2011年11月21日 星期一

The Yoizuki Hell-ship Incident - Part 3

[Source: NAA - National Archives of Australia, click to enlarge]

Our friend in Australia Sophie pointed us to documents long buried within the NAA. Here is one example, the record of one Taiwanese baby interned in Tatura, Victoria:

地區 (District): Dutch East Indies荷屬東印度 [按note: when the Pacific War broke out, Japanese and Taiwanese residents of DEI were shipped to Australia and interne there太平洋戰爭爆發時,此地一部份日本人及臺灣人被送往澳洲集中營拘禁]

姓名 (Name): SAI Ho Tjioe [原名不詳 Chinese name unknown]

生日 (DOB): 22/7/1942
被俘地 (Place of capture): Tatura, Victoria [按: 位於維多利亞省北部]
出生地 (Place of birth): Tatura
宗教 (Religion): 儒教 (Confucist)

國籍 (Nationality): 原登記為originally "Aust. Born Jap Parents", 刪改為changed to "Formosan"
生母 (Mother): SAI Loei Sian Twe [原名不詳]
生母住址 (Mother's address): Tatura 集中營第四營 (Tatura Camp No 4)

報告 (Report):
特徴 (Characteristics): 黑髪棕眼 [性別不詳] (Black hair brown eyes)
17/8/1942 入營 (Date interned)
6/3/1946 自雪梨港乘宵月艦遣回臺灣 (Repatriated on Yoizuki from Sydney Harbor to Formosa)

Internee SAI Ho Tjioe, the not-even-4-year-old Yoizuki hell-ship passenger, should be 69 years old by now.

2011年11月19日 星期六

Taiwanese POWs in Australia

On Aug 23, 2011, the Cowra Shire Council reported the following:

Taiwanese gather in Cowra to ring Bell of Peace
(source: here):

Over 80 Taiwanese guests and officials travelled to Cowra from Sydney today to take part in a special World Peace Bell Ceremony.

As part of the Republic of China (Taiwan) Centennial Peace Day celebrations, Cowra’s World Peace Bell and Peace Bells around the world were rung in conjunction with the unveiling of the ‘Bell of Peace’ on the island of Kinmen in Taiwan.

In addressing the group, Director General of the Taipei Economic and Cultural Office, Ms Frances Chung-Feng Lee, explained that Taiwan has designated 23 August as the Republic of China (Taiwan) Centennial Peace Day in commemoration of the anniversary of the 823 Artillery Bombardment, in which China fired up to 500,000 shells at the island of Kinmen. The two-meter high peace bell, cast out of copper and incorporating artillery shells used in the 1958 battle, is inscribed with the word "peace" in more than 100 languages.

Cowra has the honour of having Australia’s World Peace Bell, an honour that is usually reserved for capital cities. There are currently 21 World Peace Bells and coins to manufacture the bells have been donated by 103 United Nations member countries.

Cowra’s World Peace Bell was presented in 1992 in recognition of the peace and friendships made between the people of Cowra and Japan following the tragic Japanese breakout from Cowra's World War 2 prison camp on 5 August, 1944.

The first World Peace Bell was created by Chiyoji Nakagawa, former Mayor of Uwajima in Shikoku, Japan, during the aftermath of World War 2 and presented as a token of peace to the United Nations. Working on his own, Mr Nakagawa canvassed 65 member countries of the United Nations asking for donations of coins to cast a bell.

In 1982 a World Peace Bell Association was formed with co-operation from ambassadors representing 128 nations. The Association was charged with promoting a world free from the evils of nuclear war, and presenting replica World Peace Bells to the nations of the world. As was the case with the original, replicas are made from the donated coins of United Nations member countries.

Oddly, there was no mention of Taiwanese POWs detained between 1942-1946 within Cowra POW camps by any of the participants. The Taiwanese delegates apparently did not pay any attention let alone respects to their own people drafted to fight in the Pacific War for the Japanese Empire, instead, they commemorated the gun battles in Kinmen that occurred between ROC and PRC forces in 1985, irrelevant to the celebratory theme of World Peace.

In contrast, the breakout of Japanese POWs on Aug 5, 1944 has never been forgotten even with a memorial honoring the Japanese dead [see, for example, here]. To be fair, history has provided preciously little about the Taiwanese POWs if at all. Records only show, for instance, that there were 4 districts within the Cowra camp, Districts A through D. A and C housed Italian POWs captured in N Africa; B, Japanese POWs with low ranks; and D, Taiwanese and Korean POWs, together with high-ranking Japanese officers. It was the plan to relocate about 1,000 Japanese low ranking POWs to Hay, NSW, 400 km to the west, to separate them from their officers that had precipitated the breakout. Since no Taiwanese were reported either having been killed or injured, they probably did not take part in the riot; although the number of them, possibly in the hundreds, remains unknown to the people of Taiwan to this day.

Presumably, during and immediately after the Pacific War, 6,000 Taiwanese POWs were incarcerated in Australia. Some were previous prison sentries guarding British and Australian POWs in Borneo. Around 200 were tried and convicted as war criminals in 1945-6 and served time. In the 1950s, 50 with long sentences were sent back to Japan to serve out their time. A few of these sentries imprisoned in Rabaul did return to Taiwan and their stories told as part of the 2009 best-seller by 龍應台Lung Ying-Tai, the "大江大海一九四九Big River Big Sea—Untold Stories of 1949". Nothing is known as far as the fate of those stranded in Australia, however.

2011年11月16日 星期三

The Yoizuki Hell-ship Incident - Part 2

[Above: Taiwanese families, the "security risks" to Australia]

So who and how many were these Taiwanese internees?

From Rabaul, the Canberra Times reported in the March 15, 1946 edition that "Transfer of 350 Formosan and Korean internees from the Yoizuki to the Jap hospital ship, Hikawa Maru, was completed this morning..."

The origin of the Taiwanese is still unknown, it now appears that they were the surveyors and traders who went with the Japanese migrants to Dutch East Indies in the 1930s. When the war broke out, some of them were somehow selected and sent to Australia camps (by Aug 1945, there were still 18,138 Taiwanese remaining in Dutch Indies). It also turns out that, in the style of the American internment of citizens of Japanese descent, Australia had also imprisoned some 1,000 of its own residents/citizens of the Japanese heritage (including 300 divers and their families who worked in the pearling industry in Broome since the late 19th century). There were 28 prison camps in Australia to also intern (1) POWs; (2) enemy aliens; and (3) in addition to the Japanese described above, German and Italian residents of Australia. The Taiwanese, plus other Japanese civilians relocated from Java and New Caledonia were encamped in Camp No 4, together with German and Austrian POWs, all confined to the 7 concentration camps in Tatura, 17 miles southeast of Sheppartan in northern Victoria.

According to contemporary reports, on March 6, 1946, the Pyrmont Wharf in Sydney Harbor was crowded with 565 Japanese POWs and 400 "Japanese" civilians; among the latter were 100 and 112 Taiwanese women and children, respectively, plus 40 adult men. The number of the Koreans - mentioned in the Canberra Times article - remains unclear. In any case, the Taiwanese internees arrived at 7AM after an overnight train ride from Victoria.

For some inexplicable reason, the men were to be separated from their families. With this, all hell broke loose - families struggled to stay together and women and children wept and cried openly. One already boarded man jumped from the ship in an attempt to re-join his family on the dock and had to be rescued from the sea. The boarding process was temporarily halted but was later resumed on order of an unknown higher authority and further enforced by the Australian military police. In all, 1,005 were packed into the Yoizuki. This chaotic heart-breaking scene and the apparent overcrowding were promptly reported by the press - with comparisons to the infamous hell-ships on which many Australian POWs had suffered and died.

Scenes of Taiwanese families at Pyrmont Wharf, Sydney Harbor

[Above: The 2,700-ton Yoizuki arriving in Sydney Harbor]

[Above: a Taiwanese being forced to board the Yoizuki]

[Above: This young man refused to get on the ship while others embarked under the watchful eyes of the Australian MPs (bottom)]

[Above: Girls weeping and bottom: children receiving milk]

[Above and below: Men, women and children congregating at the Wharf]

Order from Gen MacArthur stipulated that only 948 should be allowed on board and the Australian investigating commission later pointed out that it should have been 800. In all, however, 1,005 went on the ship designed to accommodate 400.

A postscript: The hospital ship Hikawa Maru氷川丸 that the Taiwanese boarded in Rabaul was a converted luxury ocean liner of 11,621 tons. In 1941, it ferried Jewish refugees from Japan to Canada. Immediately after the war, it served as a repatriation ship, and later continued to carry cargo and passengers sailing between Japan and the US until 1960. In 1961, it was re-fitted into a floating museum in Yokohama which was closed in 2006 but re-opened to the public in 2008:

2011年11月13日 星期日

The Yoizuki Hell-ship Incident - Part 1

Quoted below are several 1946 articles in The Canberra Times that chronicled the 宵月Yoizuki Hell-ship Incident, an episode that involved the repatriation of Taiwanese families of about 350 individuals, then interned in Australia together with other POWs.

Apparently the Australian military wanted to cram more than 1,000 individuals onto the 2,700-ton Japanese destroyer Yoizuki when the Taiwanese objected. All Taiwanese by then had become nationals of the Republic of China; nonetheless, the ones in Australia were all treated as Japanese subjects to be kicked out of Australia. The internees and the POWs were promised that if they were to sail from Sydney to Rabaul on Yoizuki, they would be allowed to re-board a larger hospital ship before sailing off again.

In no position to refuse, 1,005 repatriates were forced to embark and suffered through the most deplorable living conditions during the 2,000-mile voyage. The Australian military officials obviously had intended to give the "Japs" the deadly hell-ship treatment as a payback - in fact, one soldier's mother wrote to the newspaper:
"Has "Ex-TX2162" forgotten the way mothers' sons were crowded in prison hell ships during the war, with no room to move or decent food to eat, that he cries out about a little overcrowding on the Yoizuki? My son lost his life through hunger and cruelty. I, for one. can't forget. (Signed) LONELY MOTHER".

To the credit of the Australian press which generated enough public outcry that prompted the civilian gov't to investigate; unfortunately, in the typical time-honored bureaucratic fashion, the blame was put squarely on the repatriating victims for the over-crowding and the unsanitary conditions on board the Yoizuki. The investigating mission even declared that all evacuees appeared happy and healthy with no sicknesses resulting from being on board the destroyer. Case closed.

The Taiwanese eventually arrived home; however, to this day, there has been practically no report on this Yoizuki Hell-ship incident. The evacuees were most likely too overjoyed to have finally come home to voice/file any complaints. Then again, no one in authority in Taiwan or the Central Gov't in Nanjing would have cared; after all, the "Japs" were the enemy and by association, the Taiwanese as well. Less than one year later, the 228 Incident took place which was quickly followed by the reign of the White Terror. And the Yoizuki Hell-ship Incident disappeared from the collective memory.

To preserve a little bit of the history, the Australian reports are quoted in toto and posted here:

The Canberra Times Friday 15 March 1946

The removal of women and children from the Yoizuki and the reduction of the total number of passengers could mean only one thing that the authorities had decided that the ship was overcrowded. This statement was made in a broadcast from Canberra last night by Mr. Alan, Fraser, Labour member for Eden Monaro.

Some lobby speculation attaches to the position of Mr. Fraser, Who, is claimed to have received the displeasure of some of his party colleagues for statements on the Yoizuki incident.

Some Labour members have personally supported Mr. Fraser's stand in the lobbies, claiming that any Labour member is entitled to express his own opinions so long as they are not a contradiction of Labour policy. In his broadcast last night, Mr. Fraser said he believed the original grounds of protest on the Yoizuki incident were justified, but the important point was how this has come about. It would not have come about had there not been public interest and great publicity.

In the debate, Mr. Chifley had quoted with approval General MacArthur's statement that the loading of the Yoizuki was not a matter of Government policy but of administrative action by officials. Mr. Chifley also stated that he knew nothing of the Yoizuki charges until three hours after she had sailed.

"It is astonishing to me," said Mr. Fraser, "that those who allege newspaper falsehood and inaccuracy in this matter, nevertheless have relied solely on newspaper reports to base their criticism of me. Not one has sufficiently doubted the accuracy of the newspapers as to ask me for a copy of what I said.

"While this has become a political issue now, it was not so last Thursday. I accept the reports then published as the honest work of men whom I know personally, men who are newspaper reporters not political correspondents, men who deal in facts not in opinions, and men whose political views are certainly not unfavourable to this Government.

"The war inevitably blunted belief in the value and dignity of individual human life. It is essential to re-sharpen that belief. No greater injury could be done to our democratic society at this stage than to let pass unregarded allegations of inhumanity.

"It is essential also to assert unmistakably the supremacy of civil government over military commands. My responsibility, as a member of the National Parliament, is not abolished because General Sturdee says he is satisfied. A great Labour leader, who has passed from us, impressed on me and other new members that an important part of our duty, as private members was to act as watchdogs for the people on executive action.

"Mr. A. G. Cameron shows failure to understand the duties of a member of Parliament when he says that I must either vote against the Government or repudiate my statement.

"I have a duty, which I will continue to emphasise as a private member, to criticise and, if necessary oppose, the executive action of the Government of which I am a policy supporter. But that is an entirely different thing from voting against such a Government to place in power Mr. Cameron and his colleagues whose policy would bring despair and misery not only to a few Formosans but to hundreds of thousands of Australian men, women and children."

The Canberra Times Thursday 21 March 1946

Loading Exceeded Directions by General MacArthur

The Japanese destroyer Yoizuki was overcrowded and in a filthy condition when it arrived at Rabaul from Sydney.

This was revealed in the Government investigating mission's report tabled in the House of Representatives yesterday by the Prime Minister (Mr. Chifley).

The report, made by Mr. Justice Simpson and Brigadier F. G. Galleghan, stated that the total on board was 1005, plus the crew.

The mission found that if additional family members of the internees and P.O.W.'s were to be embarked when the Yoizuki was at Sydney, an equivalent number of unattached males should have been taken off so that the number would not have exceeded 948 as laid down by General MacArthur.

There were no cases of sickness on the voyage from Sydney to Rabaul, except cases of sea-sickness. The mission received no complaints of any ill-treatment on the voyage, although they especially asked for complaints.

The report added, "Despite the orders from General MacArthur stipulating that 948 passengers embark, the actual number embarked was 1005. We are satisfied that this was brought about by a mistaken view of the military authorities governing the embarking, and was actuated by a humanitarian desire to keep families together and, in so doing, they had overloaded the ship by 57 persons."

It seems to us probable, too, that they were influenced by the fact that any other ship calling at Sydney would have had to include amongst a preponderant Japanese party some 57 Formosans and Koreans, with a grave possibility of trouble on board.

We consider that a mistake was made in this regard but we do not consider that it was a mistake that calls for any disciplinary action against the officers concerned.

The report added, "It is difficult to find words adequate to describe the filthy conditions existing on the Yoizuki. The lavatories did not appear to have been cleaned for some days and the galley was littered with scraps of food in varying stages of decomposition. The quarters of the family groups were clean and some effort had been made to obtain comfort.

"The surrendered personnel did not appear to have made any effort to maintain personal hygiene and the stench from their quarters was overpowering. These conditions were brought about, we feel confident, by the fact that the passengers refused to obey the orders of the ship's captain, and the officers and crew resigned themselves to the conditions.

In this regard, there was a marked distinction between the crew's quarters, which were clean and neat, and the passengers' accommodation, and the conditions were similar as regards space and lay-out."

The mission summed up its' findings as:

1.-The number 948 was agreed to by General MacArthur, such number to include women and children.

2.-The standard of accommodation was equivalent to the standard that the Japanese provided for their own personnel when transported by sea.

3.-The ship was overloaded to the extent of about 57 persons, such overloading was caused by a desire not to separate family groups or to leave in Australia a small number of Formosans.

4.-On this voyage the number should have been limited to 800 or the amount of baggage each person embarked with should have been restricted to hand baggage.

5.-A very considerable proportion, at least half, of the family groups would have chosen to go on with the ship rather than risk delay while awaiting another ship.

6.-There were no complaints of ill-treatment by the Japanese officers or crew and no necessity to put any armed guards on board for the protection for the Formosans and Koreans.

7.-The food was ample.

8.-Tile lavatory accommodation was satisfactory.

9.-The medical equipment and drugs were adequate.

10.-There were four doctors on board, including the Japanese doctor.

11.-Fresh water allowance was sufficient, but no more than sufficient.

12.-The filthy conditions of the ship were caused by the unwillingness of the passengers to collaborate with the crew in the cleaning of the vessel.

Members of the mission considered that a serious mistake had been made in allowing passengers to embark with very large quantities of luggage. They considered that as the ship had been designed to carry 948 passengers, each should have been accompanied only by the same amount of luggage as a soldier would carry. The amount of luggage permitted to be embarked was very great indeed, particularly that taken by family groups.

The report added that when family groups were disembarked at Rabaul, it took two landing barges to carry the luggage to the shore and nine three-ton trucks, packed to capacity, to carry the luggage from the shore to the camp site. In addition, each person carried by hand much personal luggage. It was because of the very large amount of luggage that had been permitted to be embarked that the mission came to the conclusion that not more than 800 should have been carried on this voyage. There was no place to stow surplus luggage on the vessel and the luggage, therefore, had to be stowed in passenger accommodation, resulting in reduced space being available for personnel.

The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Menzies) moved that the report be printed and the debate adjourned.

The Canberra Times Friday 15 March 1946

SYDNEY, Thursday.

The Red Cross representative at Rabaul states that none of the Yoizuki repatriates appeared to be the slightest bit affected by their voyage from Sydney.

None of the stretcher cases put aboard in Sydney was in a serious condition and the expectant mother had not yet given birth to a child

Although Justice Simpson's official report is not yet to hand, it is understood the investigators are satisfied that no deaths occurred on the voyage and that sickness had, in fact, decreased

A special plane bearing the committee of investigation, was forced back to Rabaul to-day because of engine trouble .

It is possible the aircraft will leave for Sydney either late tonight or early to morrow .

The Canberra Times Thursday 14 March 1946


Ship Sailed Brought Back To Pick Up Formosans

RABAUL, Wednesday.

A sensation developed today when it was ascertained that the Japanese hospital ship Hawata Maru [note: this should be Hikawa Maru - see also insert on top left], which had been dispatched to Rabaul to pick up the Formosan men, women and children repatriates who had been disembarked from the destroyer Yoizuki, had left without picking up the repatriates and could not be intercepted.

A naval patrol vessel was sent in pursuit and later brought the ship back

The repatriates were standing by motor transport which was to convey them to the hospital ship when it moved off at 1:20 pm.

The counter-orderlies to the captain of the hospital ship did not come from the army or navy.

The Yoizuki sailed last night for Japan after taking on 147 more male Formosans.

Before its departure, the Investigation Commission spent five hours aboard making a thorough investigation.

The repatriates taken from the destroyer were conveyed by army lorries to a compound and special food was provided by the Red Cross for the mothers and babies.

On the way to the camp the repatriates, saw Formosans and others working on roads, and waved and shouted greetings.

Apparently the only ones who were ill, were those who were hospital cases before they embarked on the ship in Sydney.

On the hospital ship there are five doctor's, three Japs and two Formosans.

A senior Red Cross representative at Rabaul (Mr A Scotford) said he was surprised at the general condition of the Formosans but he was not permitted to inspect the Yoizuki. The Formosans were in good health, happy and also in a clean state.

Guards were placed round the Formosans camp and special passes were necessary to enter it.

Mr Scotford said that one of the men who came off at Rabaul, told him the ship had travelled well and that passengers had a good voyage with only one patch of rough weather.

He added that the destroyer was scarcely built for comfort.

Mr Scotford was told there was no one seriously ill among the men, women and children taken off at Rabaul.

It is expected that Mr Justice Simpson and his colleagues will leave by special plane for Australia tomorrow.

It was stated today that the Hawatu [note: Hikawa] Maru may call at Truk in the Carolines, en route to Formosa.

Justice Simpson and his colleagues refused to make any comment. He said the report will be submitted to the Prime Minister on his return.

Pictures in London Paper

LONDON, Wednesday.

The Daily Mail used two and three-column pictures on its front page of passengers boarding the Jap destroyer in Sydney.

The pictures, which were received by air mail show, firstly a bewildered Formosan mother with a child in her arms and another on her back boarding the "hell-ship" secondly, two Australian military policeman forcing a Japanese prisoner aboard the ship; and, thirdly three Formosan girls weeping.

2011年11月10日 星期四

「波風」→「瀋陽」 The Prize of War

After the Japanese surrender in Aug 1945, what's left of the IJN warships were handed over to 4 victor-nations: USA, USSR, UK, and the Republic of China. A number of them were actually re-commissioned. Thanks to Mr Hirokawa, a complete list, from his Tansui blog, of those served in the ROC Navy is shown here - the first brackets contain the original IJN and the second, the new ROC navy name of the ships - with parts in blue added by Eyedoc:


「波風」→「瀋陽」 As the first example, the history of the transformation of 「波風」→「瀋陽」 is described below:

Destroyer 波風Namikaze [above: 1,234 tons] was built in 1922 at the Maizuru Naval Shipyard (舞鶴海軍工廠). Its duties involved principally the patrol of northern waters of Japan until Dec 1943 when Namikaze was reassigned to escort convoys to French Indochina but returned to the northern waters patrol duty in Mar 1944.

On Aug 21, 1944, Namikaze was torpedoed by USS Seal (SS-183) but survived. It was repaired and rebuilt into a carrier for 回天Kaiten (manned torpedoes - pocket submarines loaded with high explosives) and joined the Combined IJN Fleet. There was no report of the Kaitens' being deployed, however. It was decommissioned on Oct 5, 1945. And on Oct 3, 1947, the ship was turned over to the ROC as a prize of war. It was re-named 瀋陽Shenyang, originally based in Tsingtao, later moved to Taiwan to continue service until 1960, when it was finally scrapped.

「雪風」→「丹陽」 [雪風Yukikaze, below, built in 1940, nicknamed Lucky/Miracle ship because it had fought in 16 major battles in the Pacific War and yet suffered no damages. Detractors, however, pointed out that the ships that she escorted had all been sunk. Renamed 丹陽Danyang and served in the ROC Navy, it carried Generalissimo Chiang Kai-Sek from Shanghai to Taiwan in 1949. It later engaged in a sea battle with 2 PRC cruisers sinking one and damaging the other. It was decommissioned in 1965, dismantled in 1971 with the steering wheel and the rudder returned to Japan as museum pieces.]

「宵月」→「汾陽」 [宵月Yoizuki, below, was built in Jan 1945, too late to join in any battles. In Mar 1946, it arrived in Sydney, Australia to pick up 1,005 Japanese POWs. Among them were 350 Taiwanese internees who refused to crowd into such a tiny ship and demanded a larger one that befitted the new status of citizens of a victor-nation (i.e., the ROC). This was not accommodated and the Hell-ship sailed on to New Guinea where the Taiwanese re-boarded a larger hospital ship before returning home. The ship was handed over to the ROC in Aug 1947 and re-named 汾陽Fenyang. However, because of lack of manpower in restoring and operating the ship, it was sitting idle in Keelung Port and was eventually decommissioned in 1961. When it was scrapped in 1962-3 in Taiwan, veteran shipyard workers discovered pure copper (紫銅) tubing used in the high-pressure steam lines in the engine room and cursed openly in Japanese at wasting such a precious well-crafted young vessel.]

More destroyers:

Sea defense ships[海防艦]
「隠岐」→「長白」 「対馬」→「臨安」 「四阪」→「恵安」 「屋代」→「正安」
「14」→「済南」 「40」→「成安」 「67」→「営口」 「81」→「黄安」 「85」→「新安」
「104」→「泰安」 「107」→「潮安」 「118」→「長沙」 「192」→「同安」
「194」→「威海」 「198」→「吉安」 「205」→「長安」 「215」→「遼海」


Mine layers and special layers[敷設艇及敷特]

Mine sweepers and special sweepers[掃海艇及掃特]


Special duty ship[特務艦][Some in this class were, e.g., ice-breakers]
「白崎」→「武陵」 [A food transport ship]

Interestingly, the handover of IJN warships to the ROC seemed to have been handled by the US, perhaps under the guise of 美援the American aid, or it would have contradicted the post-war lenience policy that the ROC would not seek/demand any war reparation from Japan. This policy [known as the benevolent "以德報怨" policy of Chiang Kai-Sek] and the peaceful repatriation of Japanese citizens from mainland China and elsewhere had earned enormous gratitude that was to be a major factor later in the 1950-60s, in an era of intense diplomatic games played by the KMT, the CCP, and the Japanese. In 1978, Japan PM Fukuda Takeo even attended President Chiang Kai-Sek's funeral much to the displeasure of the CCP.

Other sources indicate that these ships [those within Japanese territories] were divided among the 4 nations in lotteries conducted at the Allied HQ in Tokyo (the first of four was drawn on June 28, 1947), and the officers representing the ROC were Naval Commanders 馬德建 and 姚嶼. In addition, Japan had left behind 2,169 warships of various builds in China. Of which only 192 were deemed usable and more than 1,100 were scrapped.

The ROC in fact did not demand any war compensation in silver taels as was asked of China in the Qing era by foreign powers including Japan. This might have been the core piece of the lenience policy; although the Gov't apparently did participate in dividing up the war spoils and took over abandoned Japanese war materials and public/private properties.

Whatever the reparation process was, the disarmament of Japan was complete by the end of 1947.