711.93/350
The Chief of the Division of Far Eastern Affairs (Hornbeck) to the Ambassador in China (Johnson)
Dear Nelson: The Secretary and all of us in FE49 have been very much interested in your confidential telegram No. 108, March 9, 9 a.m., reporting a conversation on March 5 with Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek.
The Generalissimo’s statement indicating his hope that the United States would manifest its interest in the Pacific area and in China and would bring its attitude toward that area abreast of the attitude which Great Britain had recently assumed constitutes, it seems to us, further evidence of an inclination in high Chinese circles to intimate that the United States has lost interest in China and the Far East and that the United States is not paying as much attention to that area as is Great Britain. We agree with your statement that the situation in the Far East cannot be dealt with adequately by mere words. We feel that action and facts are the proper criteria with regard to the attitude and position of the United States in reference to China and the Far East. And it is our estimate that an examination of the record shows that the action and attitude of the United States in and with reference to China during recent years have moved along lines parallel with and abreast of the attitude and action of Great Britain in reference to China.
In the field of diplomatic action, the United States has not, as you realize, lagged behind Great Britain. During the last year or two the tactics which the American Government has employed have perhaps not resulted in as much publicity to diplomatic démarches on the part of the American Government as to similar démarches on the part of the British Government; but it seems to us that the efforts of the American Government have been as fruitful of beneficial results as have the efforts of the British Government.
[Page 45]Turning to other fields of activity, it is probably true that at the present time American financiers and businessmen do not have as keen an interest in China as a field for present investment and trade expansion as have British financiers and businessmen. But, we think a very good case can be made out demonstrating the continued interest of the United States in China from point of view of finances and trade. To be more specific: (1) the British Government sent Leith-Ross to China where he conducted investigations into China’s monetary and financial situation and made helpful suggestions. Did not the American Government somewhat parallel Leith-Ross’ helpfulness by purchasing in November, 1935, from the Chinese Government 50 million ounces of silver at the then prevailing world price? The resulting United States dollar credit was of material assistance to the Chinese Government in maintaining the stability of its new currency and in gaining the confidence of the Chinese public. Moreover, in May, 1936, the United States Treasury arranged to purchase from China further substantial amounts of silver and to make available dollar exchange for Chinese currency stabilization purposes. (2) Several months ago the British Government sent a representative of its Export Credits Guarantee Department to China to investigate there projects involving the extension of British credit for purchases by China of British commodities. But, has not the American Government maintained in China a commercial attaché’s office50 the personnel of which is and has been larger than that maintained by any other government? (3) Notwithstanding the special interest accorded Chinese trade and economic possibilities by Great Britain, the United States has continued to hold the leading position in the foreign trade of China—which it attained in 1932. (4) In the spring of 1935, an unofficial American economic mission visited the Far East. Since its return to this country the members of that mission have been active in stimulating interest in the United States in the possibilities of increasing the trade of the United States with China to the mutual advantage of both countries.
Moreover, the United States has maintained a steady interest in reconstructive efforts in China and has consistently endeavored to be helpful. In this connection it is pertinent to keep in mind the fact that whereas the British Government in providing for the remission to China of the balance of the British Boxer Indemnity Fund stipulated that the funds should be used in first instance and in large part as a revolving fund for the purchase of British materials for use in China, the American Government remitted the balance of China’s Boxer Indemnity for educational and scientific use. The funds remitted by the American Government serve toward training China’s future leaders. Does not such use contribute as much toward assisting China in its efforts at reconstruction as the purchase of commodities? [Page 46] The manner in which the funds remitted by the American Government are used would certainly seem to fit in with the aims of General and Madame Chiang Kai-shek toward building up a higher type of personnel and to be in line with their New Life Movement.
This is of course not a complete statement of the case, but is illustrative of the thoughts which occurred to us in reading your telegram under reference.
In this general connection we have re-read the statements made in the Department’s telegram to Peiping No. 215, July 17, 1932, 11 p.m.;51 the Department’s telegrams to Nanking No. 56, July 5, 1935, 6 p.m.;52 and No. 65, October 7, 1936, 7 p.m.;53 and in my letter of December 1, 1936, to Willys Peck (copy of which I think you have seen).53a We realize, as stated in my letter of December 1, that the problem which confronts American officialdom with regard to interpreting in contacts with Chinese officialdom the attitude and policy of this country is full of difficult angles. Just as Chiang Kai-shek and other Chinese leaders have foremost in their minds the interests of China, so we have foremost in our minds the interests of the United States. We are fortunately situated in that our interests and those of China usually run along parallel lines; at least they do not conflict.
We shall continue to give serious thought to the statements made to you by General Chiang Kai-shek as reported in your telegram.
With all best wishes [etc.]
- Division of Far Eastern Affairs.↩
- Julean Arnold, Commercial Attaché since 1914.↩
- Foreign Relations, 1932, vol. iv, p. 165.↩
- Ibid., 1935, vol. iii, p. 295.↩
- Ibid., 1936, vol. iv, p. 343.↩
- Not found in Department files.↩