711.94/234416/25
Memorandum of a Conversation
The Japanese Ambassador called at his request at the Secretary’s apartment. The Ambassador said that he had received nothing further from his Government than that the Foreign Minister had made to Mr. Grew an explanatory statement in regard to the Japanese proposals, and that the Ambassador had received a report of that explanatory statement.
The Secretary said that we had received Mr. Grew’s report of his interview on September 13 with the Foreign Minister and of the explanatory statement which had been made to Mr. Grew. We had subsequently received a telegram from Mr. Grew stating that he had been informed that the Japanese Government was going to communicate to him the basic peace terms which the Japanese Government proposed offering to China. The Secretary added that we had hoped that the Ambassador might communicate those terms to us this evening.
The Ambassador said that he had not yet received any instructions on this point; that he had reported carefully to his Government our views but that he had received nothing beyond what had been communicated to Mr. Grew. He asked whether the explanatory statement made to Mr. Grew cleared up matters so as to place us in position to go ahead.
The Secretary said that the explanatory statement did not in our opinion advance us materially and that we still felt the proposals of September 6 narrowed down the original program.
[Page 630]The Ambassador asked whether it was not a fact that the principal difficulty was the question of the withdrawal of the Japanese troops from China.
The Secretary replied that it was an important difficulty, but that there was also the question of getting the proposal back to the broad basis covering the entire Pacific area along the lines that we had consistently talked about throughout the course of our informal discussions. He added it would be inconsistent with such a purpose if Japan should be proceeding along a peaceful course in one direction while pursuing an opposite course in another direction. This, he said, would not serve our ends or Japan’s.
The Ambassador asked whether we had yet proposed any new suggestions with reference to the question of the relations of the two countries to the European war. The Secretary replied that we had not yet expressed any views on the formula contained in the Japanese proposals on this point.
The Ambassador said that he had informed his Government of our views in regard to the question of the withdrawal of the Japanese troops from China, but that he was still without instructions.
The Secretary said that he hoped we would soon hear from the Japanese Government, but that he realized that the Japanese Government had more difficulties than we had to encounter in determining their position. He added that we were no less desirous than they were in moving as rapidly as possible, and that while awaiting further word from the Ambassador we were continuing to study the proposals.
The Ambassador said that his Government wanted to make it clear that while it did not have anything to say in the matter of this Government’s consulting third governments, its proposal to us was for a bilateral agreement. The Secretary said that, as he had on frequent occasions indicated to the Ambassador, we had no idea of bringing other countries in on our proposed agreement with Japan, but desired to work out independently with those powers programs which would be consistent with and supplement our arrangement with Japan.
The Secretary inquired whether the Ambassador anticipated any developments in Japan on the occasion of the anniversary (September 27) of the conclusion of the Tripartite Pact. The Ambassador gave no indication that he was apprehensive of any untoward developments. In reply to a further question of the Secretary he replied that he did not think that more than one-tenth of one per cent of the population of Japan desired to enter the war on Germany’s side. He said it was true that the Japanese Army was very influential and that many officers were German-trained and admired German military technique, but that this did not mean that the Army as a whole desired to go into the war on the side of Germany.
[Page 631]The Ambassador, after saying again that he had nothing new to present but had merely dropped in for a general chat, took his leave.