793.94 Conference/347
Memorandum of Conversation, by the Chairman of the American Delegation (Davis)13
Ambassador Koo called at 10:30 by appointment, which Mr. Hornbeck had previously arranged, to see me at the Hotel Bristol.
Koo said he came to say goodbye and to leave with me two memoranda14 which he had told Mr. Hornbeck he would prepare. The first contained unofficial confidential suggestions as to possible basis for a settlement between Japan and China. The second was a list of requirements to enable China to continue to defend herself. Dr. Koo doubted if the militarists in Japan were yet prepared to agree to any kind of settlement which would be fair and reasonable, and said that his chief concern was to keep up the morale of China, which could best be done by securing the means with which to defend herself. He nevertheless thought that there was a possible chance that Japan would now accept mediation if proposed by the United States and Great Britain, and that those two powers might be able to exercize enough influence to bring hostilities to an end and induce Japan to agree to a settlement which China could afford to accept. He felt that the United States could save the situation if it would act quickly and energetically, and that otherwise the alternatives which faced [Page 232] China would be to continue guerrilla warfare in the hope that they could thus defeat Japan’s will to conquer China or accept mediation through Germany and Italy, which would not be to the best interests of China or to a constructive solution. I told Mr. Koo that we were most desirous of doing anything we could within practical limits to bring about a cessation of hostilities and a peaceful solution by agreement; that I would talk the matter over when I got home, and by that time we could probably tell better whether Japan will be amenable to mediation.
I then remarked to Mr. Koo that I had been informed that he had said that the French had proposed to me at Brussels the imposition of an oil embargo against Japan, and that I had declined to consider it. He replied that he had made this remark and that two or three of the French ministers had told him they had made such a proposal. I told him that I was sorry to have to deny the accuracy of such a statement, but that no such proposal had been made to me, although if it had been made I would have had to decline to consider it, primarily because the Conference had not been called for the purpose of imposing sanctions but for the purpose of seeking a peaceful settlement, and that we were not prepared to consider sanctions. I told him I thought it was unfortunate and unwise for any power to try to place upon the United States the blame for its failure to do so. I told him that there had been some academic and theoretical discussion or speculation among various delegations as to the ultimate possibility of economic sanctions; that the small powers had particularly been concerned at first for fear that some such proposals would be advanced, to which they were opposed because they had gotten their fingers so badly burnt in the Ethiopian affair, and that they were relieved to be told that such a contingency was not being considered by the larger powers, or at least by the United States. There had also at some time been a reference as to the advisability or practicability of an oil embargo, but that it was never seriously proposed or considered, insofar as I knew. I also told him that if he would stop and think, he could easily see why it would not have been considered seriously, because in the first place it is probable that Japan has enough oil reserved to run her for at least six months, and in the second place that meant really Great Britain, the Dutch East Indies, and the United States; and in the last analysis the Dutch would not agree to this unless the United States and Great Britain would agree to guarantee the Dutch East Indies, which would mean a definite war measure, which I was sure no one was prepared to consider unless the United States would agree to assume the main burden; and that I certainly had no authority and no desire to consider it. I told him it was a mistake for any power to impute blame to another, and that we must continue to work together [Page 233] to try to bring about a solution through peaceful means. I also pointed out to him that in the declarations which the powers had made at Brussels they had rendered a real service to China, particularly in reaffirming their adherence to the principles of the Nine Power Treaty, and insisting that this was a matter in which they have rights and interests which they are not prepared to surrender.