the
military began to be replaced by younger officers seeking to delegitimize the
older system.

[m***@netMAPSONscape.net]

Post by Merlin Dorfman
(1) I had understood that the overtures from Japan to Russia to help
mediate a negotiated peace were completely unofficial and had no approval,
and perhaps even no knowledge that it was happening, by the government
(the cabinet, the Supreme War Council, and the Emperor). But recently I
have read something that says that Ambassador Sato's discussions with the
Foreign Ministry in Moscow were known to, and approved by, the SWC and the
Emperor. Is this correct?

Yes, they were known and approved; however, since the Japanese could not
agree on what to ask for, Sato never put forth any concrete proposals
(not that the Soviets were in any hurry to have him do so), a situation
which caused him to threaten to resign.

You may be thinking of the overtures in Switzerland, which were unofficial;
Toyoda demanded they be halted as soon as he heard of them.

I see Mr Rostrom has largely answered #2.

Post by Merlin Dorfman
(3) Is it true that every man, woman, and child in Japan had been
"drafted into the army," and that there were, thus, legally no civilians
in the country?

Not the actual law of the land, but de-facto, yes.

Mike