747.94/20
The Consul General at Sydney (Moffat) to the Secretary of State
[Received March 10.]
Sir: There can be no doubt but that recent Japanese moves in the Orient, coupled with the attitude of her delegation at London, have seriously disturbed the Australian Government and to a lesser degree the Australian public. Last October when I visited Canberra the general attitude was that Japan would probably be occupied for many years to come digesting her acquisitions in Manchukuo and that for the time being her energies must be concentrated exclusively in that direction. Of late, however, Australia has made a radical revision in her estimates of future Japanese policy based on reports received from Tokyo, presumably from Sir Robert Clive, supported by those from her own Trade Commissioner, Major Longfield Lloyd.
Both Sir George Pearce, the Minister of External Affairs, and Colonel Hodgson, the Secretary of the Department of External Affairs, told me in Canberra last week that the news from Tokyo was distinctly disquieting: that there was a new and increasing access of megalomania in Japan, coupled with a growing conviction that the greatest single obstacle to the fulfilment of Japanese ambition to become Master of the Western Pacific was the British Empire. Some [Page 51] form of anti-British move in the Orient was accordingly looked for as soon as Japan was less preoccupied with a possible threat from the Soviet.
Sir George Pearce told me that he had never forgotten a conversation he had had during the Washington Conference of 1921–1922 with Prince Tokugawa. The latter had said to him: “There is absolute unanimity in Japan on the proposition that we must expand; but there are two schools of thought as to where we should expand: the first is the Continental school, the second is called the Blue-water school. For the moment, the Continental school has the upper hand, and probably will for years to come, but if ever it should be blocked or thwarted, then it will be a matter of real concern for Australia.” Sir George added that he wondered whether each of the two schools of thought referred to was not simultaneously feeling that it was in the ascendant.
So long as we are in the Philippines Australia feels fairly safe, believing that it would be suicidal for Japan to move further south leaving the Philippines on her flank. But if and when we withdraw, whether Japan absorbs the Islands or whether they remain under weak native rule, this feeling of security will vanish. There is accordingly an increasing bitterness at our policy of withdrawal from the Philippines as step succeeds step in its realization. Colonel Hodgson told me that according to the information reaching Canberra as to future developments in the Philippines, American army circles were saying quite openly: “At least the United States will never give up a naval and military base in the Islands”, while, on the other hand, civilian opinion was reported to be emphasizing the reluctance of the United States to retain any responsibility whatsoever in the Philippines without full authority.
Meanwhile Japan and Australia continue to be “good friends” and Tokyo goes on buying wool from Australia and pressing for a trade treaty. Australia has by now pretty definitely shown Japan what she will and what she won’t give in the way of concessions. The Prime Minister told me that the powerful grazier interests were no longer pressing the Government to “buy” favors from Japan, while Colonel Hodgson said with considerable emphasis of manner: “You can rest assured that Japan is going to be very disappointed at what she actually gets from us.”
There is some feeling that the invitation to Mr. Hughes,76 the veteran war-time Prime Minister, to re-enter the Cabinet from which he had been dismissed three months ago, was in part due to his knowledge of the Japanese problem. I was even told by a journalistic friend, although of course I cannot confirm this, that Mr. Hughes’ [Page 52] return was informally suggested to Mr. Lyons “by Downing street. In any event, the Australian Government while not yet the victim of a “scare” is definitely worried at the turn events are taking.
Respectfully yours,
- William Morris Hughes.↩