611b.003/106
Statement by the Secretary of State, October 30, 1934 5
The recently revealed Japanese naval demands6 render uncertain and chaotic the entire economic policy, the Open Door policy, and even political policies as to much of China and Inner Mongolia, all of which will probably be involved in the present London or similar conferences for some months to come. The Japanese seriously threaten to abrogate the Washington and probably the London Treaties7 unless they are allowed a navy big enough to enable them to dominate the Orient economically, politically, and militarily. This is the proposed Japanese substitute for all the present or the existing Far Eastern policy, economic, political and naval, as clearly defined particularly in the Washington and the Nine Power Treaty.8 There should be long drawn out conversations between other countries including ours [Page 818] and Japan, touching peace and the economic rights of ours and other nations in the Orient, where nearly 60% of the world population resides. In these circumstances I now incline to the view that we should agree to no Philippine trade restrictions against which Japan could or probably might earnestly complain until the entire combinations of problems are settled. After all, it might be found desirable to allow a moderate increase of tariff as to certain textiles as a temporary or emergency measure, and this regardless of the plea of our exporters that the increase would be too small. I would suggest no permanent tariff or like action now but if any action at all, only a moderate increase of tariffs as suggested or an agreed quota, whichever would best avoid any controversy with the Japanese.
- As telephoned to the Assistant Secretary of State (Sayre) by the Executive Assistant to the Secretary of State (Cumming) on October 30, from Pinehurst, N. C.↩
- See vol. i, pp. 299 ff.↩
- Treaty signed at Washington, February 6, 1922, Foreign Relations, 1922, vol. i, p. 247, and treaty signed at London, April 22, 1930, ibid., 1930, vol. i, p. 107.↩
- Signed February 6, 1922, ibid., 1922, vol. i, pp. 247 and 276.↩