n;TERNn Tl CNJcL ~1111 TARY TRl3UN.t.L
FCh THE FAL EAST
TRANSCRIPT CF FRCCEEDINGS
29 CCTOBER 1947
pp. 31,968 32,058
DAYlD l\'ELSON SUTTC·N
PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ ('
PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ 29 OC'rOBER 1947
\ I N D E X Of WITNESSES
Def'ense' ·Witnesses
~1ATSUURA, Kusuo (resumed) 31969 Cross (cont'd) by Mr. Blakeney 31969
MORNING RECESS 31992
Redirect by Colonel Ivanov 31993
(~itness excused) 3199, /MURAKAMI, Keisaku 31996 Direct by Colonel Ivanov 31996 NOON RECESS 32014
Direct (conttd) by Colonel ~vanov 32015 Cross by Mr. Blakeney 32017 Question by the President of the Tribuna 1, Sir w illiarr '~!ebb 32020 Cross (cont'd) by 11r. Blakeney 32021
AFTERNOON RECESS 32038
Cross (eont'd) by Mr. Blakeney 32039 Question by the President of the Trib:unal, Sir William Webb 32042 Cross (corit 1 d) by Nir. Blakeney 32043 Cross ( cont 'd) by Mr. Blewett 1 32049
PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ 29 OCTOBER 194?
I N D E X Of 1NITNESSES (cont'd)
Defense' Witnesses
IVIURAKAMI, Keisaku ( cont' d) Question by the President of the Tribunal, Sir William Webb 32051 Cross (cont'd) by Mr. Blewett 32052 Redirect by Colonel Ivanov 32056
INDE.X Of EXHIBITS
Doc. Def. Pros. Flor In· -~ ~ No. Description --I dent .Evidence- 3372 Affidavit ~f NIDRAKAMI, Keisaku 32007
PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ 31,968
1 Wednesday, 29 october 1947 2 - - - 3
4 INTERNATIONAL MILITARY TRIBUNAL . FOR TilE FAR EAST 5 Court rouse of the Tribunal War Ministry Building 6 Tokyo, Japan 7
8 The Tribunal met, pursuant to adjournment, 9 at 0930. 10
11 Appearances: 12 For the Tribunal, all Members sitting, with 13 the exception of: HONORABLE JUSTICE R. B. PAL, Merber 14 from India, not sitting fr?m 0930 to 1600; HONORABLE 15. JUSTICE B. V. fl. ROLING, Member from the Kingdom of 16 the Netherlands, not sitting from 1330 to 1445. 17 For the Prosecution~Section, same as before. 18 For the Defense Section, same as before. 19
20 (English to Japanese and Japanese 21 to English interpretation was made by the 22 Language· Section, IMTFE.) 23
24
25
PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MATSUURA CROSS
------· ··------·-----~- --· -----, i B 1 MARSHAL OF THE COURT: The International i n I r 2 ,. Military Tribunal for the Far East is now in session. t 0 3 TEE PRESIDENT: All the accused are present n 4 except SHIRATORI, who is representeo. bjr eounsel. We & 5 have a certificate from the prison SJTgeon at Sugamo y e 6 certifying that he is ill and une..bla to attend the 1 d 7 trial today. The certificate will b? reeorded and e n 8 filed. 9 Major Blakenejr. 10
11 ... KUSUO M A T S U U R A, called as a witness on 12 I · I beh9.lf cf t'ne prosecution, ::.~P?Drn?d the stand and 13 testified through Japanose : nt e;: p~~.Jters as 14 follows: 15 I CROSS-EXAMINATION 16 BY Rffi. BLAKEl'JEY 21 the Kwantung Army operations plans for, say, the 22 year 1943? 23 A I have never seen the operations plan. 24 Q Did you see the operations plan for the year 25 1944? I,. A I have not seen it. ! PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MATSUURA CROSS 31,971 1 the Kantokuen not only provided for large ... scale 2 maneuvers but also constituted an operational plan 3 for operations against the USSR, did it? 4• A Yes. 5 Q Yesterday you told us something in detail 6 about various maneuvers that were carried out by the 7 Kwantung Army during your time there. You mentioned 8 particularly two: one which you said took place near 9 Chamussu for the purpose of practicing withstanding 10 cold and one at Tsitsihar, a river-crossing operations 11 maneuver. 12 Isn't it a fact that each year in the 13 Kwantung Army there was one large-scale maneuver? 14 COLONEL IVANOV: The prosecution objects to 15 this question as being repetitive and outside the 16 scope of the affidavit. 17 THE PRESIDENT: It certainly is repetitive, 18 Major Blakeney. I would not say it is outside the 19 scope of the affidavit though. 20 21 MR. BLAKE~~Y: He bas never before been asked 22 about any other maneuvers than those two he mentioned. 23 In order to show that these two maneuvers mentioned 24 by him were not the special, significant things that 25 he says, I wish to extract the information that such maneuvers occurred annually. PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ VL.l\ TS 1:JURA CROSS 31,972 COLONEL IVANOV: Your Honor, I must say 1 2 that the Kwantung Army each year held not only one maneuver but they held maneuvers in spring and in the I winter. I. 5 THE PRESIDENT: Colonel, you cannot give I 6 evidence; but we have heard this from other witnesses I 7 and I do not think it is contested that there were 8 annual maneuvers. I '! 9 COLONEL IVANOV: We think that this line of I 10 cross-examination is just a waste of time. 11 11HE PRESIDENT: I think we are all in 12 agreement with that. 13 Q Who told you the contents of the 1945 14 operations plan? 15 A 'I'he person ·who gave me the explanation was 16 Lieutenant Colonel ONO, Katsuichi, who was my superior 17 officer, who was in charge of the signal service 18 section. ~ Was he an operations officer? A He was a staff officer. 22 Q I didn't ask you that. I asked you if he 23 was an operations officer. 24j A He was staff o.f·f'icer in charge of signal ~, I service. LJ I -----~O~-·--~ifu1a~s~h.~e~aun~o~p~e~r~a~t~iwo~n~s~~o~fuf~iwc~e~r~?L·------_t PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ L'L4.TS UDBA CROSS 31 '973 ~---·----A-· He- 'INas not an opera t1.ons officer. ·-I 1 I ' Q Was he given access to operations plans? 2 1 A I think, naturally, he was in that position. 31 Q Did he tell you that he had seen the plan? 4 A He o.idn't say that he saw it. 5 Q How did Re say that he got his 1.nformation? A He made no explanation as to how he obtained 7 the information. Q What did he tell you were the contents of 10 the 1945 operations plan? 11 A That the operations plans for 1945 was an 12 operation for the defense of the internal regions of 13 Manchuria, that the duty of the Kwantung Army· was the 14 defense of Korea. 15 The contents of the operations plan vms 16 that at first the units along the Soviet-Manchuln..lo 17 border, especially those on the east front or the 18 north :front, were, while offering resistance, gradually to withdraw, offering-- THE l~DNr.roR: Japanese court reporter. (i~lhereupon, the Japanese court reporter 22 read.) TBE I1TTERPRETER: "I o.o not think the explanation I made, as transcribed by the reporter, is clear, tt statement of the witness. I -- PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ NIATSUORA CROSS 31,974 , I We shall attempt an inte~pretation of a 2 previous statement: 3 The contents of the operations plan was 4 that Japanese units along the Soviet-Manchukuo 5 border, especially those facing the east and northern 6 fronts, were gradually to withdraw while resisting. 7 A (Continuing) Let me repeat that at first 8 units along the border, especially those on the 9 eastern and northern fronts were, in accordance with 10 the resistance situation,to hold out --to conduct 11 holding-out operations; also to conduct a large 12 scale repulsive operation against the Soviet Army 13 in the area west of the railway running between 14 Cb.angchun and Dairen which is believed to be the 15 ob,ject of the USSR's attack -- offensive actions 16 in their attack from the westward direction. 17 Q When did the Lieutenant Colonel tell you 18 about this? 19 A The end of June, 1945. 20 ·Q Where? 21 A In an anteroom of the staff department of 22 the Kwantung Army. 23 24 Q Did he tell you how he got his information? 25 COLO}ffiL IVANOV~ The prosecution objects to your Honor, because the whole group of questions ------ PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ UATSUURA CROSS 31,975 1 connected with the plan "f 1945 is outside the 2 scope of the affidavit and the examination-in-chief. 3 THE PRESIDE~IT: The objection is overruled. 4 Q Answer the question. 5 A He did not tell me where and how he obtained such information b~t I believe tb.at it is only natural 7 that he would be able to obtain such information in 8 view of the fact that he was a staff officer in the 9 first section, and being staff officer in charge of lO cornmunications he would naturally be j_n a position to 11 know. 12 Q The staff officer in charge of communications 14 would naturally have communicated to him t~1e part of 1 15 the plans that concerned hirn, wouldn t he? 16 A The matter concerning the staff officer in 17 charge of communications, I cannot relate it to you 1s here. 19 Q Do you 1-.:now what the secl1ri ty or secrecy 20 classification of these operational plans were? A Highest military secret, of course. That is the h:i.ghest classification for 23 secrecy, isn't it? 24 A Yes. 2) It is a fact, isn't it, that these operations pJans were known to only a very few officers.~------ PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ HATSUURA CROSS 31,97E- 1 operations off:tcers, primarily and v1ere, in fact, 2 j not even knm-m to divi!tion commanders of the Krmntung 3 Army? 4 COLO}mL IVANOV: Tho prosecution objects 5 to this question as it is being repetitive. Ycster- 6 dny tho defense counsel asked the same question. 7 lffi. BLAKENEY: Yesterday I asked him about 8 tho Kantokuen. 9 THE PRESIDENT: I do not know r;ha t help vw 10 can get from a comparatively jun:tor officer on the 11 mnttor of the extent of secrecy--an officer Tiho was 12 13 never a staff officer. Hovmver, the obj oct ion is 14 overruled, but it does seem a waste of time. 15 MR. BLAKENEY: I "~Hill be Glad to vlithdrm7 16 that question. 17 Q Was it customary in the Krmntung Army 18 headquarters for staff officers to gossip to infer- 19 iors about matters that were military secret? 20 A They were not permitted to talk of such 21 mntters ns gossip; but, of course, although it cannot 22 be knorm in all its details and ramifications and 23 extent of concreteness as the officer in charge of 24 operations, still it is possible to learn of the 25 plan of operations in so far as it related to n cer• PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ 1'-'lf~TSUURA CROSS 31,977 'fo that extent it is possible to know. 1 Lioutentant Colonel ONO told me the outlines 2 of the operations plans for the year 1945 in his 3 4 capacity as chief of the communications section to 5 me as cbief of the code section in connection \7i th 6 the handling of code plans. 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 tS 16 17 18 l9 20 21 22 I 23 24 25 PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ IviA '1' SUURA CHOSS 31,978 ~------M Q Eow do all these details that you told us 0 1 r ~ffect the work of a cipher clerk? s 2, e A May I have the question repeated? I could 3 & 4 not understand it. w 5 Q What was there in your duties in connection h a 6 with ciphers which required this signal officer, OlW, 1 e 7 to disclose to you;all the details of the 1945 opera- n s tions plans which you have outlined here? 9 A In connection with codes, its purpose is 10 carried out only in the way it is handled. In order 11 to connect codes with operations it is most important 12 in establishing the time that they are prepared, when 13 they are handed over to the necessary units and how 14 they are used" These points are of very great import- 15 ance. And the handling of codes cannot be done ef 16 fectively unless the outlines of the operations plan 17 were known. Especially if the handling of the matter 18 of codes j_s not. done properly various difficulties of 19 a critical nature would occur. For instance, if a 20 unit is surrounded -- happens to become surrounded by 21 the enemy, unless that particular unit has reserve 22 codes in use, then otherwise the repetition of the 23 same codes will defeat the purposes of the codes. In 24 other words, it would amount to using the same code 25 book over again and defeating the purpose of the code. PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MATSUURA CROSS 31,979 And by the use of such codes by units encircled by 1 the enemy would defeat the purpose of any operations 2 by affecting the general over-all operations. 3 THE MONITOR: .And that will result in an 4 entire operations -- no~ delete that -- and that will 5 ) affect the entire operational plan~ 6 I 7 Q Now, Witness, just a minute. We don't want 8 all those details. That is not answering my question. 9 I asked you why you had 'bo be told the full outline 10 of the operations plan in connection with codes. 11 A Then let me state my conclusion~ 12 Q All right. 13 A At any rate the code officer -- it was nee- 14 essary for the code officer to be acquainted with at 15 least the outline of the operations plan. 16 'Q All right. Now, if that is true, why weren't 17 you told the contents of the operations plans in 1943 18 and 1944? Why was it only in 1945? 19 A In 1943 I was not in charge of the code sec- 20 tion. I was a subordinate officer in the section. 21 Q In 1944? 22 1 A In August 1944 I became chief of the code sec- 23 i I tion, and at that time, on various occasions, I asked 241 the staff officer in charge of my particular section 25 1 1--.: s to what the si tua tion_w~s-·-~:~~h~~taff officer PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ lVIATSUURA CE.OSS 31,980 told me that nothing had been decided yet and told 1 me nothing. That is following the month of August, 2 1944c 3 Q Told you that the operations plan had not 4 yet been decided in August of that year? 5 A 6 Yes. 7 Q But in 1945 it was already decided in June? 8 A Tr.e Kwantung Army was in rather difficult 9 circumstances because from the month of February of 10 1944 many units~ in considerable number, of the Kwan- 11 tung Army were transferred to the southern area. s. 12 Q Well, do I understand there was never an 13 operations plan for 1944? 14 A I have absolutely no knowledge of that myself. 15 Q Well, how could you carry out your duties as 16 chief of the cipher section if you didn't know the 17 outlines of the operations plan? 18 COLONEL IVANOV: The witness replied that in 19 the first half of 1944 he was not the head of the 20 ciphering -- chief of the ciphering section. The prose 21 cution objE::cts to that question upon the ground of its 22 being repetitive. 231 MH. BLAK..r::iNEY: He said he became chief of the 24 cipher sr:jction in August of 1944. Of course, it isn't 25 repetitive. I never before asked him this point PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ H.ATSUUT"?A cnoss 31,981 ------, desi.'.:;ned to attack hts credibility. I I 1 TEE PRESIDENT: Some of my colleagues have the ! ' 2 view that you are :really arg1.1inG with the witness, 3 Major Blakeney. 4 HR. BLAKT:£i\TEY: If it is a:t'guraent to ask him 5 to explain a patent contradiction, sir, perhaps I am. 6 TI!E PRESIDENT: If he contl"adicts himself 7 8 you may ~ell leave the cross-examiniation pass. Ordi- 9 narily, counsel getting a contradiction would stop 10 cross-examination at th2.t point unless he wanted to 11 be very fa:i.r to the witness. If that is your purpose 12 you may insist on an 8nswer and the question will be 13 allowed. 14 MR. BTJAKENEY: I might say that that has not 15 beeh tbe practice in the jurisdictions with \Vhich I 16 am familiar and wh5.ch 1 thej.:>efore 1 is tlle only practice 17 that I kno·N. But. I will leave that metter. 1."(j Q Did this Colonel ONO, the chief signal officer, 19 cUd he attend staff conferences of the Kwantnng Army 20 relating to operations plans, operations matters? 21 A N8. tu:t'all~r he has attended. them. 22 23 Q Hesularly? 24 A Yes. 25 Q, Did the ch-tef of the cipher section attend them'? ------J PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MATSUURA CROSS 31,982 ------~------r A No. I 1 Q Never? 2 I A Never. 3 Q As c matter of fact, were you ever in the 4 operations room where the operations plan vms kept'? 5 A Ho. 6 Q So that, to sum it up, all you know about 7 8 these operations plans is what you were told by 9 verious people? 10 A Yes, exactly as you say. 11 Q Were you ever told anything about the contents 12 of the plons by the Commander in Chief of the Kwantung 13 Army, the Chief of Staff or the Vice Chief of Staff? I 14 I A No. 15 Q Now, your predecessor, Major KOBAYASHI, who 16 told you all about the Kantokuen plan for aggression n\ against the U.s.s.R., he didn 1 t know any more than 18 you did what he was talking about, did he'? 19 A I do not know what extent KOBAYASHI's knowl- 20 edge was. 21 23 24 25 PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MATS UlTRA CROSS 1 Q Vlell, his position and his functions end his 2 lrank and his background were just the same when he was 3 Chief of the Cipher Section as yours when you were, 4 weren't they? 5 COLONEL IVANOV: The prosecution objects. The 6 QUestion has no relevancy to the issue. 7 THE PRESIDENT: Well, I don't know what he knows 8 about KOBAYASHI's issue, but as one of his informants 9 he should be able to answer th~t question. Objection 10 overruled. 11 A :May I have the question again'? 12 Q Repeat it to him. 13 (Whereupon, the question was read by the 14 official court reporter as above recorded.) 15 A Yes, the same. 16 Q You heard a good many rumors about when this war) 17 would be launched , d idn' t you? 1 18 19 THE PRESIDENT: None of us want him cross- 20 examined on rumors. He was only a major or something of 21 the kind, after all. He w~sn't a staff officer. Most 22 i of his information was given to him by others. We don't 23 want anybody cross-examined here abotJt rumors. 24 Q r~ell, I will nut it this way, then: You reached 25 the conclusion, nidn' t you, that the war against the U.s.s.R. would be launched before the end· of 1941? PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MATSUURA CROSS 31,984 1 COLONEL IVANOV: This question is repetitive 2 end the opinions and conclusions of this witness are of 3 no interest to the Court. 4 T.EIF PRESIDENT: Y'e have no interest in his 5 !conclusions of that nature. The most valucble period 6 of his service, as far as his evidence goes, is that 7 I when he wc.s a cipher clerk and tens of thousands of girls I I1 s throughout the Allied countries were cipher clerks ond 9 we wouldn't waste all this time on their evidence. 10 M:::t. BLAKENEY: Of course, the prosecution, who 11 now object to his opinions, put them in evidence in his 12 sffidavit over repe8ted objection from the defense. But 13 • 1 we w1ll leave that. 14 Q At any rate, when you were in the Kwantung Army 15 you think there was a plan for the cornmencement of 16 l1 aggression against the Soviet Union about the beginning 17 lor winter of 1943, we:sn't there? 18 A Yes. 19 And you got that information from one lieutenant 20 colonel we are getting into the.high ranks now-- 21 I ! 22 Lieutenant Colonel TOMURA, Morio, who told you all about 23 the directives of the Imperial Headquarters on that 24 matter? 25 COLONEL IVANOV: This question is being asked for the third time. The prosecution objects. PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ Hl1TSUURA CROSS .. 1 THE PRESIDENT; I think we are all satisfied i 1 we have heard enough on that point. 2 I MR. BLAKENEY: I should like to point out 3 tha~ 4 this informant and this information have never before I 5 I 6 ::e:u:::c::: ;:P:::::-:::::::::::: d::e:::v::~ports 7 THE PRESIDENT: Well, ask him. 8 Q That is right, isn't it? 9 A Yes. 10 Q But even this lieutenant colonel did not unde - 11 take to tell you when the operations would start, did 12 he? 13 A No, he didn't say anything. 14 Q By the way, did he explain t6 you how it came 15 about that a lieutenant colonel, who was a liaison 16 officer with the Kwantung Army, knew the directives of 17 the Imporial G~neral Headquarters? 18 A No .. 19 Q Bt the way, what was the condition of the 20 strength of the Kwantung Army at the beginning of the 21 winter of 1943 as compared with, say, a year earlier? 22 A On the whole about the same. 23 Q You mean to say that at the end of 1943 the 24 strength of the Kwantung Army was, on the whole, about 25 the same as a year earlier? PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ ll!IATSUUR.h. CROSS 31;,8,, . ~; t~ A Yes, that is what I mean. Q Had any divisions been withdre!wn? A Not at the end of 1943. 3 Q Any tanks been withdrawn? 4 Not at that time. 5 Q Aircraft? G I A With regard to aircraft I have very little if nt 7 knowledge. I 8 I Q ,'hat was the EP:~proximc:.:te strength of the Kwantu1g 9 .trmy E;,t the beginning of the winter of 1943? 10 Approximately twenty divisions, two tank divisi ns, 11 one tc.nk brigade. In addition there was an [!irforce. 12 Q Total man power? 131 14 A I have no reccllection. 15 Q Where did you get those figures? Did they 16 come to you officially in the course of your business? 17 Yes, officially in line of duty. 18 Q Now, the attack which you have got plann~.f!h.d. ~·.ftor I 19 the winter of 1943 was to be a surprise attack. . ~ 20 does thc.1 t mean? ... 21 THE PRESIDENT: I have heard the expression 22 thousands of times and it hrs never occurred to me to ask anybody vvh£.t it mennt. 24 MR. BLAKENLY: ~t ~eems to be used here as a 25 _t_e_rm___ o_f_ some o_b_l_o_q_u__ Y_· ______I PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ llli~TSUUR1~ CROSS 1 TH!:: PRESIDENT: Well, we don t t want him to 2 Enswer it. A"""pDrently he doesn't want to answer it \ imself. 4 5 6 7. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MA ~~·s U01i.A CROSS 31,988 ----- ··-·------·-----·------D Vvhat was the approximate strength of the u 1 d Soviet forces in the Far East at the beginning of the a 2 winter of 1943? 8'; 3 COLON:lJ, I'IANOV: This is repetitive and s 4 p outEdC'e of the scope of his affidavit. r 5 MR. BLA:rmnror: It has never been ment:!.oned a 6 t· befo~~, and if you will look on page 6 of the affi- t 7 8 davit, end of paragraph 4, you will find some com- 9 parison of the strength of the two armies. 10 THE PRESIDENT: Obj ec ti on overruled. 11 A I, myself, have no suf:fJ.ci.ent Jmowlecl.ge as L2 to the strength of the Soviet forcc;s at that time. 1'':· Q 1..Ji tn eys s, yo1..1. know very well, don't you, that H the dec:l.sion to wage war is one that is not made by lS captains and majors and cryptographic clerks? It is 16 not made iJy the Kwantung Al"my; it is not made even by 17 the Imperial General Headqual''ters; ..:Jut J. t is made as 18 a matter of national policy on a much higher plane. 19 COI10NAL IVAHOV~ rl'he Court r8peatedly drew 20 attention of the parties not to make long preliminary 21 statements to the questions. 3esides, this question 22 is of no purpose in connsction with this witness. 23 THE PRESIDENT: Objections upheld. 24 Q And if any ::1uch national policy was ever 25 decided it was never confided to :ou by anyone I_ PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ CEOS3 ·--·------connected ·vi th it~ wc;:_s it? 1 COLOtlliL IVA~OV; Objection on the same 2 grounds. 3 T:H:S PHh;SIDENT ~ Objection upheld. 4 Q The war didn't start in 1943 at any rate~ 5 did it? 6 TI-lE PE}:1;SIDENT: Major Blakeney? you must 7 not persist in asking questions like that. :rhey are 8 offensive to the Tri'l?unal. They are a waste of time 9 wh:i.ch cannot be justified under any circumstances. 10 MR. BLAKENEY: I am very sorry to be con- 11 12 sidered offensive to the Tribunal. I had no such 13 intention whatever. I feel that an affidavit like 14 this should be offensive to the Tribunal and that I 15 am in duty bound to inquire into what this man knows, 16 if anything. 17 COLONEL IVANOV; I object tcJ the couhs8l 18 mGking such statements from tb~ lectern in connection 19 with the document which has already been accepted by 20 the Court, admitted into evidence by the Cour~ and 21 in donnection with which the Court has already made 22 its conclusions. THE PRESIDENT: There is no nerad to add your objections to the Co1..:rt 1 s, Colonel Ivanov. Q Now, l8t 1 s just SUL1 up your whole testimony. ------·-----··------ PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ 1-lLTSUUHA CROSS 31,990 THE PRBSIDBNT : Do no su.ch thL1g. 1 Q In discussing war plo.ns in your affidavit 2 you were really talking about operotions plans to go 3 4 into effect in the event of hostilities 1 weren't you? 5 COLOrffiL IVANOV: I object because the new 6 gr(lup of repetitive qlH:;s tions is being asked now. 7 These questions have been already put to the witness. 8 Ivm. BLAKENEY: I have never put any such 9 question to this witness. 10 TIE PElESIDENT ~ It is an attempt to get him 11 to sunmmrize his (::videnco. It is not intended to get 12 any new fact. If he has left anything in doubt it 13 may be cleared up, but we do not want you to summarize 14 his evidence and g~:~t his concurrence or disagreement. 1~ ~-IR. BL..!-U PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ CROSS 31,991 "~e do not want this junior offic~;r to (\tt-..::t1pt to 1 solve for us ·nhat may be a major probler.~, assuming 2 we have not to solvu it ~~or oursC:t~lves fre·E' the 3 evidenC'e w•; hear in the qrdinary way. 4 Q You 2re an ordin•ry p) ~ sonnr of V'Ja,r, 2ren't 5 you? 6 A ~es, I am a priscner a: war. 7. Q Eave you been t .::: .ed f.)~.' any war crime c. 'r 8 offense ~gainst the US3L? 9 A No, never. 10 Q Have you beer. d .2.r ged r11 t 11 any? 11 A No. 12 Q 1 13 .".rhen wert:J you taken prise, 'ler by the Soviet forces? 14 A 15 SeptdmbE:r 5? 1945. 16 Q HavH yo·1 been 2 -orisoner e, ·er since? 17 A Q 18 Do yen; know rvhy you have noi• been repatriated 19 to Japan? 20 A I do not knowo 21 Q Hav<.? you been told whutbt..:~r YO•U would be 22 returned to Sj.beria after testifying h·~re? 23 A Yes. 24 Yus 1.hat? that you will be r01':urned? 25 A Yes, I uas told that I shall be brought back. PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ I1IATSUURA CROSS 31,992 ------~------r Q How many· tir11es have you b<:h-;n interrogo.ted , 1 since you have been a ;orisoner of war of the Soviet I 2 forces? 3 4 A About ten times. 5 Q Have you been imprisoned at any time during 6 I your cuptivi ty r.:s prisoner of war? 7 A No. 8 ~.m. BLLKENEY: Does anyone else wish to 9 cross-exa~tne? 10 I presume that concludes the cross-examina- 11 t ion. 12 COLONEL IVANOV: I naV(::l three or four 13 quGstions to this vvitm)ss. N:ay I begin after thG 14 I recess? 15 THE P:::;;_,;SIDEFT: V!e wil!l recess for fifteen 16 minutes. 17 (Whereupon~ at 10457 a recess was 18 taken until 1100, aft~r which the proceed- 19 ings were resumed as follows:) 20 21 22 23 24 25 PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MATSUURA CEOSS RLDIRI:CT w 1\IIll.RSH.~.·~L OF THr. COURT: The International 01 1 Military Tribunal for the Far East is now resumed, f2 TP.E PRESIDENT: Major Blakeney. H.n .• BLLKENLY: Colonel. Ivanov has kindly e agreed that I may return here a moment on a matter fs ~ which I overlooked. e ~ In connection with the cross-examination of 8 this VJi tnes s, I wish to rofer the Tribunal to the 9 defense evidence bearing on the points covered herein 10 and, specifically, tho cross-examination of the wit- 11 ness SLJI~., Ruizo, beginning at page 8~093 of the 12 record; the cross-examination of the witness 13 M.f..TSDJI.I!URJ~, Tomokazu, beginning at page 8,138 of the 14 record; the direct testimony of the same witness 15 beginning at page 23,282 of the record and passim I 16 I thereafter; the direct testimony of the witness 17 KL.SAHARA, Yukio, beginning nt page 23,189 of the 18 record; and the direct testimony of the witne5s 19 T,~.',J\TAKA, Shinichi, beginning at page 23,302 of the 20 record. 21 THE PRESIDENT: Colonel Ivanov. 22 COLONLL IVJ.NOV: With the permission of the 23 I Tribunal, I will put to this vJitness four questions. 24 REDII~ECT EX.i.NINi.TION 25 BY COLONLL IV"~NOV: ______.______ PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ M:il.TSUUEL ITDIRECT 31,994 Q rtr. Witness, in spots of what lurg$ units 1 or the Japn.nesy Jl.rmy and during what period of time 2 did you serve as deciphering officer? 3 1~ I was code officer with the Hongolian 4 Stationary trmy Headquarters from March, 1941, to 5 July, 1943. I was on duty £:t tho Kwantung i...rmy Head quarters from Lfigust, l943, to August, 194~. 7 Q Vii th what ma tto.rs did the deciphered com- 8 munic 11 intelligence. 12 What was the form of your personal partici- 13 pntion in the deciphering work?• I mean the extent of - 14 your knowledge. 15 A First, the handling of codes; second, the ·16 compilation of code books; the direction and carry- 17 ing out of ·coding and decoding of messages going out 18 of .headquarters and coming into headquarters. The 19 decoding of messages pertaining to ordinary matters 20 was done by non-commissioned officers and others of ' 21 equal or lower rank, but those pertaining to important 22 ones were .handled by the officers themselves, _includ 23 ing me. 24 Q From whom did you hear the secret information, 25 about which you spoke in your affidavit, and what were PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ REDII·mCT the positions of these persons and the. e~tent of thcdr 1 knowledge? 2 h I heard from v~~iou~ people: From Lieuten 3 ant Colonel ISSHIKI, Masuo, Chief Signal Officer of 4 the Mongolian Stationary :~rmy in 1941; from LieutE'n 5 ant Colonel TOMURL., Morio, Chief Signal Officer of 6 the Kwantung J.. rmy; from ftTD.jor KOBL.Y•~SHI, Taro, Chief 7 8 of the Code Section of the Kwantung I..rrny; with regard 9 to the Kantokuen in 1941, from Cantain Hl .. TTOHI who 10 was an officer attached to the Code Section of the 11 Kwantung L.rmy. These are persons from whom I have 12 received information • 13 Q .li.nd, r.ow the lnst question. Roplying to 14 the defense, you stat(d that you had been interrogated 15 ten times. Toll the Court: Were you interrogated 16 in connection with the matters pertaining to this 17 Tribunal or pertaining to some other problems? 18 A I was interrogated in connection with this 19 Tribunal once. On all other occasions, I was ques 20 tioned with regard to my previous duties. 21 COLO:t-JLL IV" .. NOV: May the witness be excused 22 on the usual tsrms, if there are no additional ques 23 tions, so th~t he can be transferred to the proper 24 jurisdiction. 25 THE Pf.ESIDEI\IT: He is released on the usual PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MURl\KAIU DEiliCT ------·-·- ----·------·- -··- ---- 1 terMs. 2 (Whereupon, the witness was excused.) 3 4 COLON'"£1 IV~.NOV: I now call prosecution 5 witness HUFAKhJH, Keisaku. 6 7 KI ISAKU hl U R A K ~ M I, called as a witness 8 on behalf of the prosecution, being first duly 9 sworn, testified through Japanese interpreters 10 as follows: 11 DITII:CT EXLEINJ..TIOI'! 12 BY COLONEL IV1>.NOV: 13 Q Hr. Witness, st::;.tc your full nnl:le. 14 j~ f.:TU1 ~LK.i .. l::l , Kc is aku. 15 Q What is your age? 16 L Fifty nine. 17 ~ What position did you hold just prior to the 18 surrender of Japan? 19 Comnander of the 3rd Army. 20 WhRt was your rank at that time? 21 22 Lieutenant General. 23 Aro you nt present a prisoner of war of the 24 Soviet ;~rmy? 25 Yes, I nm receiving tho treatment of n prisoner of war. PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ ~.fflffiAKAMI DIPIGCT 31,997 ------~~--·~---~------~--~--~~---~--~-~~·--·--~- 1 COLONFL IVANOV: May the witness b3 shown 2 exhibit 782? 3 ('ivhereupon, a document was hanGed 4 to the witness.) 5 Q Is that your affidavit and did you sign it? 6 A Yes. 7 Are the contents thereof true and correct? 8 A Yes, true and correct. 9 Q Did you give your testimony truthfully End 10 without any ~1~ess? 11 A I wrote th:;__ s from my own conscience, volun- 12 tarily. 13 COLON:.::r, r 7A1WV: If the Tribunal please 14 1 separate o:;-:.cepl"ts from exhibit 722 have been read in 15 16 court, and they aro at pago 7,575 of the record. 17 Viiith the Tribunal's permission, I shall res.c. one 18 question and one answer from exhibit 722 1 which were 19 from the affidavit of' Ml.'JT?AI\.AHI, which haven't been 20 read before. It is at the bottom of page 3 of the 21 En(;;l:tsh tz-:::;:t and at the top of page 4: of the same 22 text: 23 "Ci. What WCl"G the tasks o.f' t~ Res-earcil) 24 Institute of Tot&l Mobilization in 1943? 25 11 A. }'j_rs t 1 wo wer·e in tarr.;s ted in tho maxi- mum in ere as e of tl•e nrQd]JQ_t:l._Q.ll __Qf _ ai_r_c._r_e..ft_~JJ.S.:L~--~~-- PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MIJl AKidJII DIELCT 31,998 --~------··------·------~- factories, and we set ourselves the task of producing 1 forty thousand aircraft a year. Second, we were 2 occupied with tho problem of increasing the produc 3 tion of sea vc!sels. We set ourselves the task of 4 producing vessels with the total tonnage of one and 5 6 a half million tons a year. Third, we were interested in exports of products from Manchuria, Korea, and 7 8 from the Southern regions (hnnam, Siam) to Japan. 9 We had a shorto.g0 of 1,5oo,ooo tons of rico a year. 10 Fourth, the qur:stion of dispersion of the population 11 and industry in co.sc of air raids was studied, Fifth, 12 tho sphere of foreign polic~we set ourselves the 13 task of studying the probl0ms of consolidation of 14 tho bloc of EastErn l ... sia countries under Japanese 15 hegr,mony. 11 16 Hr. Witness, did you not hold in 1943 the 17 position of Dir0ctor of the Research Institute of 18 Totnl War? 19 Yes, I was. 20 21 22 23 24 25 PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MUHAKAMI DIRECT 31,999 1 COLOimL IVANOV: May the witness be shown 2 prosecution document No. 2152-A. 3 (~fuereupon, a document was handed 4 to the witness.) 5 Q Is that your affidavit; was it written by 6 you in your own handwriting and did you sign it? 7 A This affidavit was written in my own hand- 8 writing and signed by me. 9 Q Are the contents thereof true and correct? 10 A Yes. 11 COLONEL IVANOV: If the Tribunal please, 12 I offer prosecution document No. 2152-A in evidence, 13 This is an additional affidavit of the witness 14 MURAKAMI, Keisaku. 15 i.Vill.. BL.AlCENEY: If the Tribunal please, the 16 defense objects to the reception of this affidavit. 17 The prosecution's case in chief has been closed for 18 almost nine months now, the Soviet phase thereof for 19 a full year. There can be no reason for its being 20 reopened now for the re~eption of additional evidence, 21 except perhaps in the case of such as was not and 22 with the exercise of diligence could not have been 23 found until now. Newly discovered evidence this 24 affidavit certainly is not. With one or two exceptions 25 every fact testified to in this document is such as PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MURAKAMI . DIRECT - ,...... ------,------,--~------could and, if the prosecution .considered it to have 1 been prob~tive value, should have been put in in the 2 case in'~hief. The witness had been in the custody 3 of the Soviet authorities for some seven months 4 at the time the original affidavit was signed, for 5 fourteen months 8,t the time that it was offered in 6 evidence •. The prosecution had adequate time to -7 prepare the.witness' testimony. \., 8 / This document now tendered consists wholly 9 of additional details in expansion of the witness' 10 11 earlier testimony.' It is fairly clear, I submi:t, 12 that this-novel method of attempting to repair 13 we~knesse~ in the original pr6secution 1 ~ case is a 14 result of the opportunity offered by the prosecution's , , I 15 having heard the defenso's general Manchurian and 16 Russian evidence. There is not one word of this 17 ovidence which could not-properly have found place 18 in the case in chief and which, tnerofore, can be 19 offered in rebuttal •. That is not_quite correct; 20 one part of this affidavit whic.h could not have 21 found plac·e in the case· in chief i;s the witness 1 22 statement, at the_top of page 2, of the contents of 23 a document which he does not produce or attemRt to 24 account for. 25 Apparently the Soviet phase of the PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MUhAKAMI DIRECT 32,001 ---"------prosecution's case is neve!' to end. We have been 1 threatened rvpsatodly with the production of more 2 C:;Videnco tt as soon as it could be got from Moscow"; 3 Vihcn tho Tribunal expressed some dubiety ovur this, 4 it was hint0d that all this matter would b0 tend0red 5 in rebuttal~' When the Tribunal montionud that thorG 6 wore limits to what could properly be denominated 7 r(}buttal, this method of bolstering up the case in 8 chief has now been devised. I am informed that one, 9 at least, of thc defE;ndants, who, his case already 10 closed, is novv freshly attacked by some of the 11 allegations cor1tained in these nevvly proparf~d 12 affidavits, feols that he n1ust req1wst lcr>ve to 13 14 reopen his case to answer the new charges; doubtless 15 others will do likewise. This m~thod of introducing lG prosucution evidence long after the close of the 17 prosecution's case is a method which, we submit, 18 does not comport with j:~J.stice, vvi th E.::xpedi tion, or 19 vri th orderliness. It is submitted that this 20 supplementAl affidavit should be rejected in its 21 entirety. 22 THE PRESIDENT: Major Blakenuy -- 23 MR. BLAKENEY: Of course, should it bo 24 admitted wo must insist on the deletion of tho 25 statement of contents of the documont on page 2. PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MURAKAMI DIRECT 32,002 ------~------~------~ ------~------·- - frill. BL~VETT: If the Tribunal please, I 1 object on behalf of the defendant TOJO to the 2 introduction or the reception of this document. 3 4 One-half the affidavit pertains to evidence which 5 was alren.dy in evidence, ·which is exhibit 688-A, and 6 VJhich is a draft of the extracts from the Plan for 7 tho Establishment of Greater East Asia which is 8 almost quoted verbatim by this vvi tnoss who, no doubt, 9 hn s only seen the document within the last few days. 10 Tho evidence pertaining to that subject 11 has also been fully covered by the prosecution, 12! particularly thnt beginning with page 8816 of tho 13 record, nnd it has also be0n covered by tho defense 14 on pr-tge 27,066. There is nmple evidence in the 15 record pertaining to that first portion of this 16 offidavit, if your Honors please, in more substantinl -, .11 nature than this witness c~m t<.:;stify end this mnn con certainly be of little help to any of us in that 19 respect. 20 The latter half of his affidavit pertains to the p0.riod beginning in March, 1943 onwards, after 22 tho Pacific War had begun. We submit, if your Honors 2) I plense, that that is entirely immaterial to this 24 1 investigation. 2) I We also submit, if your Honors plense, that PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MURAKAlVII DihECT 32,003 ------~------this witness was brought here £or purposes of cross- 1 examination on his original 2ffidavit. 2 4 5 6, 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ DIRECT 32,004 THE PR~SIDENT: ;7ell~ that is so, and as a e 1 i result of bringing him here while the defense case c 2 h was being put, they are now in a position to re-open e 3 r their case. It is an easy way of having the case r,£3- s 4 opened. However, we are not bound by rules of tech & 5 nical procedure and it is well within the competence K 6 a of thi~ court to allow the U.S.S.R. prosecution to p 7 l re-open its case, and they have done so. e 8 As far as the additional evidence is con- a 9 u 10 earned, it is covered by the ruling we gave a ~ay or 11 two ago; but as to whether this particular evidence 12 should be admitted is a que~tion to be determined, 13 perhaps, on other grounds vrhich have been rai!!!ed. I 14 will take the views of my colleagues on this. 15 COLONEL IVANOV: Shall I first state my reply 16 to the defense objection, or should I do what your 17 Honor said, now tender this document in evidence? 18 THE PRESIDE1~: You may reply fully. 19 COLONEL IVANOV: Your Honor, there was a 20 precedent in the court already in connection with the 21 witnes9 TAKEBE, and I confine myself only to mentioning 22 it. 23 Your Eonor~ we submit that now, due to the 24 prosecution witnesses being called to appear before the 25 .Tribunal, the individual phases of the defense have ------··------· ....-.-· -----·---·----- _.. __ PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MURAKAMI DIRECT 32 ,oo~ ------been temporarily suspended, and the procedure used 1 during the presentation of the general phases of the 2 prosecution evidence should apply to the examination 3 of these witnesses. 4 The affidavit of MURAK.f.J.H, Keisaku, former 5 director of the Research Institute of Total 'far, has 6 great probative value for the Tribunal as objective 7 8 evidence of the real importance of the worth of the 9 Institute for the development of Japanese aggression. 10 The witness MURAKAMI is not going to give general 11 information of a repetitive nature already knovm to 12 the Tribunal, but will speak of specific undeniable 13 facts which will assist the Tribuna.l to appraise fair 14 ly the actions of the accused connected with the above 15 mentiened institute. 16 The documents mentioned in the additional 17 affidavit of MURAKA~U are, in substance, exhibits. 18 They will be shown to the witness, and the objection 19 of the defense pertaining to this is lmfounded. In 20 presenting MT.ffi.AKAMI' s affid?vit the prosecution tries 21 to save time and avoid further examination in chief 22 on the issue which, unfortunately, was dealt with only 23 in part in the first affidavit that was drawn up in 24 ~~~'arch, 1946, that is, prior to the beginning of this 25 trial, when the requirements of this Tribunal were not PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ ":'ffiECT 32,006 1 known to us. In the case of the witness TAKEBE, Rokuzo, 2 3 the defense applied to be permitted to present some 4 additional evidence. We do not object that the same 5 procedure be taken in connection with this additional 6 affidavit. The prosecution contends that there are 7 sufficient legal grounds for this affidavit to be s accepted, and in addition, considerations of the fair- 9 ness of the trial by which the Court is guided. The 10 presentation of this affidavit in rebuttal would 11 apparently be in the interest of fairness of these 12 trials and in the interest of saving time. 13 That is all I have to say, your Honor. 14 THE PRESIDENT: Yes. ':'Jell, I understand that 15 the Members of the Court who think you should be 16 allo·wed to do this do so because they assume thJ.s evi 17 dence could be given in rebuttal, and that it might 18 well be given now in order to save keeping the wit 19 nesses here. I think that I should tell you the reason. 20 And they do point out that the witnesses could be cross- 21 examined by those defendants who are affected by the 22 evidence. 23 By a m~jority the objection is overruled and 24 the document admitted on the usual terms. 25 I•lffi. FURNESS: If the Court please PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MURAKAMI DIRECT THE PRESIDENT: I also should point out that 1 any accused who is affected may not only have the 2 right to cross-examine but also to give e.dd itional 3 evidence later. Hajor J:i'urness. 5 MR. FURNESS: If the Court please, we assume that no ruling has been made as to the extent of re 7 buttal testimony. THB PRESIDENT: Well, as I pointed out, the grounds of admission assume that this evidence, at all events, would be admissible in rebuttal. However, that is the decision of the Tribunal and we don't want any discussion about it. It is well within the compe- 1< tence of the Tribunal to come to that conclusion~ the 15 Charter says so. MR. FURNESS: Before any general ruling on .i., the extent of rebuttal is made THE PR.ESIDENT: Major Furness, there is no occasion at this stage to deal with the matter you are about to raise. You can denl vvith it when it comes n up again . . ., ...... , L.,:. CLBRK OF TH~ COURT: Prosecution document 23 2152-A will receive exhibit No. 3372. (Whereupon, the document above referred to was marked prosecution exhibit 3372 and received in evidence.) --- PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MURAKAMI DIRECT 32,008 ------·-··· ------·- ··-- - - .. COLONEL IVANOV: If the Court please, I l shall 'l"'o·w read the affidavit f'f MURAKAHI, K~i$atru: 2 ur, HURAKAiU, Keisaku, former Lt. Gen. of the ;~ Japanese Army, born in 1889, take oath and depose as 4 follows: "From P~rch 8, 1943 to December 20 of thB 6 'same vear, I was director of the Research Institute of Total War in Tokyo. The In~titute was established in f :; the autumn of 1940 in accordance wit~ the Imperial :Ordinance and was a government organ for the research l ,·) ' ! of basic proble~s of total warfare and for the train ing of personnel necessarv in the variou~ ministries I ~: ·for the conductinp of the total warfare. The director t:' I of the Institute was under the direct control of the l- ' Prime !C"tnister • . "On the dav of my appointment to that post, I ~~~~as rec~i L7 ved bv PrE>rnier TOJO, Hideki in his office at the official residence. TOJ0 handed me a written order G appointing ne dtrector of the Research Institute of J-/ 20 Total ','Jar, and sald that, 'at present, the Institute _., should make supreme efforts in the study of the national L~ 1 I ideologv of the Japanese Empire /NIPPON KOKUTAI KANNEN/ i ! 23 and in order to secure ultiMate victory, it is necessary j that each student of the Institute be imbued with that I ! 2) ideolo~v.' In connection wtth the above ob,iect, Litt. D.) I YAHADA, Ta~~9__ , Di~e-~-~-~~--5'-~ __ J~~J-~U _KO_~~~~~~:~--~:-~"-~-I!AIZ~:_~, PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MURAKMU DIREC'!' Prof;~~-;~---·~y~-T;ky; ... Imperia!... -universi ty, and Rear 1 Admir~l TERAMOTO, professor: of the Naval College, 2 were invited to the Research Institute of Total War. 3 The Institute received varfous secret materials necessary 4 to carry on the research in the various problems concern- 5 ing total war from all the mini.stries, and b~sides, the 6 students of the Institute constantly received additional 7 secret data from their ministries and used them in 8 their researches. 9 "The Institute was sometimes given definite 10 research problems on total warfare, from Premier TOJO, 11 but usually the Institute itself selected the most 12 important proble~s of the time for investigation. 13 Vice Admiral ENDO, my predecessor in the post of 14 Directo~ of the Research Institute of Total War, said 15 16 +-o me in March 1943 that 'The Research in the adminis 17 tration of the occupied areas in the Greater East Asia 18 territory, occupied by the Japanese Army, was personally 1 19 entrusted bv Premier TOJO. The above secret research, 20 that is, the draft for the administration of the occupie 21 areas in the Gr~ater East Asia Occupation Areas, had 22 been completed before I assumed the post of the 23 Director of the Institute and I read it through. 24 Besides the above, I read through the draft for the 25 establishment of the Greater East Asia Coprosperity PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MURAKANI DIRECT 32,010 Sphere drawn up by the Research Institute of Total War. 1 jThe said draft provided for the establishment of: 2 11 (A) The central area including I1f.anchuria, 3 }- 8 Indo-China; "(C) The Greater Coprosperity Bphere, including 9 10 besides the Bmaller Conrosperity bphere, Australia, India 11 and Pacific Islands. 12 "The various problems of the further conduct 13 of war bv Japan in the near future, i.e., the period 14 fro~ 1943 to 1944, were investigated by the Institute 15 UDder my direction. 16 "In my interrogation on March 28, 1946, I 17 1 already stated the plans worked out by the Institute ts/ wi_ th rGgard to tre increase in the output of aircraft 19 up to 40,000 planes a vear, the increase in the construction of vessels with the total tonnage of l,?oo,ooo tons a vear and other matters. 22 "The draft plans worked out by the Institute I 23 were sent to the Pri~e Minister and all the ministries 24 concerned in order to have them carried into practical I 2) i CoMpared with the other ministries, the ,'Jar and I use. ------ PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ HURAKAIU DIRECT ------1 Navy Jtln~strins w0re most closrlv connoctnd with the 1 Institutq, and th~t is why tho Institute was hoadnd 2 altern~telv by a gnnoral or an admiral. 3 4 "When I was director of tho Institutn, it had 5 about fortv students consisting of responsible officials 6 [of the respective ministries whose ~ank were usually 7 I equnl to thn ranks of m~jor or liouten~nt colonel, and I 8 1 some reprosentntivns of banks and comp8nies. i i 91 "At tho op0ning cer0mony ··t the' Ins ti tu tn in l 10 i AR.!:il 1943, thr;rc~ vJorC> pr0SPnt Hr. fUZUKI, ;un~_stor of I 11 ! 8t:~ t(~ wt thout portf'olio nnd concur ron tly Prn s ident of I- . 12 i thf; Pl:qnninr, Bo.9rd; J:r. BAH!IDA, :lnistr~r of Education, I 131 nnd TTr. HOHPINO, Chi.cf ~c~cretar;r of the Cabinet, who 14 1 pnrti.ci pntnd in the r:stablishmnnt of thr~ Institute in I ::. 11940, I "ChiC:~ iS of cJ epArtmen ts and SPCt ions concr->rned r;l ~" I of the minis trir:s gnvc l"ctures at thr Inst i tutn, Lu I Lbjor G0nural ARif:TJC, Chlr:f of the 2nd fr·ction of the 191 Army Grn-,rnl Ptaff, Colonel NIC:HIURA, Chiof of the 20 1 I Villtarv Af:f'9.irs .:-.;ction of tho '.Var I'~inistry, ntc., 21 I r. qvr" l(Jcturns. "Wh,-,n I was d ir0ctor of the Inst i tutc:, thGo- :: ~~~ roticRl rnsrarchos and man0uvers wore conducted with ..-,,: L.' c 25 I ::: ::::0:: :::p:::l::tr:::e:~:g r:::::~::~ :::~::::::. PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ NURAKAHI DIRECT 32,012 1 T.l'lhon carrying out thnse rosoarches and mr:mr.:uvnrs, they 2 were conducted undor strict considor~tion of the actual 3 intcrn'ltion~l rmd internAl situ".tions, rmd wern based 4 only on tho ro~l strength ?nd resourcns o¥ tho statn. 5 "In tho summ~r of 1943, nt n conference of 6 thn Institute ndvisors, matters concerning the students 7 from the rnsp0ctive ministries to bo nccopted in 1944 s wor~ discussed and decided on. HOSHINO, Chief ~ecrotnry 9 of thr C.'1binr,t, nnd thP VicP l Tinistors of the rPspnctive 10 ministri,s ~nro present at this conference. 11 "At the praduntion cornmony.in Decrmbor 1943, 12 TO.TO, HCBll'INO, SUZUKI and other ministers were prPsent 0 13 Primo ~1inister TOJO st2ted in his speech at the ccr0r10ny that, 'th2 Pacific War has entered into its decisive 15 phasP nnd therefore tho personnel of nll tho ministrios 16 must mnkn intnnso efforts. And as rogards a research of 17 the students this term was only a short term research 18 from Anril to December 1943, the students should not 19 be snttsfiod with whnt they had achiev0d. Although the 20 students were given a firm round~tion in tho national 21 id0ology 9f the Jnppnosn Empire, this ideology should 22 bo thoroughly grnsp0d bv thr studnnts.' Prime IIinister 23 TOJ.O further strr::ss0d that they should r~ll endf'avor 24 to accomplish th0 war, firmly believing that Japan would by all moans be tho winner. PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MURAKAMI DIRECT 32,013 , I ------~---, / "Due to the shortage of personnel, the number 1 2 ras cut down b" half in 1944. Furthermore' in 1944 the ' 3 Institute was ordered to conduct only researches which 4 were considered most important by the Cabinet. The 5 Research Institute of' Total ~Jar was closed down after 6 I TOJO resirned from the post of Pri~e Minister in 1944. 7 "MURAKAMI, Keisaku I 8 noctober 20, 1947. Tokyo" I 9 If the Tribunal please, may the witness be 10 shown the two exhibit8 which are mentioned in his 11 additional affidavit? 12 May the witness be shown Exhibit 690? 13 (Whereupon, a document was shown 14 to the witness.) 15 !'1fr. Witness, did you see or did vou read 16 this document when you were Director of tbe Total War 17 Research Institute? Look this document throu?h• 18 A Ye~. 19 I have read it. 20 NLR. IVANOV: May the witness be shown Exhibit 21 1336? 22 (Vlhereupon, a document was shown 23 to the ~ri tness.) 24 Q ~~. Witness, did you see or did vou read 25 th'ts document when you were Direc'tor of the Total War Research Institute? ------·-----·- PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ HURAKAHI DIRECT '------ 1 A Yes, I have had occasion to read 1t. 2 COLONEL IVANOV~ That i~ all I have. 3 The defense mav cross-exa~ine the witness 4 HUB.AKAI'H , Ke is a ku • .5 THP, PRE>-IDEFT: T··1ajor Blakeney. 6 "Nell, I th:i.nk it is rather late to start a 7 lengthy crqss-examination, if there is to be one. 8 ~e will adjourn until half past one. 9 (Where1Jpon, at 11?5, a recess was 10 taken.) 11 12 - - - 15 ,- I 1t• I ! 17 I I ! I I i I I .-- .. ------··------~ ------···-·---'·-······ ·------·-·· .. ------~-----.-~----~·<> l PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MURAKAMI DIRECT s 1 AFTERNOON SESSION p r 2 •, a t 3 The Tribunal met, pursuant to recess, at t 4 1330. & 5 MARSHAL OF THE COtmT:. The International y e 6 Military Tribunal for the Far East is now resumed• 1 d 7 .THE PRESIDENT: Colonel Ivanov. e. n 8 9 K E I S A K U M U R A K A M I, called as a 10 witness on behalf of the prosecution, resumed 11 the stand and te~tified through Japanese 12 interpreters as follows: 13 COLONEL IVANOV: Your Honor, on the basis 14 of ah agreement reriched with the def~~se, I want to 15 make the following statement • .16 Your Honor, before the recess, due to an .. -,..,;.,,...-' 17 error, the witness was shown exhibit 1336, which is 18 a copy and part of exhibit 685, whereas I intended to 19 20 show the complete original, that is, exhibit No. 688. 21 With the Tribunal's permis.sion I will repair this 22 error now. and it will take two or three minutes. 23 May the witness be shown exhibit 688? 24 DIRECT EXAMINATION 25 BY COLONEL IVANOV (Continued): Q .. Wi tnes~ ,. did you see and read this original PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ J MURAKAMI DIRECT ------·------·-· ------· ---- document while you were director of the Total Warfare Research Institute? 2 A Yes, I have seen it. 3 COLONEL IVANOV: That is all, your Honor• 4 The defense may now cross-examin~ the witness. 5 THE PRESIDENT: Major Blakeney, 6 ~ffi. BLAKE}miT: Before cross-examining, may 7 I_remind the Tribunal that some considerable portions 8 of the affidavit of this witness were stricken before 9 it was admitted into evidence as exhibit No, 722 lei (r'ecord page 7, 575). Let me also mention that from n the affidavit as admitted the prosecution read orig- 12 13 inally one answer of seven lines,_ no more. We - 14 recognize, however, that the remainder is in evidence 15 against us and available for cross ... examination. . 16 THE PRESIDENT: The ~ourt copy does not show 17 how much vms rejected. 18 MR. BLAKENEY: I can state it from the 19 record if you desire to know. Shall I? ~0 THE PRESIDENT: Yes, please. 21 MR. BLAKEI~Y: On page 2, the last answer 22 and the question to which it is responsive; on page. 5, 23 the second question and the answer thereto and on the 24 same page 5, the last question and answer which con 25 tinues through to the end of the affidavit on page 6~ r PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MURAKAMI CROSS 32,017 1 THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. 2 CROSS-EXAMINATION 3 BY MR. BLAKENEY: 4 Q Witness, where were you during the spring, 5 summer and autumn of 1941? 6 A I was on the front lines on the west of 7 Hankow in Central China but in September of that 8 year I returned to Japan. Q What post did you occupy thereafter lO through the remainder of that year? A At first I vvas attached to the army school of Military Science and Technique as its principal 13 and this school's name vms later changed to School 14 of Military Science. 15 Q At what time did your connection with that 16 institution commence? 17 A From September 26, 1941. 18 Q During the year 1941 did you attend 19 cabinet meetings? A I have not. Q You vJere not at any time during 1941 attached 22 I to the War Ministry, were you? 13 A No, I have not. 24 Q And, of course, you were not attached to the 25 l I Foreign Min1stry, were you? PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ UURAKAMI CROSS 32,018 A No, I have not. 1 Q During the summer and autumn of 1941 cd.d 2 you attend liaison conferences? 3 A I have not fttended them. 4 Q Then how do you know so much about th·3 5 Japanese-American diplomatic questions in 1941 6 which you testified to in your affidavit? 7 A I vras informed by a member of the Total, 8 War Research Institute when I was director of the 9 institute from a member of the institute couing 10 11 from the Foreign Office. 12 Q What was his name? 13 A His surname was NISHIMURA. I have forgotten 14 his first name. 15 Q When was it that he informed you of these 16 matters? 17 A I think in the spring of 1943. 18 Q What did he tell you? 19 A You mean? 20 Q What did he tell you about the Japanese 21 American diplomatic question vvhich enabled you to 22 testify on it in your affidavit? 23 A It was on. the 17th of April, 1941, as I 24 heard it then, that a reply came from the United 25 States Government to the eff'ect that U Japan would ------ PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ CROSS withdraw all her troops from China then the United 1 States would recognize Manchukuo's independence and 2 approve of the economic development of that area; 3 and, moreover, that the United States will use its 4 good offices in prevailing upon Chtang Kat-shek to 5 bring about a settlement between Japan and China. 6 This information was imparted not only to me but to 7 a meeting of the research students of the institute 8 at a meeting held amongst them. 9 Q A sort of locture, was it? 10 A Yes. 11 12 Q What position did that man, your informant, 13 occupy in the ft,oreign Ninistry? 14 A Before coming to the Total War R~search 15 Institute he was with the Bureau of Treaties of the 16 Foreign Office. 17 o And. as such vms hG officially connected 18 with the Japanese-American n(~gotia tions? 19 A I think he did. 20 Q What are the provisions of Article 9~ of 21 the criminal code of the R.S.F.S.R.? 22 I do not knovr very well but I think it 23 corresponds to-- 24 THE HJTERPRETER: Mr. President, will you 25 be good enough to hold on just a moment? PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ CROSS 32,020 ~------lffi. BLAKENEY: I think it means Russian 1 Soviet Federated Socialist Republics. 2 THE INTERPRETER: No, it isn't that. It's 3 4 the Ditness' reply. s (Continuing) It corresponds vJi th what is 6 knovm in Japan as per jury or giving false evidence. Q 7 What penalty does it provide? "u THE PRESIDENT: This is a very important 9 ·nitness but his testimony on these matters is not 10 worth hearing. I suppose you really want to ask him 11 rrhat the Russian interrogator told him about that 12 section of the Russian law. 13 lffi. BLAKENEY: There are several consider- 14 ations, your Honor. One of them is, he sv1ears that 15 he >:las warned of his responsibility u.nder that 16 article and I think it might be of some interest to 17 know what responsibility is imposed by that article• 18 THE PRESIDENT: Apparently it is a 1;;rarning 19 against perjury, not in favor of it. 20 ]!lR. BL/l.KEi'lEY: I should think so. 21 THE PRESIDENT: r;rill the witness tell us 22 11hat he ·was told by the Russian interrogator about 23 the penalties for making a false. statement? 24 THE WITNESS: Well, there was nothing said 25 in particular and it is only from my own knovllodge, ------ PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ HURAKJ..MI CROSS which I believe is the same with is common 'i l;;:nm-rlcdge true to and common among all nations, l 3 1 and that is that as far as I am concerned there is I z [no penalty and that I am here testifying to what I ~ 'believe to be the truth ,:;1 thout any consideration G or concern 8S to penalties and without any concern 7 ;with penalties whatsoever. I have only set forth i 8 :the fncts. 9 [ COLONEL IVANOV: Your Honor, the prosecution ,: ~0- , submits that the replies as g:i.ven by the witness 1 11 / cover the matter and if the defense counsel ,-rants 12 ! : to elucidate the contents of this article of the 13 ! penal code he may find it out from the members of 14; tho Soviet delegation in this Tribunal. 15 MR. BLLKEfffiY: Yes, I should be glad to 16 .' see it if they ~ould supply it. 17 Q V'Ti 10 i But as for you, Nir. tnoss, I was trying _ __, 1 to test your memory. You SYJear that you were warned 2.0 of your responsibility under that article- 21 COLONEL IVANOV: I submit that the witness should not reply to this question. This is sheer 23 nrgumcnt which should not interest the Tribunal. THE PRESIDENT: It doe~ not at present. 25 This witness, as I said before, is a most important '7i tness and we would like his eros s-ex.amination to PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ NURll-Kf... MI CROSS 32,022 .l deal vii th important matters. 0 Has anything occurred since you have been .2 " 3 n prisoner of war to affect your mind or your memory? 4 No, nothing in particular. 5 Is your memory as· good now as when you 6 ··wrote your affidavit? 7 THE PRESIDENT: Do not ask him; test him by cross-examination on it. That is tbe way to 9 convince us. 10 THE INTERPRETER: The witness said: 11 Generally, my memory is reliable. 12 THE PRESIDENT: We will see when v;e hear 13 him cross-examined in relation to his affidavit. 14 Q Has your health been good since you have 15 been a prisoner. of war? 16 . J.~ Yes. 17 () All the time? 18 ·" Yes; hovJever, my blood' pressure has been 19 20 rather high 'from sometime ago.· 21 You state in·your affidavit that you know 22 that in 1942 there vms a Japanese plan of attack on 23 the Soviet Uni.on from HanchuF-ia. Did you know this 24 at the time? 25 No, not at that time. I heard of this ·r~hen I took over the ppst a:s commander of the Third ------~--~- -- ·-··------~-----·-- ---~ ------.. ------~- PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ ·MURAK.li.MI CROSS Army from my predecessor. 1 Q Who wn.s ;'"'OUr predecessor? 2 A Lieutenant General NEMOTO. 3 Q Give us tQ.e details of this plan as you 4 ie~rned them at that time~ 5 la. From the fall of 1944 the duty of the Third 6 Army became purely defensive but prior to that time 7 1 in the direction its dut;{ vvas to take tho offensive 8 of Voro1hilov. 9 Q. Is that all? 10 A Yes that is all. 11 ' the plan for _Q That is all. you learned about 12 attack of 1942? . . 16 offensive one up to 1944. 17 Q ·You mean that the plan for 1943 also was 18 offensive? 19 !~ Yes. 20 21 22 23 24 25 PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MURAKAMI CROSS 32,024 / .. Q Whe-t did the 1943 operations plan provide? 1 A I know nothip,g about thc::t. 2 Q you 3 Do mean that your predecessor told you of 4 the 1942 plcm but not of the 1943 plan? 5 No. That is, there is some mistake there 6 What I meant to say, if I may speak in greater detail, 7 is that the plan changed-from the offensive to the 8 def~nsive in 1944 and that up to th~t year, that is, 1944 :9 this plan, this offensive plan, continued to exist. 10 Q You mean the same plan continued throughout 11 several years? 12 ·A Yes. Dolnot you Y.~ow it is a fact that operations 14 plans were drawn annually? \ 15 A Yes, I know that c:s far as those details are 16 concerned. But I am trying to say that the general 17 policy of offensive continued to exist through those 18 yec::rs. 19 I am not asking about general policies. I am 20 nsking you about the statement on pc.:ge 4 of your affi 21 dc:vit~ that, "I know that in 1942 there was a plan of an 22 ' ' attack on the Soviet 'Union from the Manchurian military . 23 base. 11 Now thet isn't a policy, is it? That is a plan. 24 25 A Yes, an-offensive plan or a plan for offensive action, but the year 1942 just was cited here as a date. PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ rviURJ.Kb.MI CROSS 32,025 1 - THE INTFRP:::tETER ~ Correctio:-, of the <"~revious 2 interpretntion: Yes, it wBs c:m offensive plnn but the 3 yC:er 1942 merely cites the general standard when the 4 oper::.tions plan wr:s in effect but it doesn't mean thc:t 5 c.·n offensive pl~,n was confined only to the year 1942. 6 Q All right. Novv I e:;sk you £~gain, was there an 7 offensive plan in 1943? 8 eoLONEL IVANOV: The witness hc.s -- 9 MR.. B lJ~KENEY: I can 1 t heElr. 10 THE PRESIDENT: The•~e has been a failure in 11 the IBM. 12 COL01'TEL IVi:.. NOV: The witness h.:~s ct least twice 13 rc~lied to this question so the question is repetitive end I objoct to it. The witness has at least twice <: J--' 16 positively replied to this question. He h£;s 17 in the 2ffirm2tive. 18 TH::_ PRESIDENT: His answer in his affidcvi t should be enough. He was asked if he knew anything 19 20 ;::-;bout those proposed e.ttacks end he mentioned only one 21 yeDr. I don't know -v;~hy l1.:' should bE:, askcd of other 22 ycr:;_rs. MI-l.. BLAKENEY: I wo1::ld rc8lly likE.: to find out 23 2/x hm.,r much he docs know .::bout them, but if the Tribunal is satisfied I will be. THE PRESIDENT: 'e certeinly won't find it PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MURAKAMI CROSS 32,026 1 egninst you th2t he kneviT of one in 1941 cmd f;nother in 2 1943 unless he say~ so, and he h<::.sn't said so. 3 MR. BLAKENI;Y: I assure your Honor the.t isn't ' 4 m·y intention~ but pE':rhaps I would like him to sD;,r so. THF: PRESIDENT: If you wish him to sny something 6 ,against you you are c:lt liberty to c:.sk him. Apporontly 7 yqu assume if h~ says somethinp against you the Court -- 8 won 1 t believe him. You may be mistaken. 9 1ffi. BLAKENI.Y: bpperently your. Honor assumes 10 th.s,t the Tribunal will disregard defense evidence, but 11 it may not be so. v·e may h£:ve .good evidence of our ·own. 12 ./1!'. TUE PRESIDENT: Why you want to make this 13 prosecution witness a stronger witness against you than 14 ho-_;is, I don 1 t kndw. My concern is to seve time. 15 MR. BLAKENEY: My concern is to save my clients 16 lives and ·I believe that I should be permitted, if I crm 17 to lead this witness to contradict the testimony of 18 overy other witness, prosecution and defense. 19 20 THL PRESIDENT: I think you are talking for 21 thG sc:~ke of talking, Major Blakeney. They would have to say thEt this man knevv things which he did not know. 22 I ' 23 i\.ffi. BLAKENEY: I c:m trying to demonstrate - 24 THE PRESIDENT: To contradict him the prosecu~ 25 tion 1 s witnesses would neve to s!'y that he, this witnes , knew of p;-ept::retions for r:n attack on Rus\sic:. If that PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ i. CROSS is so I will :::lloVJ you to c.sk the question, but I know it 1 isn't so. ./. 2 l':1R. BLl.KENJ?Y: Thct vn.sn' t my point ut c:!ll. 3 'I'HE. IHT~·RPRETER: ·Tho vlitncss seid, 11 I should 4 I Tffi. BL.t-.KENEY: But if -- 6 TH~~ PRLSIDENT: Your cxcminution m[:y continue 7 r..long these lines but at prcscmt I don t t SE:e whc t vr.luc 8 it·is to you end it is t[king up & lot of our time. 9 \ 0 Wns the 1942 p1 12 L Yc s, I think it vm s. 1 13 Q "nd did the r:mnual routine operntions p1.:m .14 for 1943 similarly contcmp1r.te Ln [ ttLck on tho Sovit:t 15 Union?- 16 Yl;s; r: s fer r: s the Third Lrmy W 18 Voroshi1ov. 19 That is in nccordnncc nith the 1943 annur;1 20 operr·tions plan, is ..it? 21 Thr:t is the vvT:y I understood it. 22 THE INTERPRETER: Sli5ht correction: Thot is 23. the wr.y I h,cr:rd it. 24 Q -t:'s-ide from the Third J>.rmy, whot were the other 25 o.rmics to do under these plLns-which you he:vc mentioned? PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ CROSS 32,028 1. I did not h(:Lr anything obout the other r rmic s. 1 (J 1v'h<:::t vvns the ti.;Je set for this r.ttDck on the 2 .s.s.R. by the plc:n for c.:::.ttcck which you hrvc mentioned? 3 I don't think there was c:ny timo. 4 Q Did you ever et any time under ony plnn of 5 pcrntions or plcn of cttuck lccrn of r time being sot 6 or the Dttock? 7 1. No, I hn vc never hec:rd of thr1 t. The plun wr: s 8 th~t if hostilities broke out within the yecr, then the 9 phm w~·.s to go into operation c.nd no possible time 10 limit could be set, That is cs r metter of course. 11 THE INTLRPRETER: Could not possibly bu D plr:n 12 c s to [: tt~~ ck or not to cttock in 1:, ccrtc: in yGor. 13 Q 14 'l'hcreforc, your undcrstrnding wos e:nd your 15 instructions were, wore they not, thrt these plnns were 16 the nnnuol opcr.::•tions pl.sn to go into effect in the 17 event of hostilities from whc.tcvor cnusc? 18 y l; s ' t h:-; t is s 0 • ' 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MUHAKAMI CROSS 32,029 1 Q What about this increase in the strength of 2 the Kwantung Army in or before 1942 vn1ich you testi 3 fied to? When was that? 4 A This took place in 1941. 5 Q What part of 1941? 6 A During the period from summer to fall. 7 Q How did you know of it? 8 A I was not directly connected 1 or I did not 9 directly participate in this plan. But while Com- 10 mander of the Third Army I conducted an inspection 11 of the area under my command and heard explanations 12 to that effect at various places in that area. 13 Q What was the extent of the inc~ease in 14 strength in 1941? 15 A Your meaning? May I have that repeated again, 16 please? 17 Q What was the extent of the reinforcement of 18 the Kwantung Army in 1941 which you have testified to? 19 20 A Approximately 700,000, I think. 21 Q You don't mean an increase of 700,000, do 22 you? 23 A What I mean to say was that the army as a 24 whole reached that figure, 700,000._ 25 Q But how many men were added to the army at the time of that reinforcement to bring it up to this PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MURAKAMI Cf"-OSS 32,030 ~------·- }l ··~! total of 700,000? i2 A That I do not know. s Q Did this increase, this reinforcement or 4 j ncrea se in strength of the Kwantung Army in 1941 .5 give it numerical superiority to the Soviet forces in 6 the Far Ee~t? '7 COLOhEL IVANOV: Your Honor, this question 8 invites a conclusion of the witness. I would rather 9 prefer the defense counsel to conduct his cross- 10 examination with a view of establishing :facts, and 11 not opinions of the witness and his conclusions. 12 lVlli. BLAKENEY: I didn't ask for his opinion. ~13 THE PRESIDENT: Objection overruled-. :t4 Q You may answer the question. 15 A I do not understand which question. .16 , (Whereupon, the Japanese court ,17 reporter read.) 18 A No, I think the Kwantung Army 1 s forces were 19 inferior. ' 20 :21 Q Do you know by how much they were inferior? 22 A I do not know very well_, but according to 23 various repor~ and rumors Which were afloat and which ;24 I heard, then the strength of the Soviet forces in the 2) I Far East was at least 8oo,ooo. I Q Do you know how many divisions there were in PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MURAKAMI cr.oss 32,031 'the Kwantung Army after the reinforcement of 1941? ,1 A While I have no definite recollection, but 2 I think it was. somewhere around 13 or 15 divisions • . 3 Q • Do you know how many-divisions were in the 4 Kwantung Army at the time of your service as Commander 5 of the Third Army? - 6 A Of course the strength was different at dif 7 ferent times, and it is very difficult for me to give 8 "-~- you exact information as to what the strength was at 9 what time. 10 Q Well, from the time you took over command of 11 12 the Third Army, which was in 1944, did the strength of 13 the Kwantung Army decrease, increase, OJ; remain about the same? 15 A The Kwantung Army's strength steadily decreased 16 not only in quantity but in quality as well. As a re- 17 sult there was no chance whatsoever to take Elny offen- 18 sive, and they had to -- they were, thElt is, the army 19 was placed purely on the def_ensive, compelled to as- 20 sume the defensive. 21 Q Do Jrou know from what time the: t decrease in I 22 quality and in quantity commenced? 23 Generally from around February 1944. 24 Q Now, --in fact, this reinforcement which you 25 are talking a bout in 1941 was the so-called Kantokuen, PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MURAKAMI CROSS 1 wasn't it? 2 A Yes. 3 Q And the Kantokuen was exactly that, wasn't. 4 it, a reinforcement of the Kwantung Army against eventu- 5 ali ties? 6 A That is my belief also. 7 Q And it didn't in any way resemble a war plan; 8 did it? 9 A ThBt I do not know. 10 Q You were a lieutenant general, weren't you? 11 A Yes, I was a lieutenant general, but I h8Ve 12 never participated in operational plan either of the 13 ManchuriDn National Army or of the Kwantung Army: De- 14 lete Manchurian Army to JBpanese Army. 15 Q You are a rather well-known author on mili- 16 tary subjects, aren't you? No, I Elm not. Haven't you written books on military his~ supreme command, and allied subjects? Well, I wrote o book entitled 11 Senso Yoron," or the principles of warfare quite Ei long time ago~ 22 9 But that wos the only book I have ever written~ 23 24 1 ·Q Did you never write a book known as "To sui 25 lSankosho"? 1 'l'F£ IviONITOR: Will you spell it out? PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ CHOSS 32,033 ·------~------~-----~ ]Jlft. BLiiKENEY: · Tosu.i Sankosho. \4 THE MONITOR: S&nkosho.· The! nk you•· ;.2 A Well, this was a work undertaken at the Wnr College, .hrmy War College, while I was there. It VT:s 4 not written by me but it was compiled by me on the 5 6 basis of vnrious studies made by the instructors at~ )7 the ·college. Th2t is to soy, it wns compiled under 8 my supervision. 9 Q That WPS published under your na.me as author, ;10 "!e. sn' t it? A No. 12 Q You hc:we been a specialist in Russian matters 113 throughout your army service, haven't you~ 114 A I have not even once gone to the Second ivision of the Geheral Staff Headquarters in connec- 16 ion with a study of Russian problems. '17 Q I didn't ask you that. I asked you if you 18 0d not been a specialist in Russian matters through- 19 i ut your army career; 20 A No, I was not C1 specialist. 21 Q You rend nnd spenk the· Russian lcmguage, 22 on't you? 23 Yes, I can reed and speak Russian. 24 And when you served as an instructor in .25 i. - ilitary schools and colleges you have taught subjects ------;i-.e------,.._---.,--- PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ ChOSS connected with 11ussi8, hcven 1 t you? 1 A No. I have only taught the history of wnr 2 3 r;nd tElCtics. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2) PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ :_URfJ<:AMI CROSS 32,035 y Did you ever teach Hussian ulilitary his- : 1 I e i 1 2 tory? d e A Yes, I have. n Q Russian military tactics? & 1.'!ell, I have not taught Russian tactics as ·S p G such, but when I taught Japanese tactics I used as r 2. 7 an illustration tactics used by the Russians. t t Q You did that in the ~ilitary Staff College, 9 for example? A Yes. Q But you don't mean'to suggest, do you, that in the Lilitary t::taff College instruction was not 13 given in the military history and tactics of other nations as well? I mean as vJell as those of Russia. 15 1'.. Well, I taught ;_Jrincipally r~.us sian tactics 16 vis-a-vis the Russian Army, especially in connection .17 vJi th the history of the Russo-Jap~:mese 17ar r.s well as the history or military history of Germany and :.:.us tria. 21 Q Well, I don't believe you quite understood 22 my question. The question vms: isn't it a fact that ~ 2; in the Army Staff College instruction VJas given in 2.:~ the military history 2nd in the tactics of other 2.::; foreign nations as well as those of nus sia? A Yes, in the Army Staff College tbe military PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ CROSS his tory of Germuny, :~us tria, E'.nc~ France, among 1 others, was taught. 2 Q But your own t~ae!hing centered around those 3 4 matters in connection with Russia because that was 5 the subject in which you were best qualified, didn't 6 j_ t? 7 A I _;_,ave never given lectures on the subject s of Fus sian questions. 9 Q Am I to understand from your affidavit that 10 your teachings ·were that Jt.pan must engage in aggres- 11 sion to conquer territories in future wars? Was 12 that your teaching'? 13 A This calls for some explanation. 14 Q ALl right. Let us have it. 15 .a."· No, that is not my meaning at all. Fhat I 16 mean to say is thct the Japanese are a peaceful people 17 e.s a people, fundrummtally spenlcing. But they cannot 18 long exist shoved into the narrow confines of these 19' s~all islands. That being the situation, it is 20 necessary the.t the Japanese oxpand overseas, particu- 21 ' larly expend on the continent of L.sia? 2.nd it was 22 when there were influences which obstructed this 23 expansion that war broke out. ,.:hether in the case of 24 the Sino-Japc.nose 1i'ar or in the case of the Russo- 25 Japanese 1i!ar? tbesc~ vvars broke o~:t becausE:: of these PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ I:JJR.l\.KM.~I CROSS reasons. Ft:rthermore, in order to be ab~e to carry 1 ! on vvnrfare, th~S natural resot1.l'ces of the continent 2 nro essuntinl <.:nd Lmst be utilized. This fact is 3 4 vwll nttested to by the late war, that is, the War 5 of Greater East Asia. l..11.d it was necfJSsary to bring 6 from the continent large quantities of iron and coal 7 and moru than t•.;;n million to tvn::nty million koku of s cereals. f.nd, therefore, as fnr as Japan wa's con- · 9 cerned it w2s nocBssary that she have a strong foot- 10 hold on the continent poll tic ally, economically, and 11 militarily. This being the fact and this being the 12 renson, Japan strategically must alw::.~ys point to the 13 offensive. This is what tho cold facts testify to, 14 and it is on the b2sis of tbis fundamontal concopt 15 that I taught the history of war. That is what I 16 moan by whEJt I state in my affidavit. 17 Q Vlell, then, as I u11.derstand your Hnswer, 18 your teaching vms not that Japan must engage in 19 aggression to conquer territories in future wars; is 20 that right? 21 22 A r;"Tell, cs I hav0 scid boforG, ov0rseas expan- 23 I sion wns necessary for Jc::pan as o. nc tion; and while 24 undertaking such 2.n expnnsion vvar may possibly occur, 25 if such a w2r occurred Jnpnn must tc.lm tho offensive and g2in control of certain strategic and vital nreas. ------·------ PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ LIUHAKAI 'l' his I told r"lY cl2.sses wcs tho lesson of nili tary 1 2 history. You st:y tt1.2t the Jo.panese ;~rr.w rego.rded 3 Q 4 the ned Lrmy as a future enomy~ thc.~t is so, isnrt it? Yes. Weru there ::my other land powers having 7 modern and efficient armies so placed that they s rdght offer the :-;respect of L.::.. nd warfare with Japan? 91 A No. 10 About this 'tied Boolt' which you t~stified to, 11 what was tho title of it? 12 That -vvcs an infc.mtry l".'lanual in connection 13 viii th the vmr against Rt::s sic:,. 14 THE ViONITOn: Corr0ction: This was an 15 infantry manual for combat c.gainst Sovic:}t Hussia. 16 Q Is that G description of it or is it the ul title of it? 18 A I do not have nny exact recollectinn as to 19 thu title of the book, but if my memory surves me 20 corrE;ctly the title was 11 T2.iso Gun Sento ,Ho, 11 or 21 11 22 n:Hethod of Combat vis-a-vis the Soviet l;.rrn.y • 23 THE PRESIDENT: '~Te will recess for fifteen 24 minutes. 25 ('rher,:mpon, at 1445, a recess was taken until 1500, after which the l)roceedings PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ cnoss r; vwro rosunud as follows:) I . 0 1 MARSHAL OF THE COURT: The International f ~1 Iviilitary Tribunal for the Far East is now resumed. & ,2 THE PRESIDE~T: Major Blakeney. L r3 0 ;.4 BY Thffi. BLAKENEY (Continued)$ f Q 1 5 Tell us quite briefly, Mr. \dtness, what 0 r 6 were the contents of the "Red Book"? h A I have forgotten the details, but I will 8 givo you the general outline. ;9 THE PRESIDENT: An outline could be very !10 lengthy. He does say what is in the -book in one fu of his answers on page 3. Do you really need_any I t2 more than that? 113 llffi. BLAKENEY: I didn1 t want any more, your !t4 Honor. That part was never read in evidence and I i Its tnought he would tell us in one sentence the same 16 . thing he had in his affidavit • :17 THE PRESIDENT: It is in evidence and you its may read that part, if you desire. In the answer he Ii19 ! says: "This book gave some instruc-tions to the 20 Japanese officers what tactic methods had to be f21 app~ied_ by Japanese in order to conquer Russians and 1 22 to oppose our own tactics to that of Russians·." i23 Q Now, were those tactics, those instructions ;24 on tactiQ.~ contained in the "Red Bookrr, appli(!able 25 PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MURAKAMI CROSS 32,040 both to offense and de! ense? 1 A Yes.· ,2 Q When was the book published? 3 A I think it was first published in 1933 or 4 thereabouts. 5 Q But don't you say in your affidavit that it 6 was founded partly on the Soviet Battle Service 7 ~egulations of 1936 as one of its sources? '-,. 8 A That means that Soviet publications we:re 9 used as reference when -the book was revised in 1936. 10 That is; the Soviet publications of that year were 11 used as reference when a revision was made of this 12 "Red Book." 13 14 Q When was the revision made? 15 A I think the revision was made either in· 16 1937 or 1938. 17 Q When was Marshall MUTO Inspector General of 18 Military Training? 19 A , Up to September, 1932. 20 Q But didntt you say in your affidavit that 21 this book was issued when he was Inspector General? 22 A I d~d not say it was published. I said 23 ·-that it was -during tile time of Marshall MUTO that 24 this book had been prepared or drawn up. 1he 25 publication of the book was some time after that. PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MURAKAMI OROSS Q By whom was th€l book published or circulated? A I think during the tenure of office of arshall MUT0 1 s successcr. 2 Q I don't mean by what person. I mean by 3 4 agency or organization was'the book published., A Tho book vvas both compiled and published :L the Inspector General of Military Training. 7 THE PRESIDENT: As I am reminded, it is 8 routine to publish in the British Army, and 9 o doubt in other armies, technical books of this 10 that are constantly revised and reis~ue them, 11 lViR. BLAKENEY: If the Tribunal takes notice 12 that fact, I will leave that question. 13 Q Coming to your new affidavit on the Total Research Institute. In the third paragraph page 1 thereof, you have stated the instructions you by Premier TOJO when you were appointed of that institute. Did you carry out those structions? 19 A Yes. 20 Q May I understand, then, that from that 21 s atement in your affidavit, as well as the statement 22 o page 3 of later instructions given you by Premier 23 ] JO, that as Director of the Institute, your chief 2 terest was in spiritual training and education? 2? PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ CROSS 3?,042 A Yes, spiritual education and study. 1 Q In fact, among the lecturers whom you 2 mention es having appeared before your student 3 body, was not Doetor YA~~DA, the Director of the 4 Shinto Institute and a well-known Shinto Scholar? 5 A Yes .. 6 Q And Rear-Admiral 'I'EH.t~lv:OTO was famous, was he 7 not, as an enthusiast for and an exponent for the 8 Zen sect of Buddhism? 9 THE PRESIDENT: How does that go to credit 10 or to any issue? 11 I 'I 12 THE INTERPRETER: Prior to the Presidentfs 13 statement the witness said "Yes." IJ 14 MR. BLLKENEY: Only to show the type of 1 15 activities of this institute. 16 1~mong the studsnts -- 17 THE PRESIDENT: Did the Institute deal with 18 those matters, Shintoism and Buddhism? 19 THE tiTNESS: No, that was not the main 20 meaning at all. In order to understand the Japanese 21 concept of State, that is, the Kokutai, or fundamental 22 character of the Japanese State, it wns necessary 23 that the study of this subject not b& made from a 24 V(;ry smRll,narrow angle, but from a bro~d engle r.nd 25 therefore ~uthorities on Shintoism and Buddhism were PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ CROSS ·------,------·-----·------·- . - ----;·-:::-~ invited to contribute of their knowledge to the 1 study of this subject, together with other experts 2 i ' on the subject, treating the subject from other 3 ..nngle s. 4 Q In fact, all of your lecturers who were 5 6• named in this affidavit came to you and lectured by request of the Institute, did they not? 7 8 Yes, that is so. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 . 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ------c------·-··--··------ PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MURAKAlai CROSS 32,044 Q And, these various ministers of state, whom 1 2 1 you mention as having been present on various ceremon- 3 I ial occasions, came at the express request of the 41 Institute or you as its director, did they not? 5 A Yes. The ministers of state only attended 6 on ceremonial occasions, and invitations to them 7 were issued by the Institute. 8 Now, among the student body, commencing in 9 April, 1943, were there not ten students taken from 10 various civilian organizations? 11 A I do not recall the number, but there were 12 several. 13 Did those students pursue the same course 14 and-engage in the same activities as all of the other 15 students? 16 Yes, generally the same, but they handled 17 different subjects or different angles of the same 18 subject in accordance witb their respective snecia1- 19 20 ties. 21 Q That was true of all the students, wasn't 22 it? 23 A Yes. 24 Q But, had they all access to the same 25 materials? A Yes, they were accessible to them in PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MURAKAMI CROSS Iaccordance with their personal desires. 1 Q Now, among these students from civilian 2 organization, you had at that time ,at least two from 3 the newspapers, had you not? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q There was at least one man from the Tokyo 6 Asahi and one from the Osaka Mainichi, wasn't there'? 7 A Yes. 8 Q And, they, like all the rest, had access 9 to the materials, secret or otherwise, used by the· 10 n students of the Institute? 12 A Yes. students there 13 Q Now, do you remember how many 14 were in that class from the Army? 15 A Yes, .I do. 16 ~ How many? 17 A Three. 18 Q And, of those, one was a medical officer, 19 wasn't he? 20 A Yes. 21 Q And, one was an intendance officer. 22 A Yes. 23 Q Neither of them, of cours.e, had any connec 24 tion with operations? 25 THT PRESIDENT: You are talking about the PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ InJRAKAMI CHOSS Research Institute of Total War, Major? 1 THE HTTERPRETEH: The witness said, "You 2 can't sa~.r that they had no connection." 3 ~!JR. BLJ'JillNEY: We were talking about the 4 student body of that Institute, your Honor. 5 THE PRESIDENT: The Research Institute of 6 Total War. 7 1 8 I don t quite understand your answer that 9 you can't say a medical officer and an intendance 10 officer had no connection with operations. Do you 11 mean that these officers had some special functions 12 which brought them into contact with operational I 13 matters? I 14 A As a question of principle, the Institute 15 dj_d not study operational matters, but a study of 16 various problems in connection with operatj_ons, or 17 as they relate to operations, and medical officers 18 and intendance officers were necessary in making 19 studies of the problems of total warfare. 1,, Genera,l ARISUE, who came as a lecturer to your Institute, came at tho request of the Institute, 22 d:i.d he? 23 I A Yes. 24 Q He was Chief of the Intelligence Section of 25 the General Staff, wasn't he? PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ Mill1AKAMI CROSS .A Yes. 1 (.; _And, when he· came to give you lectures, they 2 were lectures, were they -~~t, on general information 3 on the current war situation? 4 A Yes. 5 Q And, ;was tne same true of Colonel NISHIURA 6 who was Chief of the Militarr Affairs Section of the 7 •· Mil:L tary Affairs Bureau of the War Ministry? 8 Colonel NISijiUHA did not speak about the 9 10 military situation but the war, as viewed from the 11 standp-oint of military administration. 12 When were you captured by the Soviet forces? 13 A 1:.. ugus t 19 , J. 94 5. 14 Have you been a -prfsoner of war since that 15 time? 16 Well, the ·Japanese Government says that I 17 am not a pris?ner o~ war, b~t I am receiving treat 18 ment as a prisoner of war. 19 Have you been tried tor~ t_he commission of 20 any crime or offense a'gainst the U.f.S.R? 21 .A No • 22 - Q Have you been charged with the commission 23 of any such crime or offense? 24 1~ . No. ' 25 Q Have you been infprmed that you are under PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ .. CHOSS 32,048 r ,. , 1. invE:stigation on suspicion of having cornmittod war ' · 2· '!t'imes against the U.S .S.J? 3 A No. ;4 Q Do you know of any reason that you, as a ; :. 5 prisoner of war, have not been repatriated to Japan? .i6 I know of no reason • { 7 MR. BL!~KENEY: That concludes my cross 8 examination, but J believe other counsel desire to ;9 cross-E:xamine. 10 THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Blnvett. 11 ]!ffi. BLl.J\ENEY: I keep_ forgetting. May I 12 make a reference to certain 8Vidence in connection 13 with this cross-examination? 14 The reference I wish to make is to the same 15 16 pages of the record referred to in connectj_on with ·17 the cross-examination of the witness. .il'L':..TSUUHi. and, 18 in addition, to page 7,575 of the record. 19 !dR. BLEWETT: If the Tribunal please, a 20 short cross-examination on behalf of General TOJO. 21 THE PRESIDENT: Mr. BleVH;tt. 22 MH. BLEWETT: May the witness be shown 23 exhibit 688-1~, the Japanese version? 24 (Whereupon, a document was handed 25 to the witness.) ,,' -:------.------· ------· __ Il PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ CEOSS ------·------CROSS-EX1l.Hn:"·.TIO:f\T (Continued) 1 BY ME. BLEWETT: 2 Do you percr:dvo the word "draft" added to 3 tbc title of this document? 4 ~ Yes, I notice the characters. 5 6 -7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 • 20 21 22 23 24 25 PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ :MURAKAMI CROSS ------~--- ·--·. ·--····- R t Q Now, do you reeognize the writing on this e 1 2 docum.ent "only to be used inside the institute"? c h 0 A Yes, I notice it. ~ e r Q Do-you also perceive the words "outside of s '5 the institute to bo returned as soon as possiblett & c) ; or I think the words are "as soon as through"? K a 7 A Yes, I notice it here. p Q : 1 u ! 0 Do you know whether or not at any time this e a 9 document from which you quoted in your last affidavit u ! ·. was presented to the Japanese Government'.!' ~- A ,~'ell th:ts document is ... ,..·ted at e. time prior I,, ' .~ to my tenure of office as director, and so I cannot say p, that I :actually saw or heard that this particular docu- ment was presented to the government; but in the light .1.5 I 1of custom such drafts as these would be presented to the cabinet and to the various government departments .il• I concerned. !.f Q ~II! ell, inasmuch as you were not there at the L' . time you cannot tell us whether •i: or not the government "- took any action upon this particular document? 2' A No, I cannot say anything. Q :z:, I Can you tell us from your experience a! head 2, ~f this organization whether or not this document was I 2 ,, pre.,arAed for the use of the stud~nts of the institute? \ No, this was a result of studie~ made by the ."'!'. PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MLTRAKAMI CROSS students and later on were used as reference for future 1 studies. 2 THE-MONITOR: ~panese court reporter. 3 (111hereupon, the last question was· 4 read by the Japanese court reporter.) 5 . THE 'fiTNESS: This was a result of studies 6 made by students and were used as reference for future 7 studies an~ as reference for organs which would carry '., ,, 8 \ out the matters contained in th~ study. 9 10 THE MONITOR: 1'ha t is how I think. 11 Q Did the 'tlesearch 'Institute of Total 1.'far have 12 any responsibility in formulating national policies? 13 A No, the purpose of the Total W'ar ?esearch 14 Institure was only study and education. T~Thether any ' 15 studies made by the Institute were ·adopted by the govern- 16 ment or not was entirely dependent on the government ,, 17 itself; it was at its own discretion. I 18 THE PRESIDENT : How nid this particular study 19 come to reach the cabinet, as the certificate of source 20 and authenticity shows? 21 THB ~ITNFES: ~uch documents as these were not 22 nly kept in the files of the Jnsti tut.e but also were ' 23 irc'ulated to the cabinet and to the govenwent depart 24 ents con~erned, and in the light of such a cUS'to1n, r 25 elieve that this document too was sent to the cabinet PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MURAKAMI· CROSS 32,0.52 r a d to other agencies of the f?OVern!nent concerned for , I 1 I f 1rposes of reference. l 0 By whom were you appointed to the Research 3 1 4r sti tute of Total Hobilization and l"lfe.rfare? I 5 A By His Hajesty the Emperor. 6 Is that the same as the Research Institute 8 THE nmNITOR: Hr. Blewett, I think it is a nguage problem. 10 o I will e:x;plain, then. In your affidavit, you use the term "Re~earch Institute of Total biliza:tion and ~a~are." In the$e proceedings there s been reference to "Research Institute of Total War. 11 1 ~ presume the two are identical? 15 A Yes, they are identical, but it is correct to 16 s Soryokusen Ksmkyusho, or Institute for Total '!?\Tar search. 18 Could it be that there was a different organi- 19 z tion formed subsequent to December 7, 1941? 20 - ! A .hs far as war guidance or war leadership is l 21 c the Total "lar Research Institute was este.b ... 22 1 shed for the purpose of making studies relating to 23 t is s~ject. But as to the various aspects of war, I 24 b lieve that various other organs were created for the 25 s udy of the reppective special subjects. PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ CROSS 32,053 1 Do you know anything: about the status of the 2 Institute during 1940 and the early part of 1941? 3 A 1·1hat do you mean by status~ 4 ;Ve11, now, did not the institute kno~~ as the 5 Research Institute of Total '~s.r practically cease to 6 function before December, 1941? 7 A Ther-e was a reorganization in 1943 and the 8 Institute V'Jas abolished in 1944, that is,. the end of 9 ·. 1944. 10 ~light correction: The Institute underwent 11 a reorganization at the end of 1943 and was abolished 12 in 1944. 13 THB l. 22 there were three periods from the Institute's start in 23 1940 to sometime in 1941 24 THE rrrONITOR: Is it complete, ~~r. Blewett? ( . 25 I11IR. BLB"1ETT: I will withdra\~1 that and reframe it. PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ itURAKAHI CRObij 32 ,o54 Q 'Vhen you took ovnr. your dutins in Hnrch 1~43, 1 froJ'11 previous r0cords •:rhiclr yon indicnte vou studiod, 2 from vour ~fftdavit, did not you notice thRt thorn were 3 three periods from 1940 through 1941 -- thren periods 4 of study? 5 I don't und~rstand uhat vou moan by three 6 A 7 studv pnriods, 8 Q It has been testified here by INOUE thnt there 9 were three periods -- three different classes I assume 10 hn men.ns -- nnd thn.t after the third period thn 11 Institute wns Abolished. 12 A Yes. Now I understand. Yes, tbe first period 13 of the Institute ended in 1941 and thn second period ' 14 studnnts ended in 1942, and the third poriod students 15 ended in 1943, and that wns tho last class! 16 I think vou are probably n little confused 17 on that, but I will a~k vou this question~ ~as not 18 prn.ctically a nevr organization set up after the war 19 had begun to aid in going forward with that war -- I 20 refer to the Pacific war? 21 A T7Pll that probably VJB.S th0 ~upreme Council for the Dir0.ction of War that ''laS croB.ted in the government 23 during the war. 24 Q Was not this Institute of which you were the 25 head in 1943 and 1944 primarily interPsted in studies ------ PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ TIURAKAIH CROPf 32,055 1 pertaining to the Pacific War? 2 A The clear and thorough understanding of the 3 concept of the Japanese ~tate, that is, the fundamental 4 character of the ~tate, and the resolute prosecution of 5 the war of Greater East Asia. 6 Q Is it not a fact that after the abolition of 7 the Institute all the documents and pa~ers were sent 8 ov0r to the Cabinet Archives? 9 A I have not heard nor seen that fa~t, but I 1b 11 Well after November 1, 1943 were there any 12 stud~nts, or were there any perdons added to the staff 13 Members? 14 A No addition insofar as students were concerned 15 but there was some addition in the staff of the Institute~ 16 Q Well now, •111hat was your staff when you assumed 17 control jn I·~arch 1943? How many staff members dic1 you 18 have? I mean, the number of vour faculty or whatever 19 terminology you used. 20 A I don't recdll the exact figure, but I think it 21 was around fifteen. 22 Q Now, to what was it reduced on November 1, 1943? 23 24 A The number f~ll down to less than ten. 25 It was eight, wasn't it? A I don1 t recall the exact number, but I thtnk PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ IfSlRAKAMI CROSS 32,056 REDIRECT that was so -- that it may have been that number. 1 Q And. after 1944 no student was admitted and 2 the activities of the Institute ceased, is that correct! 3 4 A Yes, you are right. 5 ll:ffi. BLEV'IJETT: That is all,. YO'\U' Hotlor, thank y01 6 THE PRESIDENT: Apparently ther~ is no further 7 cross-examination. s Colonel Ivanov. 9 REDIRECT EXA~·'ITNNH ON 10 BY COLONEL IVANOV. 11 I ask that the witness be shown exhi~)its 690 12 and 683-A. 13 (Whereupon, two documonts were 14 handed to the witness.) 15 Witness, will you take a glance at these 16 do.cu.n1 ents and tell us which of these studies were 17 mace unC:.er the instruction of TOJO? 18 A What General TOJO requested was a study of 19 what I have in my hand, this document; and h:!.s request 20 was tlla t a zeneral s tucly be made as to the adm5.nis tra tion 21 of occupied areas. 22 ~ Will you name the n~~ber of this exhibit? 23 It appears on the cover of the book. 24 A Well, there are two numbers on this docu.ment: 2) PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MUPJ\KAMI REDIRECT 32,057 ------Q. This is exhibit 690. 1 THE PRESIDENT: A? 2 Q Tell us, witness, to which document was the 3 counsel for-the accused TOJO referring in his cross 4 examination, Which of these docu.'IJlents that you have 5 now before you? 6 A Well, I don't exactly understand the meaning 7 8 of the question, but I don't think that the counsel for 9 His Excellency TOJO asked me any question :l.n connection 10 with this ·book, oi' this document. 11 &o, c1:Ld I understand you.correctly t:1at you 12 stated hei'e that the counsel for the accused TOJO did 13 not ask you a single question concei'ning the document 14 which was worked out in accordance with iristructions by 15 the accused TOJO? 16 A That is how I think. 17 Will you tell us what part vras played. by the 18 lectures on the s_pil•i tual education of the students, and 19 ·what part 1.'Jas _played l.Jy the 1:•eseal'Ch work which was 20 carried out under yo~,_l' guidance? 21 A Well, there is this question of proportion or 22 r•atio between s};irj_t enG. matter, and the question of the 23 national concert of the Japanese State was nndertaken 24 as a spiritll.al study and fror1 a spiritn.al angle; hut 25 from the point of view of quantity, I should say that ----- much work was done, that is, there were rnore studies PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/ MlJPAK.AHI m-miRECT 32,058 ~------·------··------ 1 so far as quantity was concerned. 2. THE PHESIDENT: We will adjourn until half 3 past nine tomorrow morning. 4 (Whereupon, at 1600 1 an adjournment 5 !· was taken until Thursday, 30 October 1947 at 6 I 0930.) I 7 I 81 ,:1 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/3f9014/