793.94/2577: Telegram
The Consul at Geneva (Gilbert) to the
Secretary of State
Geneva, November 9, 1931—1
p.m.
[Received 5:30 p.m.]
292. I had a long conversation with Drummond yesterday, Sunday, at noon
regarding the situation presented by the Japanese reply to Briand’s
letter of October 29 (Consulate’s 270, October 31, 9 a.m.). The text of
the Japanese reply dated November 7 is as follows:
- [“1.] I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of Your
Excellency’s note of October 29 in which you were so good as
to make certain observations on declaration of Japanese
Government of October 26 in connection with Manchurian
incident. Having referred to Tokyo your communication under
acknowledgement I am now charged to assure you that my
Government have submitted it to their most serious
consideration and that they highly appreciate your
sympathetic concern in the present situation in the interest
of international peace and good will and
understanding.
- [2.] I am further instructed to express entire concurrence
of my Government in Your Excellency’s remark that resolution
adopted by Council of the League of Nations on September 30
remains in full force. Japanese Government are determined to
carry it out in letter and in spirit and they reaffirm their
earnest desire to proceed to withdrawal of Japanese troops
to railway zone with minimum of delay.
- 3. But resolution of September 30 consecrates principle
that effective security must at the same time be assured for
lives and property
[Page 398]
of Japanese subjects and in state of tension which at
present unfortunately exists it is impossible to hope that
withdrawal of Japanese forces would immediately give place
to regime of settled peace and order under Chinese auspices.
Japan and China would simply be exposed to speedy recurrence
of untoward incidents. There can be no security for foreign
residents where hostile agitation against them is allowed to
proceed, where efficient protection to them in their
peaceful pursuits is denied [by] local authorities or where
their treaty rights are systematically ignored. Having
regard to actual conditions in Manchuria the Japanese
Government have regretfully been brought to conclusion that
dangers involved in precipitate recall of Japanese troops
could not be averted by measures of supervision such as are
recommended in opposed resolution of October 24th referred
to in Your Excellency’s note under review.
- 4. It is pointed out in your note that first four points
of five fundamental principles mentioned in Japanese
declaration of October 26th are virtually embodied in
proposition of October 24th.
- Your Excellency, however, will no doubt perceive that
terms of proposition are not sufficiently explicit or
comprehensive to cover all implications of four points in
question. As regards final point, viz., guarantee of respect
for Japanese treaty rights in Manchuria, terms of letter
addressed to you on October 24th by Chinese representative
seem to give rise to doubt whether it is in contemplation of
Chinese Government to call in question validity of some of
treaties constituting basic embodiment of relations between
Japan and China. It may be needless to state that Japanese
Government could not for a moment entertain such contention.
Nothing can be more destructive of established order of the
whole world than to permit any power to challenge binding
force of treaties concluded with all solemnity of
international usages. Japanese Government trusts that they
have made it clear that five fundamental principles
mentioned in Japanese declaration of October 26 are no more
than those that are commonly observed in intercourse of
ordered communities with one another. Unless and until
arrangement is reached between Japan and China on bases of
those principles no measure of security for lives and
property of Japanese subjects sufficient to enable
withdrawal of Japanese forces to railway zone can possibly
be assured. Japanese Government believe that course of
procedure now indicated is in entire agreement with
resolution of Council of September 30. It is far from their
thoughts to insist on final adjustment of whole series of
pending questions between Japan and China as condition
precedent to withdrawal of troops. All that they urge upon
China for the present is frank recognition by direct
negotiations between the two countries of fundamental
principles that should govern normal relations between any
two nations. Such accord will be a long step toward
replacing present tension by sense of stability between
peoples of two countries whose interest is to be on best of
terms.”
The following are the essential points of Drummond’s views respecting the
foregoing and the situation now presented.
- [Paraphrase.] (a) In spite of the Japanese
protestations, their position as set forth in the foregoing note is
not within the scope of the Council’s September 30
resolution.
- (b) Aside from the contentions repeatedly
made by the Japanese that their activities in Manchuria constitute
no acts of war, nevertheless they have violated the spirit and the
terms of the Kellogg Pact, especially article II; the League
Covenant, especially article 10, and above all the Nine-Power Treaty
of 1922.
- (c) Responding to Drummond’s inquiry as to
whether Briand contemplated replying to the Japanese note, Briand
said that, things being as they were now, he would not reply. He did
not see that anything could be done save to let the situation remain
as at present until November 16.
- (d) Drummond inquired of Briand if he would
ask the Japanese which treaties were referred to in their note.
Briand answered that he felt it would not be wise at present to do
so. While discussing this point with me, Drummond remarked he was
not at all certain that Briand was right not to address such an
inquiry at this time to the Japanese, but he had left the decision
to Briand.
- (e) I was asked by Drummond whether I
thought it might be useful, in view of the changes brought about in
the situation by this development in Japan’s position, for the
United States to make public its memorandum of November 5 to the
Japanese Foreign Office. Drummond said that Japanese public opinion
possibly did not realize the situation’s seriousness and that such
action might awaken it. I told Drummond that my Government
unquestionably was being kept well informed by its sources in Tokyo
concerning this and other phases of the situation and that my
Government of course was considering all aspects of the matter. I
said I would, however, transmit his observations to you. [End
paraphrase.]
