soc.history.war.world-war-ii

mtfester@netmapsonscape.net wrote:
: Robert Warinner wrote:
:> mtfester@netmapsonscape.net wrote:
:> Since the Liason Conference was replaced by the Supreme War Leadership Council
:> in July 1944, I am not sure the discussions of the Liason Conference would
:> have too much bearing on events from February to August 1945.

: Actually, it was still the Liaison Council, at least according to the
: Pacific War Research Institute.

I can't vouch for the Pacific War Research Institute, but all the sources I
have identify the Liaison Conference (or Council) and the Supreme War
Leadership Council as different entities with different goals. The Liaison
Conference was, well, for liaison between the military chiefs and the civilian
government. The Supreme Council was a policy making body.

: The Privy Seal kept notes on his discussions with each of the members
: and on such meetings as he attended. There were others, as well.

I was not sufficiently precise. There was not an official transcript or
minutes of the meetings of the Supreme Council and while there are notes,
either first hand or second hand, they do not entirely agree.

For example, in the crucial meeting of August 10, when Hirohito announces his
decision for surrender, there is no verbatim account of his statement. While
there is agreement that Hirohito specifically cited the failure to prepare the
coastal defenses near Tokyo, there is not agreement that Hirohito went on to
cite the atomic bombs as a reason for surrender.

Hasegawa says the claim that Hirohito cited the atomic bombs originated with
the diaries of Lieutenant Colonel Takeshita, the brother-in-law of Anami and
one of the plotters of the failed coup. However, Takeshita was not present at
the meeting and could have only gotten it second hand, presumably through
Anami.

None of the other participants in the meeting said that Hirohito mentioned the
atomic bombs.

Andrew Warinner
warinner@xnet.com
http://home.xnet.com/~warinner