On 20 January 1946, Charles de Gaulle formally resigns from his post following months of increasing political tensions and disagreements within the coalition government.
Since the elections of 21 October 1945, the coalition known as the `Three-Parties Alliance,` comprising the French Communist Party (PCF), the Socialist Party (SFIO), and the Popular Republican Movement (MRP), had dominated the Constituent Assembly.
De Gaulle, though unanimously elected head of the government in November, found himself at odds with the Assembly`s priorities. His advocacy for a strong executive branch was opposed by the Assembly`s preference for a parliamentary-centric system. The Communists, the largest party in the Assembly with 159 seats, supported granting full and indefinite constitutional powers to the Assembly, while de Gaulle had pushed for a more restrained and time-limited mandate.
Tensions escalated as de Gaulle resisted granting key cabinet posts to Communist ministers, citing concerns over their alignment with Soviet interests. He even submitted his resignation, which the Constituent Assembly rejected, as we covered in our 19 November post last year.
By the end of last year, divisions within the coalition deepened over military spending, constitutional priorities, and governance. De Gaulle`s frustrations were evident, with him declaring his inability to lead a government constantly undermined by internal attacks.
At a cabinet meeting today, de Gaulle announces his resignation in a brief and dramatic address. After delivering his statement, de Gaulle leaves the meeting abruptly, perhaps hoping that his status as a war hero and leader might mean the establishment and people will bring him back and give him more executive authority.
Reports suggest that the decision is not entirely unexpected among political observers. There had been growing indications that the coalition, including de Gaulle`s erstwhile allies in the MRP, was preparing for a transition to new leadership.
The current government is unlikely to want or need him back, but will de Gaulle return anyway?
Picture: Epinal, General Charles De Gaulle Speaking, January 1946
Source: Getty Images
On 19 January 1946, the International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE) is formally established by a proclamation issued by General Douglas MacArthur, the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers (SCAP).
The origins of the IMTFE trace back to the Moscow Declaration from 1943 and the Potsdam Declaration of last year, which affirmed that individuals responsible for war crimes would face justice. The Instrument of Surrender signed by Japan on 2 September 1945 also included provisions for prosecuting war criminals.
The IMTFE, headquartered in Tokyo, is to be governed by the charter issued today. The charter, similar to the one issued by the IMT at Nuremberg, outlines the tribunal`s structure, jurisdiction, and procedures. Crimes under its jurisdiction include Crimes Against Peace (planning, initiating, or waging wars of aggression), Conventional War Crimes (violations of wartime laws and customs), and Crimes Against Humanity (inhumane acts committed against civilian populations).
The tribunal is to be composed of judges from 11 Allied nations: the United States, the Soviet Union, China, Britain, Australia, Canada, France, the Netherlands, New Zealand, India, and the Philippines. Each nation will nominate a judge, and MacArthur will act as the tribunal president. A Chief Prosecutor has also been designated by SCAP, with Associate Prosecutors representing each of the participating nations.
The tribunal`s rules of procedure provide defendants the right to counsel, to cross-examine witnesses, and to present evidence. Notably, the tribunal`s decisions will not be bound by technical rules of evidence, allowing for a broader range of material to be considered. The proceedings will be conducted primarily in English and the defendants` languages, with translations provided.
One of the key differences between the IMTFE and the IMT at Nuremberg is the composition of defendants. While the trial currently ongoing in Nuremberg targets the highest Nazi officials, the Tokyo tribunal will include a far broader array of Japanese leaders, political and military.
Picture: Judges at the Japanese war crimes court.
Source: Getty Images
On 18 January 1946, British Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin announces during an address to the United Nations General Assembly that Britain will move toward placing three of its African mandated territories, Tanganyika, the Cameroons, and Togoland, under the trusteeship system.
Addressing the UNGA, Bevin states the following:
˝We have to consider the position in connection with mandates for which we are responsible, and I take this opportunity of informing the Assembly of our intentions... to enter forthwith into negotiations for placing Tanganyika, the Cameroons, and Togoland under the trusteeship system.
Preliminary negotiations have already started.
I make it clear that our willingness to place these territories under the trusteeship system naturally depends on our being able to negotiate terms which are, in our view, generally satisfactory and which achieve the objectives of the Charter and are in the interests of the inhabitants of the territories themselves.
These territories have been administered by us for over twenty-five years. We have fulfilled our obligations under the Covenant of the League of Nations and, to the best of our ability, administered and developed them in the interests of the inhabitants.
We intend to continue this under the trusteeship system...
Now, if that is to be achieved, it is most important that the people of the territories themselves and the world at large should be left in no doubt that continuity of the administration will be maintained until the ultimate objective of the trusteeship system - self-government or independence as the case may be - is attained.˝
Bevin comments on the situation on another British mandate, Palestine, by saying: ˝We think it necessary to await the Anglo-American mission`s report before putting forward any problems relating to the future of Palestine.˝
Finally, Bevin implores the Security Council to ˝become the real answer to all the devilish devices of war...˝
Picture: Phillip Jessup, Dean Acheson, Ernest Bevin, and John Foster Dulles are shown in conference here at the Assembly Hall at the United Nations.
Source: Getty Images
On 17 January 1946, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) convenes for its first session.
Meeting in Church House, Westminster, London, the UNSC brings together representatives from the five permanent members—China, France, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and the U.S.—as well as the six newly elected non-permanent members: Australia, Brazil, Egypt, Mexico, the Netherlands, and Poland, whose elections by the UN General Assembly you can read about in our 12 January post.
The SC begins with a provisional chair, Norman Makin of Australia, who has been chosen in accordance with the Council’s rotational presidency system. Makin expresses his country`s pride in presiding over the Council’s inaugural session and emphasizes the UNSC’s vital role in upholding the UN Charter.
The agenda for the first meeting focuses on organizational matters critical to the UNSC`s operations. Among these, the Council adopts its provisional rules of procedure and discusses establishing a Military Staff Committee, as mandated by Article 47 of the UN Charter.
This committee is envisioned to advise and assist the Council on military requirements for maintaining international peace. It is agreed that the committee, composed of military representatives from the five permanent members, will convene soon.
Additionally, members debate the practicalities of future special agreements under Article 43 of the Charter, which will define the availability and deployment of armed forces for peacekeeping operations.
Although discussions are preliminary, the session sets the stage for the UNSC to assume its critical function as a guardian of global security.
Soviet representative Andrei Gromyko describes the moment as historic, while U.S. representative Edward Stettinius emphasizes the grave responsibility the Council bears in maintaining peace. Representatives from smaller nations, including Mexico and Egypt, highlight the symbolic importance of inclusivity in this new global organization.
Picture: Members of the UN around the table at the first session of the United Nations Organisation (UNO) Security Council, 17 January 1946
Source: Getty Images
On 16 January 1946, the President of the Republic of Indonesia speaks out against violent extremism among the ranks of Indonesian nationalists.
In the simmering conflict between Indonesian nationalists and British and Dutch forces, there has been a rise of particularly violent incidents that have only served to fan the flames. Recently, British Indian forces were sent into the town of Bekasi in a brutal reprisal after Indonesian militias murdered 23 captured British and Indian soldiers. You can read more about this incident in our 14 December post.
Sukarno, who has not made a public address in some time owing to the dramatic situation in Indonesia, speaks today in an attempt to deter those resisting Dutch re-colonization from engaging in extreme violence:
˝Our fight cannot be won, and our cause cannot be achieved if elements without a sense of responsibility continue to perpetrate acts entirely against the accepted codes of humanity and justice. These elements who style themselves as nationalists are nothing better than jackals on the prowl, striking and killing in the most abhorrent manner women and children against whom they have no tangible grievance.
Civilization has only one word for them - cold-blooded murderers - and we Indonesians who still retain our sense of justice and fair play call them destroyers of human happiness and the real enemies of Indonesian independence.
Let them be warned now that the Indonesian people will not countenance their heinous deeds, and we will track them down and mete out the same justice as is meted out to all murderers. At this critical period of our national history, the speedy disposal of all such elements will only accelerate the realization of our own aims.
Any Indonesian posing as a Nationalist but, in reality, an extremist shall be shot without trial.˝
There are rumors of negotiations between British and Dutch representatives and Sukarno`s Nationalists starting soon, so it is likely that with today`s statement, Sukarno wants to discourage any particularly inflammatory incidents.
Picture: President Sukarno makes a speech. Circa 1946.
Source: LIFE
On 15 January 1946, investigators working under Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers (SCAP) uncover the full extent of the Japanese Fu-Go balloon bomb campaign.
Designed to strike at the continental U.S., the campaign involved the release of thousands of high-altitude hydrogen balloons armed with incendiary and explosive devices.
The project was initiated by the Japanese Army as an unconventional weapon to retaliate against U.S. bombing raids on Japan. The balloons, constructed from lightweight paper made from mulberry bark, were ingeniously designed to utilize the jet stream to travel across the Pacific Ocean. Each balloon carried a payload of approximately 15 kg (33 pounds), which included incendiary bombs and high-explosive devices.
Between November 1944 and April 1945, the Japanese built approximately 9,300 Fu-Go balloons. Many of the balloons suffered punctures, deflations, or premature explosions, while others were simply carried far off course and crashed into the Pacific Ocean. So despite the ambitious scale of the operation, only about 300 are confirmed to have reached North America, with most landing in remote areas of the western U.S. and Canada. The balloons were primarily intended to start forest fires, disrupt infrastructure, and sow panic among the civilian population. However, their actual impact was limited.
One tragic incident did occur on 5 May last year near Bly, Oregon, when six civilians—five children and a pregnant woman—were killed when a balloon bomb they discovered exploded. This is the only known fatal attack on the U.S. mainland during World War II. Other incidents included minor damage to infrastructure and occasional balloons snagged in power lines, but none achieved the widespread devastation Japan had hoped for.
The campaign ultimately ended in April 1945 as Japan`s situation worsened and materials became increasingly scarce. The U.S. Government had also suppressed public reporting on the balloon bombs, essentially removing any chance of a panic spreading while denying Japan any intelligence on the program`s effectiveness.
Picture: U.S. military personnel carrying the remains of a bomb load
Source: U.S. National Archives
On 14 January 1946, Allied nations formally sign the Agreement on Reparations from Germany in Paris.
The agreement builds upon earlier decisions made at the Yalta and Potsdam Conferences and divides reparations into two categories. Category A encompasses a wide range of German assets, including financial holdings and industrial equipment, while Category B is more narrowly focused on industrial and capital equipment removed from Germany, as well as merchant ships and inland water transport.
Each signatory nation is assigned specific percentage shares for both categories, reflecting their respective contributions and losses during the war. The U.S. and the United Kingdom each will receive a significant share of 28% in Category A, France will receive 16%, Yugoslavia 6.6%, and others less than 5% each. The Soviet Union’s allocations will be determined separately in bilateral agreements.
Germany’s merchant fleet is to be distributed proportionally to the wartime losses of the signatory nations. The value of the ships was calculated using 1938 German prices with adjustments for depreciation. Similarly, German-owned assets in neutral countries will be liquidated and distributed to the Allies.
The agreement also creates the Inter-Allied Reparation Agency, headquartered in Brussels, to oversee the implementation of the reparations program.
Another significant component of the agreement is its provision for non-repatriable victims of Nazi persecution. A fund is established, comprising monetary gold found in Germany and an additional $25 million sourced from liquidated German assets in neutral countries. This fund is intended to aid displaced persons who had suffered under Nazi rule but lacked a home nation to represent them.
The restitution of monetary gold looted by Germany is another priority. A pooled fund will be created to return gold to countries that have suffered losses.
Picture: German worker stencils a Russian address onto a crate filled with equipment from the FAG Kugelfischer factory in Schweinfurt which is being dismantled and shipped to the Soviet Union as part of reparations, September 20th 1946.
Source: Getty Images
On 13 January 1946, the ceasefire between the Kuomintang (KMT) and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) mediated by General George C. Marshall, the U.S. Special Envoy to China, goes into effect.
The ceasefire follows months of escalating political and military activity after the Double Tenth Agreement, which we covered in our 10 October post last year. That agreement had sought to establish a coalition government offering a vision for national unity. However, mistrust between Chiang Kai-shek`s KMT and Mao Zedong`s CCP undermined the accord before they even shook hands. By December, both sides had resumed preparations for conflict.
The KMT has sought to consolidate control over cities and major transportation routes, reclaiming territories previously occupied by Japan and the CCP, supported by U.S. logistical aid, including airlift operations. Meanwhile, the CCP expanded its influence in rural areas, employing guerrilla tactics.
This quickly escalated into open warfare in Manchuria and northern China, with major KMT offensives aimed at reclaiming Communist-held strongholds, leading to full-scale battles in Siping and Shanxi. Both sides were stretched thin: the KMT struggled to sustain its supply lines, while the CCP faced mounting pressure from superior KMT firepower.
Against this backdrop, the Marshall Mission began in December 1945, representing U.S. interests in a unified and democratic China. Marshall has worked to bring both sides to the negotiating table, emphasizing that continued fighting could jeopardize U.S. support for China’s reconstruction.
The successful agreement to a ceasefire three days ago, is partially a result of strategic maneuvering on the part of both sides and partially of Marshall`s mediation efforts. Chiang is likely seeking a break in the conflict to gain more support and material aid from the U.S. The CCP may even consider the possibility of a real truce, however temporary.
The danger of a full-scale civil war erupting in China is far from eliminated.
Picture: Soldiers read sign urging the tightening of Sino-American friendship and calling for increased hope that Marshall will end Civil War in North China.
Source: Getty Images
On 12 January 1946, the United Nations General Assembly holds the first elections for non-permanent members of the Security Council.
As envisioned in the UN Charter of 1945, the Security Council is designed to be the central organ of the United Nations responsible for maintaining international peace and security. It is granted the authority to enforce decisions through diplomatic measures, sanctions, and even military action. The Council consists of five permanent members (the United States, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, France, and China), each holding veto power and six non-permanent members elected by the General Assembly. These non-permanent seats are allocated on a regional basis to ensure equitable representation and are held for two-year terms, with three members rotating out annually.
In today`s 14th plenary session of the UNGA, representatives from all 51 founding members cast their votes through secret ballots. The first round of voting results in the election of Brazil (representing Latin America),
Egypt (representing the Middle East and Africa), Mexico (representing Latin America), the Netherlands (representing Western Europe), and Poland (representing Eastern Europe). However, because of the requirement for a candidate to obtain a two-thirds majority of votes cast, one seat remained to be filled, and the rules required for that one nation to be elected from the two most successful candidates not elected; that is, Australia or Canada. Following three more rounds of voting, Australia is elected as the sixth non-permanent member, representing the British Commonwealth and Dominions.
This first General Assembly session, which began in London two days ago, aims to operationalize the UN and its various bodies, as well as establish procedures for the functioning of the Security Council and the implementation of its decisions. Particular emphasis has been placed on ensuring that the Council would act as a unified body despite the inherent tensions between the permanent members.
Picture: First Session of the United Nations General Assembly
Source: UN Photo #332304
At noon on 11 January 1946, the People`s Republic of Albania is formally proclaimed and adopts its first Constitution under the leadership of Enver Hoxha.
During the war, Hoxha emerged as the leader of the National Liberation Movement (Lëvizja Nacional-Çlirimtare, or LANÇ), a communist-led resistance group that fought against both Italian and German occupation forces. By 1944, as the Axis powers retreated, LANÇ, with significant military and logistical support from Yugoslav Partisans and the Communist Party of Yugoslavia, managed to seize power. Hoxha became the leader of the Provisional Democratic Government in October 1944, suppressing rival political groups, including monarchists and non-communist nationalists.
Throughout this period, Albania’s relationship with Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union heavily influenced its political trajectory. Josip Broz Tito’s Partisans provided guidance and direct support to the Albanian communists, while Soviet ideological and financial backing further cemented their grip on power.
A Constituent Assembly was elected in December last year following elections widely criticized for being uncompetitive, as opposition parties were systematically repressed. Dominated by the Democratic Front of Albania, the political coalition led by Hoxha`s Albanian Communist Party, the drafting and ratification of the Constitution proceeded swiftly.
The Constitution adopted today formally abolishes the monarchy of King Zog I and centralizes power in the People`s Assembly. The executive branch is dominated by the Council of Ministers, which Hoxha will chair as Prime Minister.
The Constitution included guarantees of wide-ranging civil rights and freedoms. However, these are likely largely nominal. For example, Article 18 declares the separation of church and state and prohibits religious institutions from engaging in political activities. Yet, Hoxha`s LANÇ has so far been hostile to religious institutions, and these provisions may be a pretext to launch systematic campaigns against religious communities and state atheism.
Picture: Proclamation of the People`s Republic of Albania, Tirana, January 11, 1946.
Source: National Library of Albania
On 10 January 1946, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) convenes for its inaugural session at Central Hall in Westminster, London.
This meeting marks the official commencement of the UN’s work as a global institution committed to fostering international cooperation and preventing another world war.
The opening session begins with remarks from Gladwyn Jebb, the UN’s first Executive Secretary, who emphasizes the monumental importance of the Assembly`s task. Following the formal opening, the Assembly turns to the election of its leadership. Paul-Henri Spaak of Belgium, a prominent statesman known for his efforts in post-war reconstruction and European unity, is elected as the first President of the General Assembly. Spaak narrowly wins over Trygve Lie of Norway, with the votes 28-23.
The Assembly also establishes the organizational framework necessary to address its broad mandate. Committees are formed to handle key areas such as political, legal, economic, and social issues. These committees are meant to become instrumental in crafting resolutions and addressing specific challenges. Delegates also elect members to crucial bodies like the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) and the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).
One of the most significant achievements of the session is the preparation for the launch of the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Judges are elected to this judicial body, cementing its role as a cornerstone of the UN’s mission to resolve disputes peacefully and uphold international law.
During the session, initial discussions address issues such as the situation in Palestine and the broader question of human rights. Although no resolutions are passed on these topics, the debates highlight the UN’s commitment to tackling complex global challenges.
The session will conclude four days from now, on 14 January, after establishing the foundational structures for the UN’s work.
Picture: Prime Minister Clement Attlee, of the United Kingdom, is seen addressing the opening session of the United Nations Organization`s General Assembly
Source: UN Photo UN7771359
On 9 January 1946, Harold Cole, a notorious British traitor and double agent, meets his end in a gunfight with French police in Paris.
Born in 1906, Cole lived a life of petty crime and con artistry long before the war. He deserted from the British Army in the 1920s and reinvented himself several times, claiming lofty titles and engaging in various fraudulent schemes. In 1939, with World War II underway, Cole enlisted in the Royal Engineers. Despite his criminal background, he rose to the rank of sergeant, only to be jailed for embezzling funds from his unit. When the Germans invaded France in 1940, Cole escaped from custody amidst the chaos.
In the early war years, Cole became involved with Allied escape networks, notably the Pat Line, which helped downed airmen and fugitives escape from occupied France. However, his motives were far from altruistic. By 1941, Cole was exposed as a double agent working with the Geheime Feldpolizei, a branch of German military intelligence. He provided the Germans with a detailed statement identifying numerous members of the Pat Line, leading to the arrest, torture, and execution of many of his former comrades. Despite his cooperation, the Germans distrusted him.
Cole later worked directly for Hans Kieffer, head of the Sicherheitsdienst (SD) in Paris, donning a German officer`s uniform as the Allies advanced in 1944. After the liberation of France, Cole fled but was arrested in June 1945 by British intelligence officer Peter Hope. During the arrest, Cole shot Hope in the leg before being subdued. Imprisoned in Paris, Cole staged yet another daring escape in November 1945, walking out of prison disguised in a stolen American military overcoat.
Today, acting on a tip about a suspicious figure at "Billy`s Bar," French police conduct a routine search for German deserters. Cole resists arrest, which results in a gunfight where one of the officers is wounded. However, the other officers shoot and kill Cole.
His body will be identified by Albert Guérisse, a former Pat Line operative who had survived being arrested by the Germans.
Picture: Police officers unload crates of grenades seized in Nanterre, 1947
Source: Getty Images
On 8 January 1946, Allied occupation authorities formally abolish the Nazi German Hereditary Health Court system, a cornerstone of the Third Reich`s eugenics program.
Established under the `Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring` of 14 July 1933, these courts were designed to implement the Nazi regime`s ideology of racial hygiene by mandating forced sterilizations and other measures targeting individuals deemed unfit to propagate.
Often composed of physicians and legal experts, these courts reviewed cases referred by public health officials or institutions. The law listed conditions such as schizophrenia, epilepsy, hereditary blindness or deafness, and severe physical deformities as grounds for sterilization. Additionally, conditions like chronic alcoholism were also used as justification. Decisions were frequently made with minimal evidence, reflecting the ideological goals of the Nazi regime rather than medical necessity.
From 1934 to 1945, the Hereditary Health Courts ordered the sterilization of approximately 400,000 individuals, many without their consent and often with little opportunity for appeal. These sterilizations were carried out in hospitals and clinics under appalling conditions, leading to severe complications and sometimes death. Beyond sterilization, the courts also played a role in decisions to institutionalize individuals, many of whom were later victims of the Aktion T4 euthanasia program, which targeted people with physical and mental disabilities for systematic execution. Between 70,000 and 100,000 individuals were murdered under this program, including many whose sterilizations had previously been sanctioned by the courts.
The courts operated until 1945, collapsing alongside the Nazi regime.
Since the start of Allied occupation, the authorities have been seeking to dismantle every trace of such gross violations of human rights. Today, they abolish the Hereditary Health Court system altogether.
Picture: A man having his nose measured during Aryan race determination tests under Nazi Germany`s Nuremberg Laws.
Source: Universal History Archive
On 7 January 1946, the State-War-Navy Coordinating Committee (SWNCC) issues detailed instructions for Japanese governmental reforms, codified as SWNCC 228, to General Douglas MacArthur, Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers (SCAP).
The SWNCC, formed in December 1944 from a series of meetings between the Secretary of State, Secretary of War, and Secretary of the Navy, serves as a key interdepartmental body tasked with managing political-military issues arising from Allied occupation of former Axis states.
SCAP has recently issued or guided the Japanese government in authoring a series of sweeping reforms aimed at dismantling militarism and promoting democratization. Emperor Hirohito`s `Humanity Declaration`, which renounced the emperor’s divine status, and the SCAP `purge` of Japanese public institutions, which you can read about in our 1 and 4 January posts, respectively, are but the most recent ones.
For some time, however, there has been growing concern in Washington about ensuring that these reforms remained aligned with broader U.S. policies for post-war Asia.
SWNCC 228, issued today, outlines a vision for Japan’s future that preserved the imperial institution but confines it to a ceremonial role. The directive also emphasizes the importance of drafting a new constitution that guarantees civil liberties, universal suffrage, and democratic governance.
The directive further addresses social and economic structures, calling for the dismantling of Japan’s feudal systems. This includes the redistribution of land to empower tenant farmers and the dissolution of powerful conglomerates, known as zaibatsu, which had historically dominated the Japanese economy.
SWNCC 228 most strongly stresses the need for reforms and constitutional revisions to be carried out independently by Japan; otherwise, the people of Japan will not accept them, and ordering the Japanese government to initiate reforms would be used only as a `last resort`.
Picture: MacArthur`s HQ in Tokyo relaxes its austerity with Christmas decorations, 5 January 1946
Source: Getty Images
On 6 January 1946, the first legislative elections under the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (DRV) are held.
Following the Japanese surrender and Ho Chi Minh`s proclamation of Vietnam`s independence on 2 September last year, the country remained divided politically and militarily. The Viet Minh held substantial control over northern and central regions, while southern areas were contested by returning French forces, supported by British troops overseeing Japanese disarmament. Meanwhile, in the north, Chinese Nationalist forces were present, complicating the political landscape. Domestically, the DRV faced opposition from groups such as the Vietnamese Nationalist Party (VNQDD) and other non-communist factions, which vied for influence.
The elections today are open to multiple parties, including the Viet Minh, VNQDD, and the Democratic and Socialist parties.
Voter turnout today is remarkably high at almost 90%. However, the conduct of the elections is somewhat questionable. The ballot is not secret, and ballot papers are filled out in the presence of aides who are "to help comrades who had difficulty in making out their ballots."
The Viet Minh will be the overwhelming victor, securing 182 of the 302 seats in the National Assembly, solidifying their political dominance. In many constituencies, the Viet Minh’s candidates ran unopposed, while in contested areas, their organizational superiority will ensure success.
Despite the election`s symbolic importance, Vietnam remains a deeply fragmented country. And with a recent increase in French military presence as the former empire clings to its colonial possessions, there is a high likelihood that conflict and violence will return to the region.
Picture: The scene of the preparation for the election of the 1st National Assembly at Phat Loc alley (Hanoi) in 1946. The slogan of the National Assembly Election is patriotism.
Source: Annam Museum
On 5 January 1946, Adolf Eichmann, one of the chief architects of the Nazi`s genocide of Jews across Europe, escapes from an American POW camp near Oberdachstetten, Bavaria.
After overseeing the deportation of over 400,000 Hungarian Jews to Auschwitz, Eichmann fled Budapest in late 1944 as Soviet forces advanced. He traveled westward to Altaussee, Austria, a well-known Nazi refuge.
By May 1945, Eichmann was briefly detained by U.S. forces near Ulm but was released, as his true identity wasn`t discovered. He then moved northward, adopting new aliases along the way.
After some time, Eichmann was arrested again, this time posing as Captain Adolf Barth from the Luftwaffe, and briefly detained at Berndorf POW camp. His false identity worked, and he was assigned by U.S. forces to be a truck driver, allowing him an easy escape.
Several months ago, however, he was captured again, identifying himself as Untersturmführer Otto Eckmann from the Waffen-SS, fearing the SS tattoo on his arm would raise suspicion otherwise. He once again slipped through the screening process, which focused on high-ranking SS members explicitly identified on official lists.
Since the start of the trials in Nuremberg, however, he has been identified as one of the most significant war criminals. Fearing exposure as the testimonies from Nuremberg piled on, Eichmann devised an escape plan.
Today, while working on an outdoor work detail repairing roads, Eichmann slips away. Exploiting minimal security measures and the disorganization of POW facilities, he flees on foot into the surrounding countryside.
Eichmann will seek refuge in northern Germany in the next few weeks, where he will assume the alias Otto Heninger and find work as a lumberjack and laborer. His fluency in multiple languages, combined with forged documents, will enable him to avoid detection even as Allied forces intensify their efforts to track down major war criminals.
Picture: German prisoners of war queue for food at a West Midlands POW camp. Circa March 1946
Source: Getty Images
On 4 January 1946, General Douglas MacArthur, Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers (SCAP), issues two directives, SCAPIN 548 and SCAPIN 550, as part of the Allied initiative to dismantle Japan’s wartime institutions and prevent the resurgence of militarism. These orders target individuals and organizations associated with Japan’s aggressive policies during the war and will set in motion a sweeping purge of public institutions.
SCAPIN 548, titled "Removal and Exclusion of Undesirable Personnel from Public Office", mandates the removal of individuals deemed responsible for promoting militarism and ultranationalism from public office. This includes high-ranking officials in government ministries, senior bureaucrats, police officials, and military leaders directly involved in orchestrating Japan’s war effort. The directive also identifies individuals affiliated with ultranationalist organizations, such as the Taisei Yokusankai (Imperial Rule Assistance Association), as targets for removal.
SCAPIN 550, known as "Abolition of Undemocratic Practices in Public Institutions", seeks to reform the structures and practices within Japanese institutions to align them with democratic principles. Educational systems that glorified militarism and imperialism are ordered to be overhauled, and individuals responsible for wartime indoctrination will be dismissed. State-supported organizations that promoted nationalist propaganda or militarist values will be disbanded. The directive also calls for reforms in the judicial, police, and administrative systems to ensure civilian control and adherence to democratic governance.
Institutions such as the Home Ministry, which had played a central role in internal security during the war, will be heavily affected. Senior officials, educators, and leaders in cultural organizations are to be removed as SCAP continues to seek to eliminate the ideological and administrative foundations of Japan’s militarist regime. Schools will also be required to revise their curricula, removing elements that glorify war and imperial conquest.
Picture: Japanese Emperor Opens Diet
Source: Getty Images
On 3 January 1946, William Joyce, better known as Lord Haw-Haw, is executed by hanging at Wandsworth Prison in London after being convicted of treason for his wartime broadcasts on behalf of Nazi Germany.
We`ve covered Joyce`s career in detail over several posts since May last year, most recently on 18 December, when the House of Lords rejected the appeal he filed over his death sentence.
Joyce has remained steadfast in his statements that he owed no true allegiance to Britain, being both American-born and having claimed Irish citizenship. His family has made last-minute appeals, but these have also been ignored by the British courts and political establishment.
Early this morning, his wife, his brother, and his sister visit him in prison.
Shortly afterward, just before 0900 hours, Joyce is led to the gallows, where Britain`s chief hangman, Albert Pierrepoint, awaits.
Pierrepoint had just recently been given the responsibility to execute the 11 SS personnel convicted in the Belsen trials and another British traitor and Nazi-sympathizer, John Amery, which you can read about in our 13 and 19 December posts, respectively.
A crowd of around 300 people actually gathers outside the prison to await the news of Joyce`s death, some sympathetic to what they deem a harsh and unnecessary sentence.
At 0900 hours, Pierrepoint executes Joyce.
Eight minutes later, policemen post a notice of his death on the prison gate; the crowd remains silent, and a few remove their hats out of respect.
Later in the day, Joyce`s body is buried in an unmarked grave within the prison grounds.
Picture: Crowd watches as police officers post Joyce`s death notice on the prison gates
Source: Getty Images
On 2 January 1946, the U.S. Army partially lifts its ban on marriages between American servicemen and women from former Axis nations by allowing soldiers to marry Austrian women.
Fraternization and marriages between soldiers of the occupying or liberating Allied armies have been widespread throughout the world and the entire war. The U.S. Government recognized this recently by enacting the War Brides Act, which you can read about in our 28 December post, which allows foreign-born spouses and children of U.S. servicemen to immigrate to the United States without being restricted by national-origin immigration quotas.
However, strict anti-fraternization rules and restrictions on marriage remain when it comes to nations still deemed `hostile`, namely Germany, Austria, and Japan.
Today`s amendment to the rules will enable U.S. servicemen to marry Austrian women and their exclusion from immigration quotas under the War Brides Act. The recent elections in Austria, which not only returned the country to the pre-Anschluss political system but also resulted in a win for the democratic and Western-leaning Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP) and Socialist Party of Austria (SPÖ) coalition, have likely shifted Austria into the realm of friendly states in the eyes of U.S. officials.
The restrictions remain in place, however, for German and Japanese women.
In Germany, in particular, the U.S. military had imposed strict non-fraternization rules beginning in September 1944, prohibiting any interaction between U.S. soldiers and German civilians. Over time, these rules were gradually relaxed. On 14 July 1945, General Eisenhower permitted conversations in public, and by 1 October 1945, the Allied Control Council lifted most restrictions.
However, overnight stays in German households and marriages between U.S. servicemen and German women are still explicitly prohibited. Despite these restrictions, German women are beginning to form the second-largest group of marriage partners for U.S. servicemen in post-war Europe. So, a change in the regulations may be on the horizon.
Picture: American soldiers posing with German girls
Source: Ray Cunneen via UWDC Library
On 1 January 1946, Emperor Hirohito issues the `Rescript on the Construction of a New Japan`, termed by some as the `Humanity Declaration`, marking a significant shift in Japan’s imperial institution in response to the demands of the Allied Occupation.
The rescript is a direct result of pressures from General Douglas MacArthur as Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers (SCAP) to sever the symbolic connection between the Emperor and the militaristic, ultra-nationalist ideologies that had dominated Japan before and during the war, one of the most recent examples of this being the `Shinto Directive`, covered in our 15 December post, which separated the Japanese State and religion.
Drafted with SCAP’s input and reviewed by Allied advisors, today`s declaration is issued as part of Hirohito’s New Year’s message to the Japanese people.
The rescript begins with a call for national unity and reconstruction in the aftermath of Japan’s devastating defeat. The key passage that supposedly renounces the Emperor’s divine status states:
“The ties between Us and Our people have always stood upon mutual trust and affection. They do not depend upon mere legends and myths. They are not predicated on the false conception that the Emperor is divine, and that the Japanese people are superior to other races and destined to rule the world.”
Interpretations by some in Japan, including the Emperor himself, point to the `renunciation of divinity` as not being the main point of the text. In fact, Japanese newspapers do not even report this aspect in their coverage, likely not seeing it as newsworthy. The remainder of the rescript emphasizes themes of peace, cooperation, and cultural development, urging the Japanese people to work together in rebuilding the nation and fostering international harmony.
Internationally, however, the rescript is viewed as a success for the Allied Occupation, signaling Japan’s commitment to reform and democratization. MacArthur praises the rescript as a step toward transforming Japan into a peaceful state.
Picture: Hirohito leaving the Japanese Diet after making a speech to open session, 1946
Source: Getty Images
On 31 December 1945, Frederic William Eggleston, Australia’s minister to the U.S., sends a note to the U.S. Secretary of State detailing the agreement between the British Commonwealth Governments and the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers (SCAP) on the participation of the British Commonwealth Occupation Forces (BCOF) in the post-war occupation of Japan.
Following Japan’s surrender in August 1945, the United States, under General Douglas MacArthur as SCAP, assumed primary responsibility for administering the occupation of Japan. However, other Allied nations, particularly members of the British Commonwealth, sought involvement to reflect their contributions to the war effort and to maintain influence in shaping Japan`s future. This led to discussions between SCAP and the Commonwealth governments, primarily Australia, Britain, New Zealand, and India, regarding their role in the occupation.
Negotiations have centered on the composition, command structure, and deployment of Commonwealth forces. The British Commonwealth emphasized that their participation would underscore the multinational nature of the occupation and help distribute the responsibility for Japan’s transformation into a peaceful, democratic state. Lieutenant General Sir John Northcott, an experienced Australian officer, has been appointed as the Commander-in-Chief of the BCOF.
The BCOF will be composed of troops from Australia, Britain, New Zealand, and India, with Australia contributing the largest share. Discussions with SCAP have focused on the idea that BCOF’s presence should not dilute U.S. command but should instead complement American forces by managing specific responsibilities within Japan and by ensuring that BCOF troops remain under SCAP`s overall command.
By the middle of this month, it was agreed that the BCOF would occupy regions in western Japan, particularly Hiroshima Prefecture, including key locations such as Kure.
In his note today, Eggleston affirms the British Commonwealth Governments’ support for the finalized arrangement.
Picture: Troops for the BCOF bound for Japan. West Maitland Railway Station on 3 March 1946.
Source: Greg and Sylvia Ray’s Ken Magor collection
On 30 December 1945, Allied authorities announce the discovery of Adolf Hitler`s last will and testament.
Hitler dictated his last will and political testament on the night of 29 April 1945, less than 24 hours before his suicide on 30 April. The document was prepared by his secretary, Traudl Junge, and signed in the bunker in the presence of witnesses, including Joseph Goebbels, Martin Bormann, and two aides.
In his political testament, Hitler blamed the outbreak of the war on international Jewry and criticized his military leaders for their failures. He also reiterated his decision to remain in Berlin to face the end rather than flee, portraying this as a gesture of loyalty to his people. Hitler formally appointed Karl Dönitz as his successor as President and Joseph Goebbels as Chancellor, ensuring the continuity of the Nazi regime even as it collapsed.
In his will, Hitler left his art collection to a gallery in his hometown of Linz, Austria, and all other items of sentimental value to his `brothers and sisters`, Eva Braun`s family, and his then-current and old secretaries. Everything was to be given to the Nazi Party, or if the NSDAP was to disappear, to the Nazi state - he added at the end that if the Third Reich is to cease existing, "no further decision of mine is necessary."
After the will was signed, Martin Bormann tasked three couriers—SS officers Wilhelm Zander, Heinz Lorenz, and Major Willi Johannmeier, the assistant to Gen. Burgdorf—with smuggling copies of the documents out of Berlin. Their mission was to deliver the testament to Karl Dönitz in northern Germany, where remnants of the Nazi government were attempting to reorganize. They fled Berlin as Soviet forces encircled the city, hiding the documents among their belongings.
Zander and Lorenz were captured by U.S. forces recently in Bavaria, after months in hiding, and revealed the documents. The will has since been authenticated through handwriting analysis and the testimony of surviving bunker personnel, including Traudl Junge.
Today, Allied authorities announce the discovery to the public.
Picture: War correspondents examined a couch stained with blood inside Hitler’s bunker.
Source: LIFE
On 29 December 1945, Korean civilians riot and attack U.S. troops in Seoul in protest against the communiqué issued at the conclusion of the Moscow Conference of Foreign Ministers that places Korea under a four-power trusteeship involving the United States, Soviet Union, United Kingdom, and China.
The desire for independence had been a driving force in Korea long before the end of World War II. During the war, the Provisional Government of Korea in exile, led by figures such as Syngman Rhee and Kim Gu, lobbied for international recognition and Korean sovereignty. When Japan surrendered in August 1945, Koreans anticipated swift liberation and self-governance. However, the sudden division of the peninsula along the 38th parallel, agreed upon by the U.S. and the Soviet Union, dampened hopes for a unified and independent Korea.
In the south, the U.S. Military Government in Korea (USAMGIK), led by General John R. Hodge, has faced rising resentment from Koreans as U.S. authorities retained Japanese colonial officials to maintain order, delaying the purging of collaborators. At the same time, USAMGIK has struggled to engage effectively with Korean nationalist groups.
In the north, the Soviet Union quickly has its influence by supporting the People’s Committee under Kim Il-sung, emphasizing communist ideology.
The agreement reached at the Moscow Conference, which we covered in our 26 December post, proposes a five-year trusteeship to oversee Korea’s transition to independence. While intended to prevent domination by any single power, the proposal runs counter to the wishes of the vast majority of Koreans, who view such arrangements as a continuation of foreign occupation rather than a step toward sovereignty.
The announcement of the agreement and communiqué two days later sparked immediate backlash. Nationalist leaders in the south, including Kim Gu, vehemently opposed the plan.
Today, thousands flood the streets of Seoul in protest, which quickly escalates into rioting against USAMGIK troops.
Picture: Citizens marching to Seoul stadium chant "Long Live the Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea", December 1945
Source: Courtesy of Don O`Brien
On 28 December 1945, the U.S. enacts the War Brides Act, enabling foreign spouses and children of U.S. servicemen to immigrate without being restricted by the stringent immigration quotas.
During the war, over 1 million American servicemen were stationed abroad at any moment, and many formed relationships with locals. It is estimated that over 100,000 marriages occurred between U.S. servicemen and foreign women, with the largest numbers of `war brides` coming from Britain (70,000), followed by Australia (15,000) and New Zealand (1,500). Smaller numbers of such marriages occurred in France, Italy, and other Allied nations. These marriages often resulted in children, further underscoring the urgency of allowing these families to reunite stateside.
The Immigration Act of 1924 imposed strict national-origin quotas that heavily favored immigrants from Northern and Western Europe while severely limiting immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe and virtually barring it from Asia. For example, the annual quota for British immigrants was 65,721, while for Italian immigrants, it was only 5,802, and for Japanese immigrants, it was zero. These restrictions would have made it nearly impossible for many `war brides` and their children to enter the U.S. under the existing laws.
Today, Congress votes to enact the War Brides Act to address these issues. The Act exempts foreign-born spouses and children of U.S. military personnel from national-origin quotas, streamlining the immigration process and waiving many restrictive requirements, such as literacy tests and the need to prove financial self-sufficiency. The Act also applies retroactively, allowing families to reunite even if the marriages had occurred earlier in the war.
However, the legislation excludes foreign spouses from Germany, Japan, and other nations that are still considered hostile to the U.S.
The Act demonstrates a significant shift in U.S. immigration policy toward a more compassionate and pragmatic approach.
Picture: Dorothy Tomkins and John Carley on their wedding day with their bridal party, July 1945.
Source: Courtesy of the Carley Family via the Queensland Museum
On 27 December 1945, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) is formally established with the arrival of the 29th ratification of the Articles of Agreement.
The IMF originated from the agreements made at the United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference, held in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, in July last year. The conference, attended by representatives from 44 Allied nations, sought to create institutions that would stabilize the post-war economy and encourage global cooperation. Alongside the establishment of the World Bank, the IMF was envisioned as a mechanism to oversee fixed exchange rates, provide financial support to nations facing balance-of-payments crises, and foster international trade.
Some of the more fierce debates at Bretton Woods centered on the structure and function of the IMF. The U.S. delegate, economist Harry Dexter White, advocated for an organization focused on stabilizing exchange rates and providing loans to address short-term financial difficulties. Economist John Maynard Keynes, representing the United Kingdom, proposed a more expansive vision, including the creation of a global currency called `Bancor` and a clearing union to manage international imbalances. While Keynes’s vision was ultimately scaled back, his ideas have influenced the IMF`s focus on promoting global financial stability.
Today, the final of the required 29 ratifications is submitted and the IMF formally comes into existence.
According to the Articles of Agreement, the IMF`s primary functions include:
Exchange rate stability by establishing a fixed exchange rate system pegged to the U.S. dollar, which in turn is convertible to gold at $35 per ounce.
Financial support to member states from a pool of finances contributed by themselves to provide loans to states experiencing temprary balance-of-payments deficits.
The IMF is tasked with monitoring the economic policies of its members to ensure compliance with agreed-upon standards and to foster international cooperation.
Picture: Bretton Woods Conference - The United Nations meets at the Mount Washington Hotel to discuss programs of economic cooperation and progress.
Source: Getty Images
On 26 December 1945, the Moscow Conference of Foreign Ministers concludes, with the U.S., Soviet Union, and United Kingdom issuing a joint communiqué.
Vyacheslav Molotov, Soviet Foreign Minister, James F. Byrnes, U.S. Secretary of State, and Ernest Bevin, British Foreign Secretary, met first on 16 December to discuss some of the lingering questions of post-war governance and reconstruction.
The three foreign ministers reaffirmed the commitment to establish a Far Eastern Commission and an Allied Council for Japan, designed to oversee Japan’s reconstruction and democratization. While Molotov has insisted on greater influence in the council, an issue over which a series of harsh notes were exchanged as covered in our 12 November post, the U.S. maintains its leading role through General Douglas MacArthur, Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers in Japan.
While Molotov has been claiming legitimate reasons for Soviet actions and continued presence in northern Iran, Byrnes and Bevin pressed him for adherence to earlier agreements.
The ministers have also agreed to establish a Joint Soviet-American Commission to facilitate the creation of a unified, independent Korea. The commission’s role will be to assist in forming a provisional government, though sharp ideological divides may foreshadow challenges in implementation.
Minimal progress was made on the issue of the political future of Romania, Hungary, and Bulgaria, with the Soviets insisting on their strategic importance for security, while the U.S. and UK continue to push for democratic governments and free elections.
Despite the difficult discussions, the three powers issue a final communiqué today that boils down to agreements to:
1. Establish the Far Eastern Commission and Allied Council for Japan.
2. Recognize Iran’s sovereignty and withdraw foreign troops.
3. Form a Joint Soviet-American Commission for Korea.
4. Commitments to negotiating treaties with Axis satellite states.
5. Reaffirmation of Allied control mechanisms in Germany, emphasizing unity in reconstruction.
Picture: Bevin (left), Molotov (center), Byrnes (right), Moscow, December 1945
Source: Wide World photo
On 25 December 1945, Admiral Shigematsu Sakaibara, former Japanese commander of Wake Island, is sentenced to death by hanging for ordering the execution of 98 American POWs in October 1943.
The execution of the prisoners and how the perpetrators were revealed have been covered in our post two days ago, on 23 December.
Following the incriminating statement left by Sakaibara`s subordinate, Lieutenant Commander Toraji Ito, after his suicide, the trial progressed quickly. The prosecution emphasized the deliberate and premeditated nature of the crime, presenting evidence that Sakaibara had personally approved and directed the executions. Witness accounts confirmed that Lieutenant Commander Shoichi Tachibana, under Sakaibara’s orders, led the executions of the prisoners on the beach, who were blindfolded and shot.
Sakaibara’s defense argued that the executions were a military necessity, claiming that the prisoners posed a security risk due to the possibility of an imminent American invasion. The defense attempted to portray Sakaibara as a commander under immense pressure, acting in the best interest of his troops and the Japanese war effort.
However, the prosecution countered that the POWs were defenseless civilians and posed no immediate threat, making the massacre an unequivocal violation of the laws of war.
Today, Sakaibara appears in front of the U.S. Navy War Crimes Commission and gives a final statement.
He says he wished he had never heard of Wake Island. But his most strikin comment is on morality in war. A nation that drops atom bombs on major cities, the admiral explains, does not have the moral authority to try so many of his countrymen. Sakaibara claims there was little difference between himself and the victors over Japan.
He closes his statement with: ˝I think my trial was entirely unfair and the proceeding unfair, and the sentence too harsh, but I obey with pleasure.˝
Moments later, the commission reads Sakaibara`s sentence - death by hanging.
Picture: Sakaibara reads his final statement before being sentenced
Source: U.S. Navy 80-G-495958
On 24 December 1945, Pope Pius XII broadcasts his Christmas message, calling for collaboration, trust, and an end to totalitarianism in the post-war world.
The Pope`s broadcast reads, in parts, as follows:
˝Thus, what a sigh of relief emerged from all our hearts at the news that the bloody conflict had ended, first in Europe, then in Asia! How many fervent prayers had risen to the throne of the Almighty during those long years of struggle, asking Him to shorten the days of affliction and to stay the hands of the angels pouring out the vials of God`s wrath upon the sins of the world! Now, for the first time, the human family will once again, through divine mercy, celebrate a Christmas feast where the terrors of war on land, at sea, and above all in the air no longer fill so many hearts with fear and mortal anguish...
The Peace on Earth? The True Peace?
No, but only the "post-war" period, a painful and all-too-significant expression! How much time will be required to heal the material and moral sickness, how many efforts will be needed to close so many wounds! Yesterday, immense territories were sown with destruction, calamities, and misery; today, as we face the task of reconstruction, humanity is only beginning to realise how much insight, prudence, righteousness, and goodwill are needed to lead the world back from physical and spiritual devastation to justice, order, and peace...
The Church’s Role in Peace
We do not intend to delve into the practical solutions they may propose for such complex problems. However, We deem it Our duty, as in previous Christmas messages during the war, to point out the fundamental moral prerequisites for a true and lasting peace, which We reduce to three brief considerations:
Collaboration and Trust: The present moment imperatively calls for collaboration, goodwill, and mutual trust among all peoples.
Truthful Public Opinion: It is necessary to value honest public opinion over manipulative forces.
End to Totalitarianism: The totalitarian state is incompatible with true democracy and lasting peace.˝
Picture: Pope Pius XII blesses faithful at the Vatican, 4 March 1949
Source: AFP
On 23 December 1945, Japanese Warrant Officer Tomiro Miyaki and Ensign Banguichi reverse their previous statements regarding the death of 98 U.S. POWs on Wake Island, revealing that all of them had been executed on orders of Admiral Shigematsu Sakaibara.
The U.S. garrison on Wake Island, comprising approximately 450 U.S. Marines, 68 Navy personnel, and 1,200 civilian contractors, had mounted a fierce defense against Japanese forces in December 1941. After 15 days of resistance, they were overwhelmed. They were all captured on 23 December 1941.
The majority of the military personnel were transferred to prison camps in Japan and China, but 98 civilian contractors were kept on Wake Island to perform forced labor.
By 1943, U.S. air raids on Wake Island increased, and on 5 October, aircraft from USS Yorktown hit the island hard. Two days later, on 7 October, Sakaibara ordered Lieutenant Commander Shoichi Tachibana to execute the POWs. His justification was a belief that their presence posed a threat.
The POWs were blindfolded and led to a nearby beach, where they were shot and buried in a mass grave. One prisoner managed to escape briefly, and was spotted by a Japanese soldier the following day. Tachibana`s troops dug up the bodies and recounted them to confirm, then reburied them. The escaped POW was captured three weeks later and personally beheaded by Sakaibara.
Following Japan’s surrender, Sakaibara Tachibana and Lieutenant Commander Toraji Ito were taken into custody by U.S. authorities. During the first days of their internment, they maintained that a U.S. bombing raid killed half of the POWs, while the other half were executed on the same day for attempting to seize weapons from their guards. However, Ito hanged himself and left a statement revealing the truth. Sakaibara and Tachibana have attempted to maintain their original recount of events.
However, today during questioning at the trial, Miyaki and Banguichi confirm Ito`s statement and Sakaibara`s order for execution.
Picture: Formal surrender of the Japanese garrison on Wake Island - 4 September 1945. Sakaibara is the Japanese officer in the right foreground.
Source: U.S. Navy NH 96813
On 22 December 1945, U.S. President Harry S. Truman allows more immigration of victims of Nazi persecution into the USA through an executive order.
The directive is clearly aimed at rearranging the 1946 immigration quotas to allow for a larger proportion of displaced persons (DPs), which is the President`s response to a growing resistance within the Government and public to migrants from Europe, particularly Jews. The directive reads:
˝The grave dislocation of populations in Europe resulting from the war has produced human suffering that the people of the United States cannot and will not ignore. This Government should take every possible measure to facilitate full immigration to the United States under existing quota laws.
The Secretary of State is directed to establish with the utmost despatch consular facilities at or near displaced person and refugee assembly center areas in the American zones of occupation. It shall be the responsibility of these consular officers, in conjunction with the Immigrant Inspectors, to determine as quickly as possible the eligibility of the applicants for visas and admission to the United States...
Visas should be distributed fairly among persons of all faiths, creeds and nationalities. I desire that special attention be devoted to orphaned children to whom it is hoped the majority of visas will be issued...
The Secretary of War, subject to limitations imposed by the Congress on War Department appropriations, will give such help as is practicable in:
(a) Furnishing information to appropriate consular officers and Immigrant Inspectors to facilitate in the selection of applicants for visas; and
(b) Assisting until other facilities suffice in: (1) transporting immigrants to a European port; (2) feeding, housing and providing medical care to such immigrants until embarked; and
(c) Making available office facilities, billets, messes, and transportation for Department of State, Department of Justice, and United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration personnel...˝
Picture: People awaiting admission to No.17 Displaced Persons Assembly Centre at Hamburg Zoological Gardens.
Source: IWM BU 6629
