793.94 Commission/529: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Acting Chairman of the American Delegation to the General Disarmament Conference (Gibson)
36. [For Wilson.] Your 41, November 15, 11 p.m., last paragraph. I suggest that you review the Department’s telegrams to you as follows:
[Page 348]No. 2, September 23, noon; No. 24, October 17, 2 p.m.; No. 27, November 1, 4 p.m.;18 and No. 31, November 14, 1 p.m. Ask Davis to show you the Department’s 269, October 14, 6 p.m., to London. Review also the texts of the American Government’s notes of January 7; my letter to Senator Borah of February 23; the League Resolution of March 11; and my address to Council on Foreign Relations of August 8.
I feel that you should refrain from being drawn into discussion of questions which are internal to the League, that is, questions which involve the constitutional rights and obligations of members of the League under their Covenant; for example, the question of possible withdrawal from or expulsion of Japan from the League. I wish to avoid the fact or the appearance (a) of inciting the League to action in relation to and against one of its members and/or (b) of intruding in the field of the rights, obligations and responsibilities of the League. I wish to discourage any desire or tendency on the part of the League to involve us in its primary responsibilities in those connections. The attitude and position of the American Government with regard to the problem in general are well known and any suggestion to the contrary should be met with the statement that the American Government has repeatedly affirmed its desire to give support, acting through diplomatic channels and reserving independence of judgment, to decisions of and efforts by the League. That position you may constantly and emphatically reaffirm.
It should be understood that the attitude and efforts of the United States are animated not by hostility to Japan but by faith in and insistence upon principles and practices which have been agreed upon for the purpose of preserving peace and doing justice among the nations. The obligations of the United States in this connection are as great as but not greater than are those of other countries. In fact, the obligations of those countries which are parties to the Nine-Power Treaty, the Paris Pact and the Covenant of the League are greater than are those of the United States, a party to the first two but not to the third of these agreements. The Covenant of the League is a constitution of peace machinery and 57 nations are committed to its provisions. They should formulate their program, tentatively at least, and ask us for support. They should not expect us to attempt to tell them in advance what course we may think they should pursue.
When the League or the principal governments members thereof work out suggestions on which they see likelihood of agreement with regard to action and if the League or such government or governments then care to consult the American Government with regard to the line [Page 349] or lines of action that they look upon as practicable, I shall promptly and sympathetically consider their ideas and indicate this Government’s reaction thereto.
If you are asked whether our attitude or policy have changed, you should reply that a policy does not ordinarily change when attended by such success as has attended ours in its approval by the March 11th Resolution and the Report of the Lytton Commission; that on the contrary we regard our policy as entirely vindicated and we are looking forward with expectant interest to a corresponding attitude by the League within its separate and independent sphere. If they ask you as to what we deem to be the immediate steps of the future you might reply, entirely upon your own authority and without committing the Department, that in view of the accumulating evidence of the increasing economic pressure which has been brought upon Japan by her Manchurian adventure, as exemplified in the fall of the yen, the doubling of her budget, the transgression of her debt limit and the inconclusive result of her military operations, it should be only a matter of probably a short time when she will seek responsively to confer on the subject of the future of Manchuria; that a disposition on her part to listen to reason may be counted on provided only the alignment of the nations in Geneva on the side of the peace treaties remains unbroken and none of them sacrifice the general interest in these great peace treaties by yielding to the temptation of making separate, selfish bargains of their own; and that for such conference the Report of the Lytton Commission offers an invaluable foundation for the discussion.
I am of course giving careful consideration to specific points brought up in your recent telegrams, including your report of Drummond’s speculations; but I do not wish to comment upon the latter at this stage. I feel that the above, especially the review suggested in the opening paragraph, should suffice for your guidance up to such time as the League members, having begun their deliberations on the Lytton report, shall at least have shown what procedure and what measures they have seriously in contemplation.
- Telegram No. 27 not printed.↩