During the US occupation of Japan, general elections were held in 1946, 1947, and 1949. Suppose during one such election, the Communists won, and SCAP had to deal with a Communist government. How would the US occupiers have dealt with this? And how would this impact the future of Japan?
WI: Communists win a Japanese election during US occupation
- Thread starter Armored Diplomacy
- Start date
In the 1949 Diet elections the Communists got 10 percent of the vote and even this freaked out the US so much they helped engineer a 'Red Purge,' kind of an answer to the Red Scare for Japan. If it looked like they were going to actually win who knows what they'd do.
What election? Didn't you hear that it was rescheduled for [some time in the future]? It's unfortunate it had to be delayed, but we couldn't afford the possibility that Soviet infiltrators could influence the election.
General Ripper
Banned
I would be more interested to see how would US act in case of less cooperative Japanese Diet/Government? i.e. refusing US made Constitution (Article 9 etc.)
U.S declares elections rigged and installs a pro-U.S/Capitalist/right wing government the legitimate government flees Beijing or Moscow.
The U.S. would be miffed, but owing to the nature of the JCP, might tolerate them. Memories of the Pacific War were still fresh in 1949., and JCP was decidedly pacifist-at least there was no danger of Japan rising up and waging wars around Asia with Nosaka at the helm. He was not much of a Soviet stooge anyway, from what I know. Of course, a neutral, disarmed Japan cannot serve as a bulwark against actual Communist belligerence.
Maybe the Japanese Socialist Party? They had a chance of winning one of the elections, I think in 1980.
And Citing Kissinger in a the Chile situation(similar situation but with caveats)
"“I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its people. The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves"
or
"The e:x:ample of a successful elected Marxist government in Chile would
surely have an impact on-'-.and even precedent value for- -other parts of
the world, especiaily in Italy; the imitative spread of similar phenon:tena
elsewhere would in turn significantly affect the world balance and our own
position in it."
(source: https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB437/docs/Doc 4 - Kissinger to Nixon re Nov 6 NSC meeting.pdf)
I´know the epoch are different but still there was the period of cooling diplomatic ties between USSR and USA, before, during and after the Berlin-Blockade, so the politic relation between the too are going to the Cold war really fast, and the Containment of Communist policy by the USA was already born in 1946 and was in the process of being articulated, so I doubt a Japanese Elected communist government during the occupation will be let be (this make sense?, the redaction, not the idea). This situation is a Pandora Box that, luckily for the USA and the World, don´t happened
"“I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its people. The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves"
or
"The e:x:ample of a successful elected Marxist government in Chile would
surely have an impact on-'-.and even precedent value for- -other parts of
the world, especiaily in Italy; the imitative spread of similar phenon:tena
elsewhere would in turn significantly affect the world balance and our own
position in it."
(source: https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB437/docs/Doc 4 - Kissinger to Nixon re Nov 6 NSC meeting.pdf)
I´know the epoch are different but still there was the period of cooling diplomatic ties between USSR and USA, before, during and after the Berlin-Blockade, so the politic relation between the too are going to the Cold war really fast, and the Containment of Communist policy by the USA was already born in 1946 and was in the process of being articulated, so I doubt a Japanese Elected communist government during the occupation will be let be (this make sense?, the redaction, not the idea). This situation is a Pandora Box that, luckily for the USA and the World, don´t happened
With regard to a Socialist-Communist coalition, remember that the Socialists themselves were deeply divided between a left and a right wing, and were soon to formally split. (That alone is enough to make the Chile comparison invalid.) In any event, the Socialists and Communists *combined* got only 23.3 percent of the vote in 1949. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_general_election,_1949 the center-right parties (the Democratic Liberal Party and the Democratic Party) got a combined total of 60.2%, not even counting sympathetic Independents. Moreover, apportionment for the Diet favored the rural areas and therefore disfavored the more left-wing parties.
(BTW, the JCP's 9.8 percent in 1949 was to be their high point, not only because of repression and because Stalin ordered a purge of the JCP which he thought was too moderate. There was also the fact that the Korean War stimulated the economic recovery of Japan. By 1952 the JCP got just 2.5 percent of the vote, the Left Socialists 9.8 percent and the Right Socialists 12.8 percent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_general_election,_1952 So *even if you include the Right Socialists* the Japanese Left got only about 27 percent of the vote in 1952, compared to over 67 percent for the center-right parties.
In other words, even if the US were willing to tolerate it--which it wasn't--a left-wing government was just not going to happen.
(BTW, the JCP's 9.8 percent in 1949 was to be their high point, not only because of repression and because Stalin ordered a purge of the JCP which he thought was too moderate. There was also the fact that the Korean War stimulated the economic recovery of Japan. By 1952 the JCP got just 2.5 percent of the vote, the Left Socialists 9.8 percent and the Right Socialists 12.8 percent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_general_election,_1952 So *even if you include the Right Socialists* the Japanese Left got only about 27 percent of the vote in 1952, compared to over 67 percent for the center-right parties.
In other words, even if the US were willing to tolerate it--which it wasn't--a left-wing government was just not going to happen.
Last edited:
I must agree with the opinion that the Communists winning so many votes seem very unlikely, at least a majority. A plurality might be possible in some scenario. If something like was to happen, there are ways how Americans and the SCAP could attempt to fight back. Prior the election, Americans could prevent some people becoming candidates and put restrictions on the Communist campaign activities. They could also attempt to influence other Japanese parties to work together, so even if the Communist gather the plurality of votes, some other parties might be able to create a governing coalition. They might even attempt to purge people who become too difficult to deal with. At the same time though the US would probably prefer to keep their influence invisible, if possible. It should be also kept in mind that during the Occupation, it is the SCAP which holds the sole executive authority in Japan, so even if the highly hypothetical government led by the Communists opposes Americans, their freedom of action is rather limited, if the US chooses so.
It should be noted though that Americans might be ready to at least attempt to work them in 1946, later this becomes more difficult. At the start of the Occupation Americans and the Communists had still relatively good relations and had extensive cooperation during the initial reform period. Americans even seemed to like Nosaka, even if they distrusted other Communist leaders.
By 1949, the Communist Party was clearly seen as a hostile political actor by Americans. Although the rearmament drive hadn't yet started, they were already moving towards the position where earlier disarmament policies were seen possibly too restricting. There were American officials already complaining in 1948 that some decisions made regarding disarmament were too extensive.
We actually don't know whose idea it excactly was. Two most likely candidates are either PM Shidehara or MacArthur, though there were others who had suggested something similar before. It's worth noting that the Filipino constitution had somewhat a similar article in it, so it is likely that MacArthur was rather familiar with the idea. He seems to have had some sort of grand vision of Japan as Asia's Switzerland, though unlike its European counterpart, disarmed.
^This. I don't see even all Left Socialists being particularly happy about forming a coalition with the Communists.
It should be noted though that Americans might be ready to at least attempt to work them in 1946, later this becomes more difficult. At the start of the Occupation Americans and the Communists had still relatively good relations and had extensive cooperation during the initial reform period. Americans even seemed to like Nosaka, even if they distrusted other Communist leaders.
By 1949, the Communist Party was clearly seen as a hostile political actor by Americans. Although the rearmament drive hadn't yet started, they were already moving towards the position where earlier disarmament policies were seen possibly too restricting. There were American officials already complaining in 1948 that some decisions made regarding disarmament were too extensive.
We actually don't know whose idea it excactly was. Two most likely candidates are either PM Shidehara or MacArthur, though there were others who had suggested something similar before. It's worth noting that the Filipino constitution had somewhat a similar article in it, so it is likely that MacArthur was rather familiar with the idea. He seems to have had some sort of grand vision of Japan as Asia's Switzerland, though unlike its European counterpart, disarmed.
^This. I don't see even all Left Socialists being particularly happy about forming a coalition with the Communists.
Last edited:
Won't happen period. The Japanese Communist Party consistently failed to get traction during the pre-war period and was operating under even greater constraints during US occupation. The only way you're getting something even remotely like this would require a PoD that's decades ahead of the US occupation and would change how events unfold. It wouldn't be enough to constrain Japanese militarism but it may lead to a different set of policy decisions if you have a domestically powerful enough Communist Party that it would be in striking position to win in the late 40s.