On 25 April 1946, France presents a memorandum at the Council of Foreign Ministers in Paris proposing the separation and international control of key German regions—the Ruhr, Rhineland, and Saar.
The Council, meeting in Paris this month, is addressing critical issues left unresolved after Germany`s surrender.
In its detailed memorandum submitted today, France insists that Germany must be decisively deprived of the war-making capabilities concentrated in the Rhine-Westphalian region. Rather than annex these areas outright, France advocates a system of political and economic separation and international oversight.
For the Ruhr, home to Germany`s coal mines and heavy industry and populated by approximately five million inhabitants, France proposes complete internationalisation. The region would become an independent political entity, governed under international supervision. Crucially, the Ruhr’s major industrial assets would be expropriated, operated as international public utilities, and a customs barrier established to prevent Germany from utilising these resources for future armament.
Regarding the Rhineland, France suggests its political and economic separation from Germany, advocating for permanent military occupation by Allied troops. France would take primary responsibility southward up to Cologne, with Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and potentially the United Kingdom managing northern sectors. The Rhineland states would have significant autonomy.
France’s demands for the Saar region go further. The Saar’s mines, previously awarded to France by the Treaty of Versailles, would again become French state property, and the territory would operate within French customs and monetary systems.
Finally, France reiterates opposition to any immediate centralisation within Germany, emphasising decentralisation as agreed upon at Potsdam. Local German governments within each Allied occupation zone should form the basis of Germany’s future political structure, preventing the resurgence of centralised Prussian dominance.
Picture: The Paris Conference of Foreign Ministers opens at the Luxembourg Palace in Paris, France, 25th April 1946
Source: Getty Images
On 24 April 1946, the Soviet Union successfully conducts the first test flights of its indigenous jet fighters—the MiG-9 and Yak-15.
The Soviet drive for jet fighters began during the final months of the war. Captured German jet technology, including the BMW 003 and Jumo 004 engines, became a critical resource. In April 1945, the Soviet government tasked aero-engine factories in Kazan and Ufa with producing these engines under the designations RD-20 (BMW 003) and RD-10 (Jumo 004). Simultaneously, Soviet design bureaus received strict orders from Stalin to rapidly develop jet-powered aircraft.
Two prominent Soviet aircraft designers, Artyom Mikoyan and Aleksandr Yakovlev, received orders to produce single-seat jet fighters. Mikoyan’s bureau (OKB-155) pursued a twin-engine layout, resulting in the MiG-9. Yakovlev’s OKB opted for a simpler approach by converting their proven piston-engine Yak-3 fighter into a jet-powered model—the Yak-15.
The MiG-9, initially designated as the I-300, featured two RD-20 turbojets housed in the fuselage, exhausting beneath the tail boom. This unusual configuration aimed to minimise drag and optimise thrust but posed significant technical challenges, including severe fuselage heating and structural vibrations from jet exhaust gases. Engineers overcame these issues using heat-resistant shields initially inspired by aircraft industry practices from captured German jet prototypes.
Meanwhile, Yakovlev’s Yak-15 retained much of the Yak-3’s airframe, removing the piston engine and installing a single RD-10 turbojet under the forward fuselage, creating a distinctive "pod-and-boom" appearance. This simpler conversion allowed quicker development and lower risk, though performance was somewhat limited by its reliance on an older piston-airframe structure.
After months of intense preparation, this morning, test pilot Aleksey Grinchik takes the MiG-9 into the air first, circling the airfield twice and landing safely after six minutes. Later that same day, pilot Mikhail Ivanov successfully completes the maiden flight of the Yak-15.
Picture: Grinchik preparing to take off in the first MiG-9 prototype.
Source: Russian Aviation Research Trust
On 23 April 1946, Enrico Piaggio files a patent for the Vespa scooter, an innovative two-wheeled vehicle intended to aid Italy`s urgent post-war recovery.
Piaggio & Co., once prominent producers of aircraft parts and military equipment, suffered extensive destruction from Allied bombing campaigns during the recent war. As Italy grapples with the daunting task of reconstruction, Enrico Piaggio turns his company`s considerable aeronautical experience towards creating practical civilian transport, addressing the desperate need for affordable and reliable mobility.
Earlier this year, Piaggio collaborated with renowned aeronautical engineer Corradino D’Ascanio to devise a new scooter prototype. Drawing heavily from aviation technology—and reusing surplus aircraft parts—D’Ascanio created a distinctive vehicle unlike conventional motorcycles. His initial prototype, known as the MP5 "Paperino," proved cumbersome, prompting rapid redesign into the sleeker MP6, which now receives its official patent application.
The Vespa (Italian for "wasp," due to its buzzing engine sound and slender waist-like design) incorporates numerous aviation-inspired innovations, including a stress-bearing steel chassis reminiscent of airplane fuselages, a streamlined enclosed engine that shields the rider from oil and dirt, and unique front suspension resembling aircraft landing gear. Even some wheel and suspension components have been directly adapted from spare airplane parts, showcasing Piaggio`s resourcefulness in the face of material shortages.
The scooter`s compact size, simplicity of operation, and economical fuel consumption make it particularly suited to the post-war environment of rationing, damaged roads, and limited public transport. Piaggio hopes the Vespa will enable thousands of Italians to return swiftly and safely to factories, offices, and fields, significantly contributing to Italy’s economic revival.
Picture: Luigi Di Gennaro (holding the handlebars) - dealer Piaggio and famous motorcycle racer, and Piaggio mechanic Guido Galbani (on the left). (Acquasanta Golf Club, Rome, March 29, 1946
Source: Piaggio Historical Archives
On 22 April 1946, General George C. Marshall publicly criticises the Chinese Communist Party for violating peace agreements, deepening mistrust, and pushing China closer to civil war.
As we covered in our 10 January post, President Truman appointed General George Marshall as his special envoy to broker peace between the rival factions. Marshall’s mission initially appeared promising; negotiations in Chungking earlier this year led to a ceasefire agreement and the formation of joint "peace teams" intended to enforce a nationwide truce and pave the way towards a unified government.
However, optimism quickly faded. Almost immediately after agreements were finalised, skirmishes erupted, particularly in North China and Manchuria. General Marshall, speaking to journalists at a press conference in Tokyo yesterday, openly expressed his disappointment with the Chinese Communist Party. Marshall stated unequivocally that the Communists had violated "elementary terms of the truce" by attacking government-controlled troop trains and surrounding and assaulting towns recently evacuated by Soviet troops.
He accused the CCP of demonstrating false eagerness during earlier negotiations, noting they had initially appeared committed to peace only to abandon agreements when conditions seemed favourable for military advantage. Marshall described Communist accusations against the Kuomintang—branding Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek a ruthless dictator and criticising the Nationalist-led administration as a "one-party Cabinet"—as a deliberate "campaign of mudslinging and calumny," aimed at undermining government legitimacy.
The General further warned that the CCP appeared to be rushing to establish spheres of influence in strategically vital territories, driven by unfounded fears that the central government was plotting their extermination. "China," he remarked, "was the victor against Japan, but materially and economically she is utterly unbalanced. Above all, China needs good leadership and the cooperation of every single Chinese."
Picture: Portrait of General Chang Chun, General George C. Marshall, General Chou En-lai, and Dr. Hsu Mo (L to R).
Source: Getty Images
On 21 April 1946, the Socialist Unity Party of Germany (Sozialistische Einheitspartei Deutschlands, SED) is officially founded in East Berlin.
The formation of the SED results from a forced merger between two historic leftist rivals: the Communist Party of Germany (KPD) and the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD). These two parties had shared deep ideological and strategic divisions since the early 20th century, particularly during the Weimar Republic. While the SPD pursued a parliamentary path toward socialism, the KPD aligned with Soviet-style Marxism-Leninism and openly opposed the SPD, even branding them "social fascists" during the 1930s.
After the Nazi regime outlawed both parties in 1933, many of their leaders were imprisoned, executed, or driven into exile. In the aftermath of Germany`s defeat, both the KPD and SPD were re-established under Soviet license. However, as early as the summer of last year, Soviet authorities and German Communists began quietly pressuring Social Democrats to merge with the KPD in the Soviet zone—a move sold as a necessary unification to prevent a resurgence of fascism and ensure peace.
SPD members were deeply divided over the merger. While some agreed, many feared Communist domination and resisted what they saw as an undemocratic union. In the Western zones of Germany, the SPD remains a separate party, but in the East, the Soviet-backed consolidation effort succeeds. Despite significant internal opposition and reported cases of intimidation, arrests, and suppression of anti-merger Social Democrats, the unification is pushed through.
Today, the SED is born at a formal congress held in the Admiralspalast in Berlin. The party’s charter is read aloud and a joint leadership is elected, with Otto Grotewohl of the SPD and Wilhelm Pieck of the KPD serving as co-chairmen. Their presence is meant to symbolise parity between the two founding parties, though in practice, the former Communists hold dominant control and align the new party closely with Moscow’s interests.
Picture: Walter Ulbricht, Secretary-General of the newly formed party, unveils its official banner.
Source: BPA
On 20 April 1946, the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry releases its final report, recommending the immediate admission of 100,000 Jewish displaced persons into Mandatory Palestine—but stopping short of endorsing the creation of a Jewish state.
Established in November last year, the Committee was created to investigate the plight of European Jews following the Holocaust and determine a viable political path forward for Palestine. President Truman’s letter to Prime Minister Attlee in August 1945 had called for urgent solutions, particularly regarding Jewish immigration, while the British sought to share the political burden of the Palestine question with the U.S.
Comprising six American and six British members, the Committee has since toured DP camps across Europe and visited Palestine, interviewing over a hundred witnesses, including Zionist leaders, Arab representatives, and international experts. Despite divergent ideological leanings among the members, today’s report is presented as a unified recommendation.
The central recommendation—to admit 100,000 European Jewish refugees to Palestine without delay—is a response to the appalling conditions in the DP camps.
However, the report also delivers a major political blow to the Zionist movement by recommending against the establishment of a Jewish state. It instead proposes that Palestine remain a bi-national state under British trusteeship, governed with equal rights and protections for both Jews and Arabs.
It also outlines the need for economic development and the establishment of a legislative council and calls for restrictions on land sales and immigration to be reviewed. The Committee explicitly condemns terrorism and violent resistance from Jewish militants while also warning of growing Arab hostility.
Today’s release immediately sets off heated reactions in both London and Washington. Zionist groups express disappointment over the rejection of a Jewish state, while Arab leaders vehemently oppose the immigration proposal.
Picture: Members of the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry standing next to the Western Wall
Source: Central Zionist Archives (via Harvard University Library)
On 19 April 1946, the French Constituent Assembly votes to adopt a new draft Constitution that would fundamentally reshape the country’s political structure.
Since the Liberation of France in 1944, the country has been governed by the Provisional Government of the French Republic under the leadership of General Charles de Gaulle. However, tensions between de Gaulle and the Constituent Assembly, particularly regarding the scope of executive power, led to his resignation in January this year. De Gaulle’s insistence on a strong presidency clashed with the preferences of the dominant political forces—namely the French Communist Party (PCF), the Socialist SFIO, and the Christian Democratic Popular Republican Movement (MRP)—who supported a parliamentary system with checks on executive authority.
In the months since his departure, the Assembly has worked toward formulating a new constitutional order. The draft Constitution submitted to today’s vote seeks to abolish the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies and replace them with a single legislative body, the National Assembly, whose members would be elected by universal suffrage. This unicameral Assembly would hold supreme legislative authority and be empowered to appoint the President of the Republic, who would serve a largely ceremonial role. The Council of Ministers, led by the President of the Council, would be responsible to the Assembly.
The proposed Constitution also strengthens social rights, including the right to employment, trade union freedom, and access to public services. However, critics argue it concentrates too much power in the hands of the legislature, creating the risk of political instability through weak executive leadership and fragmented parliamentary coalitions.
Today’s vote sees the draft approved by a vote of 309 to 249. With this result, the Constitution now moves to the next step—a national referendum, scheduled for 5 May. The French people will decide whether to ratify the new order or reject it and demand another attempt at framing the Fourth Republic.
Picture: French MP Marcel Cachin (L) reads on November 28, 1946 the resignation letter of Georges Bidault
Source: Getty Images
On 18 April 1946, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) opens its inaugural session at the Peace Palace in The Hague.
The ICJ emerges as the successor to the Permanent Court of International Justice, which functioned under the now-defunct League of Nations. As we covered in our 8 April post, the League of Nations officially ends its final session today, symbolically passing the baton to the UN. Among its final acts, the League transfers its assets, archives, and responsibilities to the UN, ensuring that the legacy of international law continues in this new era.
The ICJ has been designed to adjudicate legal disputes between states and to provide advisory opinions on questions of international law. Its statute, adopted as part of the UN Charter at the San Francisco Conference in last year, provides for a court composed of fifteen judges elected by the UN General Assembly and Security Council.
Today’s inaugural sitting opens with an address by the President of the Court, Judge José Gustavo Guerrero of El Salvador, who served previously as President of the Permanent Court and now leads the ICJ into a new era. Guerrero calls for justice to be “the cornerstone of peace,” and emphasises the Court’s impartiality and independence from the political organs of the United Nations.
The establishment of the ICJ is the culmination of months of legal and diplomatic groundwork. Over recent weeks, judges from across the world have arrived in The Hague and begun coordinating with the UN Legal Department and Dutch officials on court logistics and procedures. Many of them, like Guerrero, have experience in international law and diplomacy, lending the Court both legitimacy and continuity.
The ICJ is to begin its work with several pressing legal questions already submitted for consideration, including territorial disputes and questions of treaty interpretation. Its advisory capacity will also be essential in navigating the complex web of post-war settlements and colonial decolonisation processes now gaining momentum.
Picture: Inaugural session of the International Court of Justice on 18 April 1946
Source: Courtesy of the ICJ
On 17 April 1946, nearly 200,000 demonstrators fill the streets of Tokyo in protest against Prime Minister Kijūrō Shidehara and the conservative holdover government.
The protests erupt less than a week general elections, which we covered in our 10 April post, where Japanese citizens—men and women alike, for the first time—voted in a landmark moment of democratization under the supervision of the U.S. occupation authorities. While the election results have not yet officially ushered in a new government, many citizens are growing frustrated with the lack of immediate change. Shidehara, a former diplomat installed by SCAP, is increasingly viewed as out of step with the public’s demands for economic relief, democratic reforms, and accountability for the wartime regime.
Today`s demonstration begins as a planned rally in Hibiya Park, organized by a coalition of 69 labour and farmer organizations and 45 cultural associations. An estimated 70,000 people gather under red banners with slogans like “Overthrow the Shidehara cabinet—supporter of the rich and enemy of the people!” and “A democratic constitution by the hands of the people!” Among the speakers are Communists, Socialists, and even liberal figures such as Ishibashi Tanzan, who is heckled by sections of the crowd urging him to cut ties with conservative elites.
As the rally spills into the streets, the crowd swells to around 200,000. Protesters march to the Prime Minister’s residence to present a list of demands. A confrontation ensues when police attempt to block their path.
Several officers suffer minor injuries as demonstrators breach the gate. Shots are fired—not into the crowd, but into the air—as a warning. The situation threatens to escalate into full-scale violence before U.S. military police intervene with armored jeeps and mounted machine guns.
Eventually, a delegation led by Communist Party figure Tokuda Kyūichi is allowed into the residence to deliver the movement’s demands, though Prime Minister Shidehara himself refuses to meet them until tomorrow.
Picture: Explaining citizen rights and the new Constitution to a crowd of Japanese
Source: U.S. National Archives
On 16 April 1946, the true scale of the Benxihu Colliery disaster—by far the deadliest mining disaster in world history—is publicly revealed for the first time, confirming that over 1,500 miners perished in a single day in Japanese-occupied northeast China.
The Benxihu (Honkeiko) coal and iron mine is located in Benxi, Liaoning province, an area that fell under Japanese control following the 1931 invasion of Manchuria and the subsequent establishment of the puppet state of Manchukuo. Jointly managed by Japanese and Chinese entities, Benxihu quickly became a key supplier of coal and iron for the Japanese war effort. Under wartime mobilization policies, tens of thousands of Chinese labourers were pressed into service under brutal conditions alongside a small number of Koreans and Japanese supervisors. Many Chinese workers were effectively conscripted or coerced, living under militarized conditions, with reports of food scarcity, forced labour, and the use of violence against those deemed unproductive or rebellious.
On 26 April 1942, a gas explosion tore through the coal shafts of Benxihu, igniting coal dust and releasing lethal quantities of carbon monoxide throughout the tunnels. At the time of the disaster, over 3,000 men were working underground. The Japanese authorities immediately sealed off the mine entrance—reportedly to prevent the spread of the fire but also to stop the escape of miners, effectively condemning hundreds to suffocate inside.
In the immediate aftermath, Japanese officials downplayed the disaster. News of the incident was heavily censored, and the death toll was officially reported as 34. The site was cordoned off, and foreign journalists were barred from visiting. For years, surviving relatives of the victims were denied information about the fate of their loved ones.
Only today, nearly four years later, Soviet investigators confirm the number of `over 1,300` casualties in the disaster. Most of the victims are believed to have died from carbon monoxide poisoning and suffocation. The majority of the dead were Chinese forced labourers.
Picture: Fushun (China), view of open-cut coal mine
Source: American Geographical Society Library
On 15 April 1946, the U.S. military publicly reveals for the first time that it has developed and used night vision scopes during the war.
The concept of night vision had been explored by engineers in both the Axis and Allied powers before and during the Second World War. By 1944, German engineers developed the Zielgerät 1229 “Vampir” scope, a bulky infrared system deployed in minimal numbers late in the war, primarily on the Eastern Front, as well as more powerful systems mounted on tanks.
Parallel to these developments, the U.S., through the Army’s Signal Corps and private industry partners like Bell and Howell, was working on its own version of night-fighting equipment, particularly to aid infantry operating in low-visibility conditions.
The result was the M1 and M3 Infrared Sniperscopes, often nicknamed “snooper scopes” by U.S. troops. These active infrared systems are composed of a specialized rifle-mounted scope with a separate infrared lamp and backpack-mounted battery power supply. The scope itself converts reflected infrared light into a visible image using a cathode ray tube, allowing soldiers to detect targets in complete darkness up to roughly 100-200 metres, depending on the model. While cumbersome and fragile, the technology is nonetheless revolutionary.
The initial model, the T-120, was mounted on the standard M1 carbine. By late 1944, prototypes had been tested in jungle conditions, and by the spring of last year, small numbers were deployed in the Pacific Theatre. They were first used operationally during the Battle of Okinawa, where U.S. Marines employed the scopes to detect and neutralize infiltrating Japanese forces during nighttime operations.
Following the war’s conclusion, the technology remained classified for several months. Today’s announcement includes demonstrations of both the M1 and the improved M2 models, the latter featuring a larger power source and improved detection range.
Picture: Sharpshooter with an M2 carbine sporting the T-120 scope
Source: U.S. Army
On 14 April 1946, members of the Jewish revenge group Nakam carry out an audacious plot to poison thousands of former SS prisoners in Stalag XIII-D, a POW camp in Nuremberg.
In the months following the war, a group of Jewish partisans and Holocaust survivors coalesced around a singular goal: to avenge the six million Jews murdered by the Nazis. Led by Abba Kovner—poet, fighter, and former commander of the Vilna Ghetto resistance—the group calls itself Nakam, “The Avengers.”
Kovner and his inner circle began drafting what they call Plan A—a sweeping, symbolic act of vengeance. They aimed to poison the water supplies of several major German cities, including Munich, Hamburg, and Nuremberg. With technical assistance from sympathetic scientists, they develop a formula that would target only German civilians. However, in December last year, while en route to Palestine to secure further support, Kovner was intercepted by British authorities in Egypt. His suitcase, reportedly filled with poison, was seized.
In the wake of this failure, Plan B emerged. Smaller in scope but deadly in intent, it targets former SS members interned at Stalag XIII-D. Located in the southern part of Nuremberg, the camp is home to thousands of German prisoners, many of whom served in the Waffen-SS. The new plan is coordinated primarily by Joseph Harmatz, Yehuda Maimon, and Eliahu Rosenberg.
Using forged papers and covert contacts, Nakam infiltrated a local bakery contracted to supply bread to the POW camp. Over weeks, they secured access to the production process, obtained arsenic, and methodically mixed it into the glaze of loaves marked for delivery to the SS section of the camp.
This morning, the contaminated loaves—some 3,000—are delivered to Stalag XIII-D. Very quickly, reports emerge of severe illness sweeping the camp.
U.S. military authorities will quickly launch an investigation and quarantine the site. While American officials will report no deaths, Nakam will later claim hundreds, if not more.
Picture: Lt. Robert R, Rogers, left, and Erich Pinkau, of the German criminal police, inspect the bakery and the hiding place of Leipke Distel, a member of Nakam
Source: U.S. Army
On 13 April 1946, Prime Minister Clement Attlee authorises Sir Stafford Cripps, leader of the Cabinet Mission in India, to accept the partition of the colony if negotiations fail to produce a unified solution.
As covered in our 24 and 29 March posts, the Mission is attempting to balance irreconcilable demands: the Indian National Congress seeks a strong central government for a united India, while the All-India Muslim League, led by Muhammad Ali Jinnah, insists on the creation of a separate Muslim homeland—Pakistan.
Officially, the Mission’s objective remains the formation of a single Indian Union. However, after weeks of inconclusive talks, Attlee privately concedes that this may no longer be feasible. In a directive sent today, he instructs Cripps and the Mission that they are now permitted to explore and, if necessary, agree to the partition of British India as a last resort.
The decision marks a significant turning point. Until now, partition had been publicly rejected by British officials, who feared it would spark violence and undermine the goal of a peaceful transfer of power. But with communal tensions escalating and Jinnah warning of civil war if Muslim demands are ignored, the British government begins to re-evaluate its position.
Under the partition proposal now under consideration, British India would be divided into two dominions: a predominantly Hindu India and a Muslim-majority Pakistan. Provinces like Punjab and Bengal—religiously mixed and deeply contested—would likely face their own referenda or internal division. Princely states would be encouraged to accede to one of the two new dominions, though their legal status remains uncertain.
The authorization does not represent a final decision, and the Mission will still present a federal scheme in its formal recommendations. But today’s instruction gives Cripps crucial flexibility as he continues to meet with Congress and Muslim League leaders.
Picture: Cripps negotiating with the leader of the Indian Congress Party, Maulana Azad leading Indian representatives about the country`s independence: The leader of the Indian Congress Party, Maulana Azad
Source: Getty Images
On 12 April 1946, Field Marshal Harold Alexander is sworn in as the 17th Governor General of Canada, becoming the first professional soldier to hold the post.
The Governor General of Canada serves as the King’s representative, performing constitutional and ceremonial duties on behalf of the monarch. While the position was once a direct extension of British imperial rule, it has evolved considerably. Since the 1931 Statute of Westminster, and especially during and after the Second World War, the Governor General acts not as a representative of the British government but of the Crown in right of Canada—a symbol of national unity, who functions on the advice of the Canadian prime minister and parliament.
Harold Alexander is not a politician by training but a soldier with a reputation for cool judgment and supreme command presence. Born in 1891 and educated at Harrow and Sandhurst, Alexander rose swiftly through the ranks of the British Army. In the First World War, he distinguished himself on the Western Front and in the Irish War of Independence. But it was in the Second World War that he became a household name. After commanding British forces during the evacuation at Dunkirk, he was sent to Burma and later to North Africa, where he took over command of the British Eighth Army after the fall of Tobruk.
As Commander-in-Chief of Allied forces in the Mediterranean, Alexander oversaw the successful campaigns in Sicily and mainland Italy, including the bloody struggle at Monte Cassino and the liberation of Rome.
Alexander`s nomination was made earlier this year by King George VI on the advice of Canadian Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King. As a war hero admired in both countries, Alexander embodies continuity and transformation—qualities essential to a postwar Canada reassessing its role on the world stage.
With Canada still demobilising from the war and seeking a new sense of national purpose, the presence of a figure like Alexander may prove a stabilising influence during this transitional period.
Picture: Alexander in London, 17 Jan 1946
Source: Getty Images
On 11 April 1946, the Bell X-1 completes another crucial test flight, continuing America’s race to break the sound barrier.
The Bell X-1—initially known as the XS-1—is the first aircraft specifically engineered to exceed Mach 1 in level flight. Its design traces back to 1944, when the U.S. Army Air Forces, NACA, and Bell Aircraft responded to the urgent wartime need to understand and overcome the mysterious aerodynamic phenomenon dubbed the “sound barrier.” As propeller-driven aircraft approached transonic speeds, pilots reported severe buffeting and loss of control.
The Bell team, led by chief engineer Robert J. Stanley, chose rocket propulsion for the XS-1, using a Reaction Motors XLR-11 engine with four chambers. Its fuselage mimics the shape of a .50 caliber bullet—known for supersonic stability—with thin, straight wings and an all-moving tailplane borrowed conceptually from British designs such as the now-canceled Miles M.52. The plane is constructed to withstand stresses of up to 18g, far beyond any operational aircraft.
Parallel to American efforts, British engineers at de Havilland and Miles Aircraft were also developing high-speed models, notably the DH 108 and M.52, but the latter was abruptly cancelled in February this year amid post-war budget constraints.
Bell’s X-1 testing initially began at Pinecastle Field, Florida, before shifting to Muroc Army Air Field in California’s Mojave Desert. This site offers clear skies, flat terrain, and relative seclusion from public scrutiny. The X-1 is carried aloft by a modified B-29 Superfortress “mothership” and released at altitude, where it engages its rocket engine.
Test pilot Chalmers “Slick” Goodlin has been at the controls for most of these early sorties. Yesterday, he performed a glide test to evaluate flight trim and stability.
Today, Goodlin follows up with the first powered test flight since the aircraft’s return from maintenance. Although the flight ends in a nose-wheel collapse on landing, it marks a critical step forward, verifying engine ignition, aerodynamic stability, and systems functionality under power.
Picture: Goodlin next to his X-1
Source: Niagara Aerospace Museum
On 10 April 1946, millions of Japanese voters head to the polls in the first general election of the post-war era.
It is the country’s first election in nearly a decade and the first truly free election in modern Japanese history. Under the supervision of the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers (SCAP), General Douglas MacArthur, today’s vote is intended to set Japan on a democratic path guided by reforms in governance, education, and civil liberties.
This election is unlike any before. For the first time, women are eligible not only to vote but to run for office. Of the 79 women standing as candidates, 39 will go on to win seats, an unprecedented development in a society long shaped by patriarchal norms. The electorate now includes over 36 million eligible voters—vastly expanded from previously restricted rolls—and nearly three-quarters will cast a ballot.
Competing for 466 seats in the House of Representatives are 2,781 candidates from an array of newly formed or reformed political parties. The center-right Liberal Party, led by Ichirō Hatoyama, and the Progressive Party, aligned with Prime Minister Kijūrō Shidehara’s policies, appeal to moderate and conservative voters. On the left, the Japan Socialist Party calls for sweeping land reforms, labour rights, and demilitarisation. Further left still is the Japanese Communist Party, with figures like Kyuichi Tokuda challenging the legitimacy of Shidehara’s leadership and calling for radical change.
The campaign period has been volatile. Still, on this election day, order prevails. Voters queue patiently in towns and cities across the country, casting their ballots in privacy and calm.
Though results are not yet final, early returns suggest a victory for the conservative bloc. The Liberal Party is expected to emerge as the largest group, with the Progressives, Socialists, and Communists trailing behind. Kijūrō Shidehara is unlikely to remain in office for long, and SCAP will soon need to navigate the formation of a new cabinet that can implement Japan’s democratic reconstruction.
Picture: A Japanese woman, with a child on her back, submits her ballot, Tokyo, Japan, April 10, 1946
Source: Getty Images
On 9 April 1946, the United Nations Security Council receives a letter from Soviet Ambassador Andrei Gromyko sharply criticising its resolution on the Iran Crisis, calling it “incorrect and illegal”.
As we covered on 2 and 4 March, Soviet forces failed to withdraw from northern Iran by the 2 March deadline agreed in the 1942 Tripartite Treaty. Instead, Moscow continued to occupy Iranian Azerbaijan and supported separatist movements there, prompting Tehran to appeal to the newly formed UN Security Council. After weeks of tense debate, and despite Soviet objections, the Council adopted Resolution 3 on 4 April. The resolution, while taking note of Moscow’s assurance that a withdrawal was underway and would be completed within five to six weeks, scheduled a follow-up review for 6 May and tasked the Secretary-General with monitoring compliance. Meanwhile, the Soviets managed to secure a deal to jointly exploit oil with the Iranian government, as we covered in our 5 April post.
Though Soviet diplomats had issued statements claiming that all issues between Tehran and Moscow had already been resolved, Gromyko goes further today. In a new letter dated 6 April and made public today, he declares the Council’s action to be illegitimate and inconsistent with the UN Charter.
"The Soviet Government cannot ignore the resolution adopted by the Security Council on 4 April,” he writes. “It is incorrect and illegal, being in conflict with the Charter of the United Nations.”
Gromyko insists that the resolution was unnecessary because “an understanding on all points was reached” between the Soviet and Iranian governments by 4 April. He further argues that no threat to international peace exists in Iran, and thus the Council has no grounds for intervention under Article 34 of the UN Charter. The Soviet position, in his view, had already been vindicated by the joint communiqué with Iran announcing the withdrawal agreement.
The Council, for its part, has not withdrawn the resolution and will proceed with its review in May.
Picture: Gromyko leaves the Soviet consulate on March 28, 1946, in New York City
Source: Getty Images
On 8 April 1946, in Geneva’s Palais des Nations, the final session of the League of Nations opens.
Founded in the wake of the Great War, the League of Nations had been envisioned as a revolutionary institution that would replace balance-of-power diplomacy with cooperative peacekeeping. Emerging from the Treaty of Versailles in 1919, its Covenant bound members to resolve disputes peacefully.
But the cracks were always there. Key global powers were absent or inconsistent: the U.S. never joined, and Japan, Germany, and Italy all withdrew during the 1930s. The League’s response to Japanese aggression in Manchuria in 1931 and the Italian invasion of Ethiopia in 1935 exposed its inability to enforce decisions against determined aggressors. Its commitment to collective security unraveled as Germany remilitarised the Rhineland, annexed Austria, and dismantled Czechoslovakia.
Despite the outbreak of war, the League’s machinery continued to sputter along. Committees met, and documents were drafted, but the war had rendered its mission obsolete.
This final session, attended by representatives from 34 nations, is both administrative and elegiac. The League`s remaining functions will, over the next 10 days, be formally transferred to the United Nations. Delegates will rise not to debate policy but to deliver eulogies.
Lord Robert Cecil, one of the League’s original architects, will offer a final assessment on the closing day of the session on 18 April:
“Let us boldly state that aggression wherever it occurs and however it may be defended, is an international crime, that it is the duty of every peace-loving state to resent it and employ whatever force is necessary to crush it, that the machinery of the Charter, no less than the machinery of the Covenant, is sufficient for this purpose if properly used ... I venture to impress upon my hearers that the great work of peace is resting not only on the narrow interests of our own nations, but even more on those great principles of right and wrong which nations, like individuals, depend.
The League is dead. Long live the United Nations.”
Picture: Last League of Nations, Palais des Nations, Geneva 1946
Source: Getty Images
On 7 April 1946, Italy holds the final round of its first local elections since the fall of Fascism.
Since the collapse of Mussolini’s regime in 1943 and the formal liberation of northern Italy last year, political life has reawakened in a country left deeply fractured by civil war and occupation. Power gradually shifted from the royalist government in the south to the diverse coalition of anti-Fascist parties that had led the Resistance through the National Liberation Committee (CLN).
Until now, Italy had not held democratic elections since 1924. Fascist rule had suppressed all opposition, and municipalities had been governed through appointed Podestà rather than elected councils. But with the monarchy weakened, Mussolini dead, and a new republican future looming, the return to electoral politics has become central to Italy’s reconstruction.
The first round of municipal elections was held on 10 March in 3,095 communes. Today’s second round covers an additional 2,406 towns across 43 provinces.
Voter participation has been high, a sign of the hunger for civic engagement after two decades of dictatorship. Women, for the first time in Italian history, are granted the right to vote and stand for office, marking a transformative milestone. Though Italy remains under the watchful eye of the Allied Military Government in Occupied Territories (AMGOT), the elections are organized and conducted by Italian authorities under Allied oversight.
The results show a clear alignment with the political composition of the CLN. Across the country, the left and centre-left dominate. The Christian Democracy (Democrazia Cristiana, DC), rooted in Catholic social teaching and favouring a moderate, pro-Western orientation, emerges with the largest overall share, winning 35.2% of the vote. The Italian Socialist Party (PSIUP), advocating democratic socialism and strong state intervention, follows with 29.9%. The Italian Communist Party (PCI), ideologically aligned with Moscow but increasingly national in tone, secures 18.9%.
Picture: Maria Castaldo is assisted by clerk,as she casts the first ballot on her life at Anzio. 18 Mar 1946
Source: Getty Images
On 6 April 1946, Japanese officer Captain Hoshijima Susumu is executed for war crimes committed against Allied POWs at the Sandakan camp in North Borneo.
The Sandakan camp was established in 1942 following the Japanese invasion and occupation of British Borneo. Located near the town of Sandakan, the camp initially held over 1,000 Australian and 500 British POWs—captured during the fall of Singapore and transported to Borneo to construct a military airfield for the Japanese. Under the administration of the Japanese 37th Army, the camp was run with a rigid system of forced labour, starvation rations, and increasingly severe punishments. Conditions deteriorated rapidly from late 1943 onwards, especially after a new, more brutal guard unit comprised of Formosan soldiers under Japanese command arrived.
By 1945, the situation had become catastrophic. With the Allies advancing and airfield construction complete, the Japanese decided to evacuate the prisoners. What followed became known as the Sandakan Death Marches. Between January and June last year, over 1,000 men were ordered to march through the Bornean jungle to camps at Ranau, more than 250 km (155 mi) away. Already emaciated and ill; those who could not continue were executed or abandoned. Out of 2,400 men sent on the marches, only six survived—Australian soldiers who managed to escape and were later rescued by local resistance fighters.
Captain Hoshijima Susumu served as commandant of the Sandakan camp during its deadliest period. Although his superior, Lieutenant Colonel Tatsuji Suga, committed suicide after the war, Hoshijima was arrested by Allied forces and brought to trial in Labuan in January this year. Witness testimonies—supported by surviving documents and accounts from local civilians—detailed systematic beatings, deliberate starvation, and the withholding of medical care under Hoshijima’s command. The prosecution argued that the captain oversaw conditions that led directly to the near-total destruction of the POW population.
In the early morning hours today, Hoshijima is hanged at the War Crimes Compound at Labuan.
Hoshijima about to enter the 9th Division HQ during his trial
Source: AWM-133909
On 5 April 1946, the Soviet Union and Iran announce the formation of the Soviet-Iranian Oil Company.
Soviet interest in Iranian oil stretches back to the 1920s but grew dramatically during World War II, when Allied troops occupied the country to secure supply lines. The Soviets, occupying northern Iran, began supporting the pro-Communist Tudeh Party and pro-autonomy movements in Iranian Azerbaijan. By 1943, Stalin leveraged his visit to the Tehran Conference to secure the Shah’s support for Soviet political aims, including boosting Tudeh in parliamentary elections. But oil, not ideology, remains the ultimate prize.
Negotiations between the Soviets and Iranian Prime Minister Ahmad Qavam intensified since the start of this year. The Soviet military occupation has become a bargaining chip: in exchange for withdrawal, Stalin wants oil.
Yesterday, Iran and the USSR formalize an oil agreement with six binding conditions. First, a joint company will explore and exploit oil fields in northern Iran. For the first 25 years, the Soviets will hold 51% of shares; in the second 25 years, ownership will be split 50-50. Profits will be divided according to these shares. Second, the concession excludes a corridor in western Azerbaijan, where no foreign oil company will be allowed under Iranian law. Third, Iran contributes land, while the USSR supplies equipment, specialists, and funds. The Iranian military will guard all facilities, affirming national sovereignty. Finally, a formal treaty will be submitted to the newly seated Majlis within seven months.
Stalin is reportedly willing to abandon the autonomous Azerbaijani People’s Government—his main political asset in northern Iran—in exchange for this oil concession, underscoring the depth of his interest in Iranian petroleum. Soviet Ambassador Ivan Sadchikov and Qavam are said to have finalised the deal only after intense backchannel diplomacy.
For Tehran, this is a high-stakes gamble. While Qavam avoids a possible Soviet annexation of Iranian Azerbaijan, he also risks blowback from nationalist politicians and Western allies wary of Communist expansion.
Picture: Middle East Oil, Iran 1945
Source: LIFE
On 4 April 1946, the Far Eastern Commission formally approves the exemption of Emperor Hirohito from prosecution for war crimes.
Since Japan’s surrender, questions surrounding the responsibility of Emperor Hirohito have hung over the Allied occupation. As Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers (SCAP), General Douglas MacArthur quickly moved to preserve the Imperial institution, declaring Hirohito a “symbol” rather than an active participant in the war.
While men like Prime Minister Hideki Tojo, General Kenji Doihara, and Foreign Minister Kōki Hirota face charges ranging from aggressive war to atrocities committed by Japanese forces, Hirohito has been spared from indictment. The legal rationale lay not in the absence of imperial complicity but in the political strategy of SCAP and the Truman administration. MacArthur and Washington fear that prosecuting the Emperor will provoke mass unrest, collapse the fragile Japanese state, and derail occupation reforms.
The Far Eastern Commission (FEC), formed late last year to oversee Allied policy in Japan, includes representatives from the U.S., U.K., U.S.S.R., China, and other wartime Allies. Over the past several months, Soviet and Chinese delegates have pressed for Hirohito to be held accountable. However, the U.S., backed by Britain and Australia, argued that prosecuting the Emperor would jeopardize “orderly administration” and postwar stability.
Today, the FEC formalizes its decision. The commission affirms SCAP’s policy and states that the Emperor “shall not be included among those to be arrested as war criminals.” In its official memorandum, the FEC explains that Hirohito’s immunity is “a matter of political necessity” and a means of maintaining “the cohesion of the Japanese nation under conditions of surrender and occupation.” While the document concedes that the Emperor had been “the sovereign authority during Japan’s period of aggression,” it maintains that his retention is crucial for achieving the broader goals of “disarmament, demilitarisation, and democratic reconstruction.”
Picture: Far Eastern Commission meeting in the former Japanese embassy in Washington.
Source: Getty Images
On 3 April 1946, Lieutenant General Masaharu Homma is executed by firing squad at Los Baños prison in the Philippines, found guilty of war crimes for his role in the Bataan Death March.
Homma’s trial and execution follow a lengthy investigation into the atrocities committed after the fall of Bataan in April 1942, when some 75,000 American and Filipino troops surrendered to Japanese forces. As we covered in our post from 8 December last year, General Douglas MacArthur ordered Homma to stand trial for his role as commander of the Japanese 14th Army during the march, in which thousands died from starvation, abuse, and summary executions. The killings were largely orchestrated by Colonel Masanobu Tsuji, acting without Homma’s knowledge or consent. Yet, under the principle of command responsibility, Homma was held accountable.
The trial began on 3 January 1946 in Manila. Witnesses described unspeakable brutality—bodies left unburied, prisoners forced to march without water, and officers executed on the roadside. Homma, composed and quiet throughout, maintained that he was unaware of the scope of the atrocities until after the war. He insisted that he had delegated logistical arrangements to his subordinates while focusing on the assault on Corregidor and that his orders called for the humane treatment of prisoners.
Nevertheless, on 11 February, the tribunal found him guilty on all charges. Homma appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that he had been denied due process. The Court declined to intervene. Justices Murphy and Rutledge dissented strongly—Murphy warning that “the nation’s very soul is involved,” and that Homma had been denied a fair trial by any constitutional standard.
Despite the legal challenges, MacArthur confirmed the sentence.
At 12:53 a.m. today, Homma is led before a U.S. Army firing squad at Los Baños. He refuses a blindfold and stands silently before the rifles. Unlike most convicted Japanese generals, who were hanged, Homma is granted a military execution by musketry.
Picture: Homma before the five member military commission in Manila, Philippines, on Feb. 11, 1946
Source: U.S. National Archives
On 2 April 1946, General Douglas MacArthur enacts new fraternization rules for U.S. troops in Japan.
From the start of the Allied occupation in August last year, U.S. military personnel were explicitly prohibited from fraternizing with Japanese citizens. Official bulletins, films, and even cartoons reinforced the idea that interaction with Japanese civilians—especially women—was a form of disloyalty. Fraternisation was equated with softness, or worse, betrayal.
Enforcement came not only through military command but also the intense censorship regime run by SCAP, which restricted any media depiction of American-Japanese romantic relationships.
As early as autumn, relationships between American GIs and Japanese women—especially in the black market zones, among entertainers, or what SCAP labelled “special comfort facilities”—became widespread.
With thousands of troops stationed for extended deployments and an uneven power dynamic, relationships blossomed—some exploitative, many consensual, and others genuine. By early this year, a new problem emerged: babies. "Occupation babies," often born to unmarried Japanese mothers, revealed the futility of the policy and the need for a new approach.
Today, MacArthur, acting under pressure and with growing recognition of the policy’s failure, abolishes the ban on fraternization. But it is far from a liberal gesture. The new directive permits social relationships and even marriage—but only under stringent vetting processes. Troops have to receive permission to marry, with background checks and health screenings for the Japanese women involved. The goal is not only to control but to sanitize the fraternization that is now too widespread to deny.
These new rules are also tied to broader SCAP social reforms: re-education, gender equality (at least rhetorically), and the introduction of Western-style family law. Yet, Japanese women who married Americans—the so-called "war brides"—face immense legal hurdles. Barred from immigrating to the U.S., they are caught between cultures.
Picture: U.S. soldier from the 11th Airborne Division shares a bit of chocolate with a local girl, 1946, Japan.
Source: LIFE
On 1 April 1946, the U.S. Navy carries out Operation Road’s End, scuttling 24 captured Imperial Japanese Navy submarines off the Gotō Islands.
Following Japan’s surrender on 15 August last year, the Allies moved quickly to enforce the terms of the Potsdam Declaration and the U.S. Post-Surrender Policy for Japan. Among the conditions was the complete dismantling of the Japanese military, including the surrender and destruction of its naval forces.
The decision to scuttle rather than preserve the submarines has been accelerated by growing tensions between the Western Allies and the Soviet Union, which has demanded access to Japanese naval technology.
Operation Road’s End is the culmination of this effort. Conducted by the USS Nereus and other U.S. Navy vessels, the submarines—many of which had been moved to Sasebo Naval Base—are crewed by skeleton Japanese teams and have been piloted to “Point Deep Six,” approximately 65 km (40 mi) west of Nagasaki.
Among those scuttled today is the I-58, infamous for sinking the USS Indianapolis in the final days of the war, resulting in one of the worst losses of life in U.S. naval history. Alongside it are several Ha-class submarines and other I-boats, including I-156, I-157, I-159, and I-162. They are sunk by demolition charges or naval gunfire in waters more than 200 meters deep.
Though not sunk today, several other high-profile submarines will meet similar fates in the weeks and months that follow. These include the massive I-400 and I-401—aircraft-carrying submarines that had been moved to Pearl Harbor for evaluation. Each capable of launching three bombers, the I-400-class boats represent one of the most ambitious underwater weapons platforms ever constructed. As it will become clear that Soviet interest in these vessels could spark further tension, they, too, will be scuttled—off Hawaii in May and June 1946.
Today’s operation signals not only the physical destruction of Japan’s undersea fleet but also the symbolic end of the country’s naval ambitions.
Picture: Japanese submarines at Sasebo on 31 March 1946, awaiting disposal.
Source: U.S. Naval History and Heritage Command #80-G-260146
On 31 March 1946, Greece holds its first parliamentary elections since before the war, under the supervision of Allied observers.
The Greek political landscape is in chaos. Since the end of Axis occupation in 1944, tensions between the conservative monarchy-backed government and the leftist EAM-ELAS resistance movement have escalated into open violence. Though the 1945 Varkiza Agreement promised disarmament and democratic elections, neither side has kept its word. EAM forces, mistrusting the government’s intentions, refused to disband fully, while right-wing militias continued to target leftists with impunity. The wartime coalition has collapsed, and Greece now stands on the brink of internal war.
In an effort to restore political legitimacy, elections are scheduled for today. To lend credibility, the vote is conducted under the oversight of Allied observers from the United States, Britain, and France. Their presence is intended to verify that the electoral process meets international standards. But the conditions in which the vote takes place are far from ideal. In many parts of the country, political intimidation, assassinations, and acts of retribution have made free campaigning virtually impossible.
The Communist Party of Greece, backed by the leftist EAM coalition, boycotts the election, claiming the government has failed to guarantee fair conditions. Their abstention ensures a sweeping victory for right-wing parties. The monarchist United Alignment of Nationalists secures a majority of the seats, and the government interprets the result as a public mandate to continue its policies and prepare for a plebiscite on the restoration of the monarchy.
Despite serious irregularities, the Allied Mission reports that the elections are "on the whole free and fair." While acknowledging instances of coercion and administrative failure, they conclude that these were not sufficient to overturn the general outcome. The finding gives international legitimacy to the new Greek government—but does little to restore internal peace.
Picture: Observer Chats With Voters at a polling station near the based of the Acropolis in Athens
Source: Getty Images
On 30 March 1946, British and American military intelligence launch a large-scale sweep across Germany and Austria, arresting over a thousand individuals suspected of attempting to revive Nazism through clandestine networks.
Since Germany’s surrender last May, the Allied occupation authorities have been engaged in the arduous task of denazification. This has involved identifying, investigating, and removing Nazis and Nazi sympathizers from public life through arrests, questionnaires, and tribunals. As part of this broader program, American and British counterintelligence agencies have maintained a close watch on extremist groups, especially remnants of the wartime “Werwolf” movement, a paramilitary resistance force organized by Joseph Goebbels during the final days of the Third Reich.
Now, a major plot has been uncovered—one aimed not at immediate insurgency but at the long-term resurrection of Nazi ideology. Rooted in underground cells composed largely of former Hitler Youth members and junior party officials, the movement sought to preserve Nazi beliefs, maintain clandestine communication networks, and prepare for an eventual resurgence once conditions became favorable. According to Allied intelligence sources, this covert organization was not focused on violent sabotage but rather on keeping alive the ideological flame of National Socialism and building a framework for future political influence.
Intelligence operations carried out over the past several weeks culminate in today’s coordinated arrests. The detained individuals are accused of plotting to spread propaganda, conceal Nazi symbols and literature, and recruit sympathizers—particularly disaffected veterans and youth. .
In recent months, denazification efforts have slowed as differences between the Allied powers—particularly between the Western Allies and the Soviet Union—complicate joint governance. Germans, meanwhile, endure severe food shortages and mounting economic hardship, with some viewing the growing East-West divide as a possible route to regain sovereignty.
Picture: Nuremberg de-Nazification court 1947
Source: Getty Images
On 29 March 1946, Sir Stafford Cripps issues a stark warning in London about the growing communal rift in India, cautioning that delay in granting independence will result in “distrust and disaster” for both Britain and the Indian people.
Just five days ago, Cripps arrived in India as part of the Cabinet Mission, covered in our 24 March post, charged with the task of negotiating a constitutional framework for Indian independence. The political climate they have entered could not be more volatile. As we noted in the post from 28 March, the results of the Indian provincial elections have confirmed the dominance of the Indian National Congress and the All-India Muslim League—but they have also underscored the deepening divide between Hindus and Muslims, especially following the Muslim League’s overwhelming success in Muslim constituencies.
Cripps confronts the central dilemma head-on: the Muslim League’s demand for Pakistan. “Every Britisher must ask himself,” he says, “if for the interest of the Indians’ self-government, the demand of Pakistan… is justified or workable.” While he expresses deep respect for the League’s concerns, he ultimately warns that partition would not bring peace but greater instability. “The granting of autonomy for a division of the country would be disadvantageous both to the Hindus and to the Muslims. They will be only at the mercy of each other.”
He points to Europe, still reeling from war and political fragmentation, as a cautionary example of what communal division can bring. “Their own unity will end with the British withdrawal,” he warns, “and will leave themselves greatly disappointed to make a `Pakistan` or a `Hindu` state.” In his view, unity—though difficult—is preferable to religious partition, and only the Indian people themselves can arrive at a sustainable solution.
Cripps concludes with an appeal to urgency. “Now is ripe to go from there with every necessary proceeding which will assure peace for the political advancement of the Indian people.”
Picture: Cripps and Pandit Nehru in New Delhi. 1942
Source: Getty Images
On 28 March 1946, the results of the Indian provincial elections are formally announced, confirming a sweeping victory for the Indian National Congress and the All-India Muslim League.
Held between December last year and February, these are the first elections in India since the end of the Second World War. The results come at a critical moment in India’s struggle for independence—just days after British Prime Minister Clement Attlee announced on 15 March that the United Kingdom would grant India self-rule, and four days after the arrival of the British Cabinet Mission in New Delhi, which we covered on 24 March.
The election was conducted across eleven provinces, with seats allocated along religious and communal lines according to the Government of India Act of 1935. The Indian National Congress entered the contest with the goal of reinforcing its claim to represent all Indians, while the Muslim League seeks to demonstrate its status as the sole voice of India’s Muslims and to legitimize its demand for Pakistan.
The results show a dramatic consolidation of support around these two political giants. The Indian National Congress wins 923 of 1,585 seats, dominating the general and non-Muslim constituencies. The Muslim League claims 429 of the 482 Muslim seats, an overwhelming majority that effectively obliterates other Muslim political voices and solidifies Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s claim to speak for the Muslim community across India.
The Punjab results are particularly striking. As we have covered in recent posts, the province was bitterly contested between the Muslim League, the Unionist Party, and the Congress-Akali alliance. Despite intense resistance from British authorities and other parties, the Muslim League wins 73 of the 86 Muslim seats in the Punjab Legislative Assembly.
However, Governor Sir Bertrand Glancy invites the Unionist Party, now a minority faction, to form a coalition government with Congress and the Akali Dal, sidelining the League and igniting a new phase of communal agitation in the province.
Picture: Voters outside the Town Hall in Delhi during polling in the Assembly elections in December 1934.
Source: National Archives of India
On 27 March 1946, the United States and the Provisional Government of the French Republic sign an agreement in Paris to establish regular air services between the two countries.
The war has reshaped global transportation, and with the conflict now over, civil aviation is quickly emerging as a vital tool of diplomacy, commerce, and reconstruction. Military airfields, surplus aircraft, and trained personnel offer the foundation for a new international air travel system, but legal and political agreements are necessary to ensure access, safety, and fair competition.
The agreement sets out a mutual exchange of rights, allowing each nation’s designated airlines to operate passenger, mail, and cargo services between their territories and onward to third countries. Specific routes are outlined, allowing for regular connections between major American and French cities, with further access to stops in Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. Each country retains the right to designate its chosen air carriers—an authority that the U.S. will use to expand the reach of companies like Pan American World Airways and France to promote its national carrier.
To ensure safety and order in this newly regulated airspace, the agreement mandates that all flights comply with the laws and regulations of the destination country. It also calls for tariff controls, requiring governments to review and approve fare schedules to prevent exploitative pricing or discriminatory practices. Beyond its practical function, the agreement reflects deeper political aims—strengthening Franco-American relations, stabilizing economic links between Europe and the United States, and laying the groundwork for a liberalized international aviation regime.
As of today, this is more than a technical arrangement—it is an early symbol of peaceful global reintegration. The skies that once carried bombers and transport planes now begin to host the movement of passengers and goods in a new world order, one shaped less by imperial competition and more by negotiated openness.
Picture: Four Pan American Airways Constellations lined up at LaGuardia Field, New York City, 1946
Source: Walter Christensen Collection
