894.6363/149: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Great Britain (Bingham)
431. Your 620, December 11, 6 p.m., and previous.
1. Department’s 428, December 10, 8 p.m., clearly outlined difficulties under which Department was working due to inadequate information regarding the views of British oil interests and Foreign Office and action by the latter, and indicated the action which would in the opinion of the Department, at this stage, best serve the common objective.
No matter what term might most accurately describe the action proposed in the Foreign Office’s instruction of December 5th to Clive, such action, if taken, would constitute a further official approach to the Japanese Government of equal if not greater import than approaches previously made. Therefore, bearing in mind that strong representations recently were made to the Japanese Government by the British and by the American Embassies in Tokyo in regard to the oil situation in Manchuria; that previous representations in regard to the oil situation in Japan, which were similar to those envisaged on December 5th by the British Government, have brought no satisfactory result; that officials of the Japanese Government have intimated that future governmental representations should include more concrete evidence, and presumably statistical data, in regard to the economic burden which the Petroleum Law would place upon foreign oil interests, which evidence the oil interests, if so inclined, could best supply; and that, in the hope of arriving at a satisfactory solution of their problems, special representatives of the principally interested oil companies are now in the Far East, the Department is, as previously outlined to you, of the opinion that action by the governments of the concerned oil interests might best, for the present, be confined to that suggested in the second paragraph of subdivision numbered 1 of the Department’s telegram 428 of December 10. Such [Page 790] procedure would give ample opportunity for oral emphasis to the Japanese Foreign Office of the seriousness with which the concerned governments view the situation under discussion and also for pointing out specific factors in the situation to which it is believed particular attention should be drawn. In the event that the special representatives of the oil interests should find it impossible, in the course of their direct conferences with appropriate officials of the Japanese Government, to arrive at a satisfactory solution of the problem, the British, American and Netherland Governments could then, if deemed advisable, and without having previously dissipated their efforts, make to the Japanese Government further representations, in character either informal or formal as the then situation might seem to warrant.
2. Department has just received from Grew a telegram dated December 13 which reads in part as follows:
“I therefore feel that it would be advisable for us to go over the ground again in an informal conversation as envisaged in … Department’s telegram No. 20181 (see second paragraph of subdivision numbered 1 of Department’s telegram to you No. 248 [428] of December 10)82 to be held preferably between the Counselor of the Embassy and the Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs or a bureau chief. For the purposes of clarity our points could be embodied, if the Department approves, on an informal sheet of paper which could be left with the Japanese official with the understanding that our representations were oral and not formal.
The British Embassy is recommending to its Foreign Office that the British representations be altered to the same basis as those suggested above.”
Grew’s telegram includes a summary of the points which should, in his estimation, be brought forward in the conversation as indicated above. No mention is made in such summary of the special representatives of the oil interests who are now in the Far East.
Although Department still feels that the better course to pursue would be one along the lines indicated in its telegram 428, it would, if the Foreign Office is not similarly minded, be prepared to instruct Tokyo to act in accordance with Grew’s suggestion, as briefly outlined above, provided his British colleague takes similar action.
3. Department desires that you consult Foreign Office representative promptly; that you read to him all of the foregoing except the first paragraph and all of the Department’s telegram 428 of December 10 except paragraphs 4 and 5; and that you state in addition that the Department is confident that there is no fundamental difference of opinion between the British and American Governments in regard to this matter; that the American oil interests have indicated to the [Page 791] Department their desire that whatever is done on the part of the companies and on the part of the governments be done by parallel courses and with common front; that the Department is of the same view; that had the Foreign Office indicated to us in advance of its instruction to Clive of December 5th just what it had in mind, the points involved could probably have been straightened out easily and promptly between us and it, thus avoiding the present confusion and delay; and that this confusion and delay strengthen our opinion that London rather than Tokyo should be the clearing point in regard to these matters.
4. You are authorized and instructed to ask Foreign Office to work out with you a tentative common understanding as to the course to be followed in their and our instructions respectively to Tokyo and to report by telegram exact terms to Department for confirmation or comment.