Tojo says U.S.-British coalition ‘chased’ Japanese into war
TOKYO (AP) – Hideki Tojo asserted today a coalition of the United States and Great Britain “chased the Japanese Empire into a conflict which declared war on civilization and they should take responsibility for destroying civilization.”
Striking back at the international war crimes prosecutor’s castigation of himself and 27 other defendants, the Japanese wartime premier gave the Associated Press, through Defense Attorney Ichiro Kiyose, this exclusive statement.
In the statement, entitled “impressions received from a statement of the prosecutor,” Tojo contended the prosecution could not prove its charges that the defendants conspired to dominate the world.
In his first detailed summation of his ideas of the causes of the Pacific war, Tojo listed:
“1. The pressure of the Anglo-American coalition against the empire after the first great European war.
“2. The suppression of the (Japanese) empire’s trade development by the objection of a certain big power against the East Asiatic immigration, adoption of a high tariff policy and formation of an economic bloc. (Obviously a reference to the United States.)
“3. Racial discrimination.
“4. Economic blockading of the empire immediately before the war of Great East Asia through the joint (Anglo-American) might and military and economic threat.
“5. Adoption of a policy to cause China to continue resistance and to cause Japan and China to fight each other.
“6. Presentation of impossible proposals to the empire at the last stage of Japanese-American negotiations (probably just before the Pearl Harbor attack in 1941.)”
Origin of Pacific war
Tojo in his recapitulation placed the origin of the Pacific war many years before the date set by the prosecution, which in general begins its case with the preludes to the Manchurian incident in 1931.
Tojo’s mention of racial discrimination and immigration quotas refers to the bitter controversy over the Immigration Act of 1924.
Asserting that these causes forced Japan into a war of self-defense “to guarantee its own existence,” Tojo declared that “this idea should not be cast away as the cries of a defeated nation.”
Tojo also asserted that it “is not clear how it was possible for the numerous defendants, whose ages are vastly apart, to carry out a joint conspiracy” as the prosecution charges.
Meanwhile, a U.S. Marine officer testified as the first prosecution witness at the trial of Tojo and 27 others that Japan’s war plotters used the schools to instill in Nipponese youth the idea their nation had a “divine mission” to rule Eastern Asia.
Lt. Col. Donald R. Nugent, chief of Supreme Headquarters Civil Information and Education Section, who taught in Japan before the war, said Japanese students were told that their nation eventually would dominate “the world under one roof.”
Tojo leaned forward on his elbows, stared at the witness, and seemed to show an interest for the first time since he went on trial before the International Tribunal.
Machine-gun instruction
Col. Nugent testified that Japanese pupils were put through field maneuvers, street fighting problems, bayonet drills and machine-gun instruction.
“Such teachings,” he said, “inculcated in them both ultranationalism and militarism. It taught them fanatical devotion to country and blind obedience to authority.”
Dr. S. Nazumi of the defense staff sought to show by cross-examination that Col. Nugent had arrived at his opinion by talking to only a few Japanese students.
“When the response,” Col. Nugent replied, “is 100 percent the same opinion, it is apparent the opinion is a good one.”
At the outset, Valentine C. Hammack of San Francisco, assistant prosecutor, charged that beginning with 1928 the men on trial began to prepare Japan for war.
Accused Hirohito’s adviser
He accused Marquis Koichi Kido, former confidential adviser to Emperor Hirohito, with “completely reorganizing” Japan’s educational system in 1937 in preparation for hostilities.
Mr. Hammack declared that propaganda was used to lash the Japanese people into a frenzy against the United States and Great Britain. He said the argument was that their aid was the reason why China was able to resist Japan.
Chief Justice Sir William Webb announced earlier the court would consider the complaint of defense attorneys that unsolved problems were hampering their task of preparing their cases.
Floyd J. Mattice of Indianapolis, Indiana, member of the defense staff, told the court there was insufficient personnel for the defense, and that difficulties ip general were “increasing and multiplying.”
Resignations not explained
The resigned chief of defense counsel, Navy Capt. Beverly M. Coleman of Washington, D.C., said he and five of his aides who also resigned had informed Allied headquarters of their reasons. There was no official explanation, however, and the six refused comment.
Resigning with Capt. Coleman – who said June 3 that he was quitting because of lack of time to prepare a competent defense case – were: Norris H. Allen of St. Louis; John W. Guider of Washington; C. Talbot Young of Richmond, Virginia, and Navy Lts. Valentine B. Deale and Joseph F. Hynes, both of Cleveland.
The defense public relations office said a press release had been proposed to Allied headquarters, explaining the resignations, but other sources said it was withheld by higher authorities.