793.94/10400: Telegram
The Minister in Switzerland (Harrison) to the Secretary of State
[Received October 4—11:05 a.m.]
24. My 22, October 2, midnight.69 Last night Munters circulated the following: “First draft of the general conclusions to be adopted by the Subcommittee” reading as follows:
“Section 1. The present situation in China is a matter of concern not only to the two states in conflict, but, to a greater or less degree, to all states. Many powers are already directly affected in their material interests, and in the lives of their nationals. But even more important than this is the interest which all states must feel in the restoration and maintenance of peace. Members of the League have agreed that any war or threat of war is a matter of concern to the whole League; and those who are not members are not less aware that any situation in which armed hostilities are in progress or are threatened is a situation wherein rights and interests of all nations either are or may be seriously affected. The members of the League could not admit that the imposition by force of measures affecting the lives and possessions of Chinese nationals or of foreigners could in any way be recognized as creating the basis of future rights.
Section 2. It is clear that the two countries take very different views as to the underlying grounds of the dispute and as to the incident which led to the first outbreak of hostilities.
It cannot, however, be challenged that powerful Japanese armies are advancing into Chinese territory and are in military control of large areas, including Peiping itself; that the Japanese Government has proclaimed, and the Japanese Fleet is enforcing, a blockade of Chinese shipping on Chinese coasts; and that Japanese air craft are carrying out bombardments over widely separated regions of the country.
The action taken by Japan has been out of all proportion to the incident that occasioned the dispute. Further, it cannot possibly facilitate or promote the friendly cooperation between the two nations that Japanese statesmen have affirmed to be the aim of their policy.
After examination of the facts laid before it, the Committee is bound to take the view that Japan has invaded the territory of China, submitted her shipping to blockade, and carried on military operations against her by land, sea and air; that these actions can be justified neither on the basis of existent legal instruments nor on that of the right of self-defense, and that they are in contravention of Japan’s obligations under the Washington Treaty of February 22 [6], 1922, and of the Pact of Paris of April [August] 27, 1928.
Section 3. It is the right as well as the duty of the members of the League and of the powers possessing special interests in the Far East to attempt to bring about the reestablishment of peace in conformity with the principles of international law; and they will naturally seek, in the public statements made by both parties at various times since [Page 53] the incident of July 7, for such evidence as may be found of the possibility of taking action in this sense.
China has declared that she is prepared to accept any pacific means known to international law or treaties. Japan, although she has stated that she desires to settle the conflict by peaceful means, has in fact not shown herself willing up to the present to give practical effect to this aim, either by direct negotiations with China, or by the mediation of third parties, or of Advisory Committee of the League of Nations.
Nevertheless it would seem possible to suppose that if at any time even a temporary cessation of hostilities could be arranged, and if purely military considerations should thus cease for a moment to be the predominant factor, some hope might appear that means could be found of giving effect to the expressed desire of both China and Japan”.
Inasmuch as the wording of the first sentence of the third section seemed to me susceptible of misunderstanding and that it could possibly be interpreted as implying some association by us in the proposed conclusions or in any resolution which might ensue later, I called the matter privately to Munters’ attention before the meeting this morning. He promised me that when his draft comes up for consideration he would say that upon rereading his draft and considering the conditions on which I sat on the Committee he would propose in order to avoid any misunderstanding that the first paragraph of the third section be amended to read as follows:
“It is the right as well as the duty of the members of the League and in fact of all the powers possessing special interests in the Far East to attempt to bring about the reestablishment of peace in conformity with the principles of international law. The Committee will naturally seek, et cetera”.
Please instruct if you have any other suggestions.
The meeting this morning was entirely taken up with the consideration and revision of the first section of the exposé which deals with the developments of events. The Subcommittee will meet this afternoon and probably tonight also.
- Not printed.↩