SAN FRANSISCO TREATY

Treaty

Student’s Name

Affiliation

Course

Date

SAN FRANSISCO TREATYHistory

In 1791 American ships landed in Kii Oshima led by John Kendrick to open up negotiations on a trade agreement. But he planted a flag and claimed to be American Island. In 1846 -1848 explores mainly James Biddle and James glynn entered Tokyo to make trade arrangements with two ships filled with seventy two cannons but it was unsuccessful (D. Low, 1974). The latter commander proposed to the Congress that they should show Japan the capabilities by a demonstration (Ellis S. Krauss, 2004).

American commodore Mathew Perry decided to visit Japan upon his arrival he could not trade .He became infuriated but was later told to trade in Nagasaki where the laws allowed for limited trade with the Dutch. He later decided to threaten the Tokugawa Shogun ate if he was denied the right to trade. The offer was tempting to the Japanese but as of that time they did not accept modern technology (D. Low, 1974). Perry returned leaving a trail of fear due to his black ships which were a sign of danger from western technology. After two years Perry returned to find a treaty known as convention of Kanagawa in which he had stipulated as per instructions from then American president Millard Fillmore.

In 1860 a Japanese envoy comprising of Karin Maru went to USA to show that they had mastered the western technology. This was also a visit to amend Mathew Perry’s demand and at the same time broker a treaty of friendship. The Japanese also wanted to set up a first ever Japan embassy in the united states in which the firs t ambassador was Townsend Harris ,then Robert H, Pruyn. Hawaii was where the first place in us soil for Japanese occupied immensely after it became part of America.

Here is where there was some conflict over control of Hawaii. The two nations later cooperated to suppress the boxer rebellion in china but we could not convince Japan to the open door policy for equal trade with china. In brokering a good deal President Roosevelt arranged for a gentleman’s agreement between Japan and the USA where little movement of immigrants would be allowed.

This agreement was harbored by the Secretary of state and Japanese foreign minister who also banned all immigration of Japanese to the US. The gentleman agreement was signed in 1907-1908 where congress forbid emigration of Japanese to the USA .The Japanese fought with the US on allied sides to take control of German bases in china in 1919 but the Twenty one demand s by Japan was too much for China, Britain and US. This was because it en crouched Chinas sovereignty by possessing the German holdings and refusing to knowledge the open door policy (D. Low, 1974). This was of concern to USA congress and was brought forward by William Jennings in March 1915.He indicated that sovereignty of China should be core and not substantiated by greed of the Japanese government.

In a Paris Peace treaty in 1919 US fought against the demands of china but was faced with stiff opposition from Britain and France who approved it. This brought about chaos in China and soon china was given sovereignty for Shandong and German holdings but it was still run by Japan government (Ellis S. Krauss, 2004). In 1924 tension broke out after implementation of American Immigration law which prohibited immigration from Japan. Japan and US friendship began to sour after the Manchurian Incident and the attacks of Gunboat Panay in china in 1937.In 1940 an embargo was given to Japan from, the British, Australian and Dutch government after Japan seized Vietnam.

The cut demolished the government of Japan and due to shortage in oil supply they had to either leave china or go to war with US and Britain. Prior to this Japan thought that the other countries saw them as inferiors and lack of diplomacy when it came to Japans expansion programs. Japan American relationships was constricted and a statement indicating why it was so was broadcasted in 1938.This was the major reason for the pearl harbor attacks which was due to lack of proper communication. The Washington treaty stipulated an equal share of American nay and Japanese army but it was not so and the Japanese government was well aware of this. The Japanese would later want to expand and leave the dependency of oil from the US.

A full embargo was imposed on Japan where all oil shipments was to be held back and Japanese assets would be frozen .in the 1930s Japan depended on oil from the Us and due to Tokyo’s expansion the export control act was implemented where oil, steel and iron exports were cut (D. Low, 1974). Japan took it as a way to disable their economy this action angered the Japanese government and wanted to attack the USA and the insecurity on energy was a core factor for Pearl Harbor attack. While the Japanese navy was steaming towards Hawaii, their ambassadors in D.C. were trying to convince the government that Japan would not attack. The naval forces were the weakest point that Japan could use to attack America and paralyze their system of operation.

They decided upon Pearl Harbor because it was closer to Japan than the U.S., and they would have less distance to travel hence, they decided to bomb Pearl Harbor, as it held the majority of the American naval forces in the Pacific. Pearl Harbor attack of the port was a huge blow to American counter offense as they could not retaliate. The attacks were occurred in December 941 in pearl harbor Hawaii and later reaction United states declared war which they easily worn by destroying japans states and after their surrender the war ended (Dzurek, 1996)d.

United states occupied Japan and once they were allied forces. This was the first time to be occupied by a foreign power and thus arose the San Francisco Peace treaty signed in 1951 September 8 and in 1952 Japan would later become an independent state (D. Low, 1974). After the occupation Japan was given independence and due to the war relied heavily on the USA for support which was not appreciated, they wanted more independence from the allied powers especially because USA occupied major islands on the country (Ellis S. Krauss, 2004). The USA returned most islands but would not release Okinawa a major military administration post according to article 3 of the peace treaty (D. Low, 1974).

The allies goals were subject to UN Charter and UDHR (Universal Declaration of Human Rights) This treaty was the official ending of World War 11, which indicated that Japan grant, the United States the territorial means for it to establish a military presence in the Far East. It was mandatory for Japan to compensate former prisoners of war and at the same time the USA return sovereignty to Japan 9(D.Low,1974)

The Security Treaty marked the beginning of the effects of Japan’s relationship with the United States and role in the international arena as determined by treaties discussed on the ways in which these effects have governed Japan’s post-war history (Dzurek, 1996). This was known as the San Francisco system

Taiwan independence argue that sovereignty of Taiwan is really still held by the Allies .Non attending nations included India, Yugoslavia and Burma who had separate treaties that would honor equality y among free nations. They believed that sovereignty between nations is the most important thing.

The Soviet Union was adamant in accepting the treaty and they tried to undermine it by stalling the procedures. It was there assumption that, militarism by the Japanese would still be in effect and sooner than later they would rise. They were angered by the fact that China was not invited to participate despite being one of the main victims of the Japanese aggression The soviet union thought the treaty was meant to help certain nations and leave out other nations (Ellis S. Krauss,, 2004).

Japan signed a Treaty of Peace with the Allied Powers because it has been disarmed. The sovereignty of a nation such as Japan was to be recognized and should be included in arrangements as per security arrangements (D. Low, 1974) Japan desired a Security Treaty with the United States of America to come into force simultaneously with the Treaty of Peace between the United States of America and Japan. The security arrangement dictated that the USA would provide security to the nation from external attacks .Japan would be surrounded by USA naval ships as they had been disarmed and would protect them.

The United States of America, , was willing to maintain certain of its armed forces in the expectation, that Japan will itself increasingly assume responsibility for its own defense avoiding any armament in the interest of peace and security

BELOW IS THE ORIGINAL CONTEXT OR CITATION FROM THE TREATY

“Article I: The state of war between Japan and each of the Allied Powers is terminated Japan grants, and the United States of America, the right, to dispose United States land, air and sea forces in and about Japan and grants, and the United States of America, the right, to dispose United States land, air and sea forces in and about Japan The Allied Powers recognize the full sovereignty of the Japanese people over Japan and its territorial waters.

Article II: Japan was to cease being part of the League of Nations Mandate system and should renounce the domination of some states. The states include Korea, islands of Quelpart, Port Hamilton, Dagelet, Formosa, Antarctic area, Pescadores. Kurile Islands, portion of Sakhalin and the islands adjacent Spratly Islands and to the Paracel Islands

Article III: The United States had the power of administration over the territory of Japan and would stand in as the arm as of ruling, administration, jurisdiction and legislation.US would execute the powers of the armed forces and administer its duties.

Article IV: This Treaty shall expire whenever in the opinion of the Governments of the United States of America the disposition of property of Japan and of its nationals in the areas the disposition in Japan of property of such authorities and residents, and of debts, against Japan and its nationals, shall be the subject of special arrangements between Japan and such authorities.

Article V: Confirmation had to be done in Washington Dc for the treaty to be considered valid between United State and Japan.

Article 6: It was indicated that upon agreement the properties belonging to Japanese government would be returned within 90 days as stipulated

Article 7&Article 8: Japan renounces all rights, title and interests acquired under, and is discharged from all obligations resulting from, the Agreement between Germany and the Creditor Powers of 20 January 1930 and its Annexes, including the Trust Agreement, dated 17 May 1930, the Convention of 20 January 1930, respecting the Bank for International Settlements; and the Statutes of the Bank for International Settlements. Japan will notify to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Paris within six months of the first coming into force of the present Treaty its renunciation of the rights, title and interests referred to in this paragraph.

Article 9: Japan will enter promptly into negotiations with the Allied Powers for the regulation or limitation of fishing and the conservation and development of fisheries on the high seas.

Article 10 :Japan renounces all special rights and interests in China, including all benefits and privileges resulting from the provisions of the final Protocol signed at Peking on 7 September 1901, Article 11: Japan accepts the judgments of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East and of other Allied War Crimes Courts both within and outside Japan, and will carry out the sentences imposed thereby upon Japanese nationals imprisoned in Japan.

Article 12 :Japan declares its readiness promptly to enter into negotiations for the conclusion with the application of this Article, a discriminatory measure shall not be considered to derogate from the grant of national or most-favored-nation treatment, as the case may be, if such measure is based on an exception customarily provided for in the commercial treaties of the party applying it, or on the need to safeguard that party’s external financial position or balance of payments ,or on the need to maintain its essential security interests, and provided such measure is proportionate to the circumstances and not applied in an arbitrary or unreasonable manner.

Article 13: In regard to air transport there shall be negotiations by allied powers to make bilateral or multilateral agreements

Article 14: To the countries that suffered from Japanese oppression they shall be compensated from causing damages and suffering. The government of Japan shall get into negotiations with the oppressed state to allow for mode of compensation. The government of Japan shall also have to be sufficient in providing for the resources to provide for the economy of sustainability.

Article 15: Japan will, within six months of the date of such application, return the property, tangible and intangible, and all rights or interests of any kind in Japan of each Allied Power and its nationals (Dzurek, 1996).

Article 16: Japan will transfer its assets and those of its nationals in countries which were neutral during the war, to the International Committee of the Red Cross which shall liquidate such assets and distribute the resultant fund to appropriate national agencies, for the benefit of former prisoners of war and their families on such basis as it may determine to be equitable.

Article 17 :The Japanese Government shall provide that, where the national has suffered injury by reason of any such judgment, he shall be restored in the position in which he was before the judgment was given or shall be afforded such relief as may be just and equitable in the circumstances. The Japanese Government shall take the necessary measures to enable nationals of any of the Allied Powers at any time within one year from the coming into force of the present Treaty between Japan and the Allied Power concerned to submit to the appropriate Japanese authorities for review any judgment given by a Japanese court between and such coming into force, in any proceedings in which any such national was unable to make adequate presentation of his case either as plaintiff or defendant

Article 18: The intervention of a state of war shall equally not be regarded as affecting the obligation to consider on their merits claims for loss or damage to property or for personal injury or death which arose before the existence of a state of war, and which may be presented or re-presented by the Government of one of the Allied Powers to the Government of Japan, or by the Government of Japan to any of the Governments of the Allied Powers. The provisions of this paragraph are without prejudice to the rights conferred by Article

Article 19: Japan waives all claims of Japan and its nationals against the Allied Powers and their nationals arising out of the war or out of actions taken because of the existence of a state of war, and waives all claims arising from the presence, operations or actions of forces or authorities of any of the Allied Powers in Japanese territory prior to the coming into force of the present Treaty.

Article 20: Japan will take all necessary measures to ensure such disposition of German assets in Japan as has been or may be determined by those powers entitled under the Protocol of the proceedings of the Berlin Conference of 1945 to dispose of those assets, and pending the final disposition of such assets will be responsible for the conservation and administration thereof.

Article 20: Japan would follow the Berlin Conference act and dispose the assets of German and would be responsible for conservation and administration.

Article 21: It provides with the confirmation that Japan shall adhere to the articles previously stated and reinstate all property to Korea and china and pay repatriations for the damages

Article 22: Under this article the decision to dispute the treaty can only be taken to the International court of justice. This shall not be in response to a special case tribunal and shall not hear any case relating to these disputes. This is also in regards to allied nations on confirmation of being members of the Statute of International Court of Justice.

Future of the treaty and the relation to the future Security of United States

Japan and those Allied Powers which are not already parties to the Statute of the International Court of Justice will deposit with the Registrar of the Court, at the time of their respective ratifications of the present Treaty, and in conformity with the resolution of the United Nations Security Council, dated 15 October 1946, a general declaration accepting the jurisdiction, without special agreement, of the Court generally in respect to all disputes of the character referred to in this Article (D. Low, 1974).

The claims about the San Francisco treaty was regards to its main objective. It was for a peace treaty with Japan but later became a settlement of war to Japan. Japan did everything pertained to the treaty so as to build their nation. They even toke back their territory which brought territorial wars among other nations. This could only be resolved by political amendments and cross border negotiations. No Japanese politician seems strong enough to withstand such criticism. Yet, as with many international disputes, time may again present opportunities for solutions.

Japan’s imports from the United States included both raw materials and manufactured goods. United States agricultural products were a leading import in 1990 (Dzurek, 1996).

Machines and transportation equipment were the main manufacturing imports because it was the era of industrialization. This was as per reports thatt Japanese imported a lot of equipment from the United States comprising of computers and computer parts. In 1990 the imports were regarded as a sign of improved trade relations which would later be shown by Japans importation of aircrafts and auto mobile parts.

Economic relation between the two nations grew drastically because of demand and supply. The Japanese invested in the commercial sector and they provided distribution and sale for the Japanese. This trade contributed too much of United states Income and increased wholesale and retail distribution of Japanese investments in the USA. Real estate became a popular investment during the 1980s, with cumulative investments rising to billions by 1988, or 18.4 percent of total direct investment in the United State (Dzurek, 1996).

National Intelligence: Japan’s limited intelligence gathering capability and personnel are focused on China and North Korea, as the nation primarily relies on the American National Security Agency.

In 1994 there was a friction between Japan and United States Trade friction and due to this an agreement had to be made to foster the relationship (Dzurek, 1996). Despite the general failure of the framework talks, the two countries revealed in May that they would be engaging in joint high-technology research to develop ceramics used in high-density integrated circuits, composite carbon fiber materials used in manufacturing machinery, data collection using a crystal protein system, and technology to build environmentally friendly factories.

When the USA stopped all mode of trade with Japan and set up an embargo the Japanese government sought solace from the Iranian oil (Dzurek, 1996). This action brought sharp criticism from the United States of Japanese government insensitivity for allowing the oil purchases and led to a Japanese apology and agreement to participate in sanctions against Iran in concert with other United States allies.

Through trade relation the US and Japan relationship has been strengthened. The major cause of friction in the relationship, trade disputes, became less problematic as China displaced Japan as the greatest perceived economic threat to the U.S. Meanwhile, though in the immediate post–Cold War period the security alliance suffered from a lack of a defined threat, the emergence of North Korea as a belligerent rogue state and China’s economic and military expansion provided a purpose to strengthen the relationship (Ellis S. Krauss, 2004).

While the foreign policy of the administration of President George W. Bush put a strain on some of the United States’ international relations, the alliance with Japan has become stronger, as evidenced in the Deployment of Japanese troops to Iraq and the joint development of anti-missile defense systems. This has shown that cooperation between allied forces has a lot of benefit to both countries. The alliance has helped prevent major catastrophes from happening or assisting in resolving conflicts.

Recommendations for changing the treaty to what best benefits the international community and the United States

The treaty should have focused on the Japanese more than the victims from the aggression which would have helped the other international communities. The United state should not have set up in Japan as an American military base which was drawn against the Soviet Union which would later be seen in the cold war. In the eyes of the international communities and allies the treaty was seen as a peace draft between Japan and USA alone.

To prevent the cold war Americans could have recognized the Soviet Union’s sovereignty over Kurri islands. The peace treaty should have recognized the sovereignty of states and should have placed clear guidelines for territory. There could have been joint declarations such as Soviet Union and Japan to boost diplomatic relationships.

They should not have let china divide and should have developed a treaty that would unite the nation. Maritime resources were a big issue as opposed to territorial disputes where issues about border or maritime area are complicated.

The terms effectiveness and sufficiency of the treaty come to mind. Somehow, we should incorporate that we want students to analyze the effectiveness and sufficiency of the treaty as it relates to homeland security and international cooperation. Efficiency and effectiveness of a treaty is aimed at realizing the idealistic aims of the treaties. The aim purpose of treaties is to take the responsibility to protect the citizens and the international community as well. The San Francisco treaty was also based on arms control and disarmament of Japanese but majorly for the security interest of the state.

To guarantee treaty system the homeland security should establish and integrate a treaty monitoring body should be considered as a medium term goal. in order much less resistance can be pursued.

Reference

D. Low, A. (1974). The Anschluss movement, 1918-1919, and the Paris peace conference (Vol. 103, pp. 221-156) New Jersey: American Philosophical Society.

Dzurek, D. J (1996) the spratly islands dispute: Who’s on first? (pp. 10-60). USA: IBRU.

Ellis S. Krauss, B. N. (2004). Japan and North America: The postwar. (Vol 2, pp 68-256) Taylor & Francis

Lee, S (2002) Territorial disputes among Japan, china and Taiwan concerning the senkaku islands (7 ed., Vol. 3, pp. 38-50). IBRU