793.94/2465: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Japan (Forbes)
219. Embassy’s 204, November 4, 5 p.m. and last paragraph of our 218, November 4.54
1. With reference to the points made by you, and for the information and further guidance of the Embassy, you will remember that while reserving my right of complete independence of action I have undertaken to reinforce as far as may be practicable the action taken by the League.
The probability that Japan will be unable to withdraw its forces from Manchuria by the date specified in the October 24 resolution of the Council is a fact concerning which I have no misapprehension. The terms of the resolution you will note have not received unqualified endorsement on my part; and as for a date, I have deliberately refrained from mentioning one. It is my opinion, however, that a sincere effort to offer a constructive contribution was made by the League, and I cannot forget the fact that the representatives of China and Japan in the resolution of September 30, which was adopted unanimously, made definite commitments for their respective Governments. There should not be as a requisite precedent to the withdrawal of Japanese armed forces the settlement of long outstanding issues; and the Japanese Government should not avail itself of the presence of those armed forces as an instrumentality for bringing pressure to bear upon China in the negotiations. We regard this as fundamental, and it is the point on which we associate ourselves with the action of the League.
As for public opinion in Japan, I realize the force of what you report. At the same time, however, I am of the impression that, while this public opinion is not entirely within the determination of the Japanese Government, in no small measure it is susceptible of being influenced and guided by the Government of Japan. It is my belief that there is not any government which is attempting to injure Japan. The various governments are trying to give due consideration and weight to a wide range of factors, very considerable in number, with regard to the situation which is of concern to the whole world.
Evidence exists that Japan has from the beginning attempted to prevent cooperative or concerted action by the United States Government [Page 37] and the Governments which are League members. Japan has also attempted to create the impression that there is a difference in objective between the United States and the members of the League. My objective and that of the Council are identical. It is to prevent war and to seek to bring about a solution by peaceful means. We stand for the same principles. It is imperative that this should be understood. So far I have refrained from passing judgment, and throughout it is my desire to maintain an attitude of impartiality. Between Japan and China I have no desire to take sides. However, when, with regard to fundamental considerations in connection with which the interests and obligations of the United States are similarly involved, 12 other nations have indicated that they disagree with Japan, I do not intend to remain inactive and aloof, leaving to the others the whole burden of action. The implication of silence on the part of the United States would be that we were taking sides with Japan contra the views expressed by the others.
2. Strictly confidential, for your information. Through the French Ambassador here, I am bringing to the attention of M. Briand, President of the Council—simultaneously transmitting to him my views as expressed in the memorandum to the Japanese Government,55 and in connection with the suggestion made in that memorandum that there are several agencies and methods for relieving tension and achieving a peaceful settlement which might be invoked—a suggestion that the impasse might be resolved by resorting to the method of direct negotiations on the part of the two Governments in the presence of neutral observers, as was done in connection with the Shantung question. This is in line with a thought which I understand already to have been in the minds of both the Chinese and Japanese Governments and of M. Briand. It is my hope that the Japanese Government sooner or later will make a definite proposal of this sort.
3. To summarize, while the view of this Government has been associated by me with that of the League in relation to a point which in my opinion is fundamental and against which Japan cannot hold out without forfeiting the good opinion of the whole world, my views have been expressed moderately and in terms which have been conciliatory. At the same time in order to avoid a deadlock I have suggested to the President of the Council a method which is possible and seems to me to be practicable.