500.A15A5 Construction/124: Telegram
The Chargé in the United Kingdom (Johnson) to the Secretary of State
[Received March 1—7:39 p.m.]
174. My 166, February 28, noon.6
- 1.
- At the meeting this evening there were present Sir Robert Vansittart7 and two Foreign Office officials, Lord Chatfield, Captain Phillips of the Admiralty, M. Cambon8 and French Naval Attaché, Captain Willson9 and Millard.10
- 2.
- The British officials said that the Japanese Ambassador on his own initiative had called at the Foreign Office and asked what assurances regarding naval construction the Japanese could give to eliminate [Page 894] the necessity for escalation which would be satisfactory. The Foreign Office had replied tentatively that any assurances must be acceptable to all three London treaty powers and communicated to them, and (a) must indicate that the Japanese Government have not constructed, are not constructing, and have no present intention during the period of the treaty of constructing any ships outside the treaty limits; (b) must be supplemented by figures of maximum tonnages in the categories and the maximum calibre of guns; (c) due warning must be given of departures from these assurances. Commenting on the above M. Cambon suggested that to the foregoing be added a request for an assurance that Japan would not build non-treaty vessels for other powers. The British for their part accepted this idea.
- 3.
- In commenting on the above proposals the point was made by the British representatives that in their opinion it would be possible and in fact probably desirable to escalate without delay and to proceed with any discussion concerning this possibility during the 3 months period provided by the treaty before the escalation becomes effective.
- 4.
- The Japanese Ambassador had asked whether in such an arrangement Japan would reciprocally be given similar information. The Foreign Office replied that they saw no objection.
- 5.
- The Japanese Ambassador asked if publications would be necessary. The Foreign Office replied that Parliament would have to be informed at least to the effect that the assurances given were satisfactory but that it would not be necessary to publish figures.
- 6.
- The Foreign Office said this interview was highly confidential and if it became public any chance of success would be lost. After the meeting the Foreign Office said privately to the American representatives that they at least “knew” that the Japanese Ambassador had reported his conversation to Tokyo. They were not hopeful that anything would come of it but asked (a) whether the United States thought the conversations should continue, and particularly asked for an early reply; (b) whether the United States Government had been approached in a similar sense.
- 7.
- The French Counselor said he fully approved continuance of conversations.
- 8.
- Lord Chatfield said as regards escalation and speaking informally the Admiralty regarded capital ships as the dominant question and only desired to consider escalation in that category for the present. These were merely his “first reflections”. He did not mention gun calibres.
- 9.
- M. Cambon read a statement, a translation of which is given in paragraph 11.
- 10.
- Lord Chatfield asked what was the United States Government’s views and he was informed that the Embassy had no instructions. He and Sir Robert Vansittart said they would be grateful if the Embassy could ascertain as soon as possible from the United States Government any views which it would wish to express regarding escalation; if the United States desires to escalate; in what categories of ships and to what figures; and whether the United States Government wishes to escalate alone or simultaneously with Great Britain and/or France. He offered to arrange another meeting as soon as the Embassy received instructions.
- 11.
- M. Cambon’s statement:
“Given on the one hand the grave consequences which would result to France by the overturning of the Treaty of London which would involve the putting into construction of capital ships of more than 35,000 tons and on the other hand that the French Government has not itself been able to ascertain with certainty that Japan has undertaken or is undertaking such construction, the renewal of the conversations between the signatories of the treaty has led the Counselor of the French Embassy to insist in the name of his Government to the British and American Governments that they be good enough to take note of the consequences which the first departure from the Treaty of 1936 would have upon the naval position of the powers which have decided to observe the provisions of that treaty.
It goes without saying that it is not our thought to suggest a slowing up of any of the armament measures which Great Britain and the United States of America believe necessary to take to assure their national defense.
But the French Government feels confident that they will make all their efforts in order that most of the provisions of the Treaty of London continues unchanged, in so far as concerns the armament of the powers signatory to the treaty or of those which have accepted its provisions.”
M. Cambon explained that the last powers referred to were Germany and Russia.