751.94/60
The Ambassador in Japan (Grew) to the Secretary of State
[Received July 29.]
Sir: Japan’s relations with France, which have been unusually quiescent since the outbreak of the present Sino-Japanese hostilities, have recently come to the fore and French policies and actions in the Far East have been attacked in the local press with vehemence. In fact, the tone of bitterness and editorial vituperation suddenly directed against France, whose attitude of strict neutrality and impartiality had previously elicited approving comment, reveals a sensitiveness and a state of nerves on the part of the press somewhat out of proportion to the offenses alleged; this, in turn, may be an indication that the strain of the past year’s hostilities has been greater upon the Japanese than they themselves have suspected.
In general, the criticism is based on an allegation by the Japanese that France, whose precarious position in Europe is now so greatly dependent upon the closest possible association with Great Britain, has seen fit to follow British policy in the Far East and that France has now aligned itself with Great Britain in endeavoring to obstruct the unfolding of Japan’s plans in China.
Specific complaints are based upon allegations that France has agreed to extend loans to China and to send to China military officers who would take the place of the German military advisers who have been recalled by the German Government. The Japanese furthermore complain that there has been a marked increase in the shipment of arms and munitions to China through Indo-China, especially since France appears virtually to have ceased supplying the Spanish Government with war material which has now become available for sale to the Chiang Kai-shek régime. Mr. Sugimura, Japanese Ambassador at Paris, is reported to have protested to the French Foreign Minister against the use of the Yunnanfu Railway for this purpose and to have deprecated the alleged agreement concluded between the French and the Chinese governments for the construction of a new railway from Chennankwan, French Indo-China, to Nanning in Kwangsi Province, China.
In a conversation between the Counselor of the French Embassy and a member of the staff of this Embassy, Baron Fain remarked that the contract for the construction of this new railway had actually been signed prior to the outbreak of the present hostilities, that it was a purely private business enterprise in which the French Government felt it could not interfere, and that it would in any case be at least two years before the construction would be completed. Continuing [Page 219] the conversation the Counselor said that such arms as were at present being shipped over the railway to Yunnanfu represented the fulfillment of regular contracts for the sale of arms to China which had likewise been entered into before the outbreak of hostilities. He maintained that there was no smuggling of arms or munitions across the Indo-China frontier. (See our telegram No. 423, June 28, 8 p.m.)
Questioned concerning the reports that French military advisers would replace the departing German military advisers to Chiang Kai-shek, a further source of considerable concern to the Japanese, the Counselor said that he had no information on the matter but that, in his personal opinion, there was no truth in the report; that France’s policy of strict neutrality was being adhered to and that such action as alleged above would not be consistent with this policy. He said that there were, of course, a few free-lance individuals of French nationality who, like soldiers of fortune from other countries, were serving in various capacities in the Chinese air force and armies but that they had no significance. He thought that possibly the recent arrival of one or two of these individuals from Spain may have been made the basis for the rumor that France intended to supply military advisers to the Chinese Government.
Other irritants in the question of Japanese-French relations have been the increasing French concern in the possible occupation by the Japanese of the island of Hainan (see our telegram No. 423, June 28, 8 p.m.) and the landing by the French of ten Annamite policemen and the establishment of a lighthouse and a wireless station on the Paracel Islands, a scattered group of tiny islets and reefs some 120 miles to the southeast of Hainan. The sovereignty of the Paracels is under dispute between the French and the Chinese; the French, however, maintain that title to those islands lay with the former Kingdom of Annam by virtue of a treaty between that Kingdom and China and that when France took over Annam the title to the Paracels passed to the French. The Japanese claim no title but sustain the Chinese claim that the islands are Chinese. At all events, the recent action of the French in landing policemen on the Islands was made the subject of a formal protest by the Foreign Office here through the French Ambassador on July 4, and the Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs is reported, in an official communique later issued by the Foreign Office, to have said that he “called attention of the French Government to the possibility that the stationing of the Annamese policemen in the (Paracel) Islands was likely to give rise to some unexpected misunderstanding between them and the Japanese engaged in the work mentioned above (collection of sea-weed and rock phosphates), and expressed the hope that the said police force would be withdrawn”. The nature of the French reply to these representations is not known but the Embassy understands that the Japanese request will be rejected.
[Page 220]In the non-political field a further difficulty has interjected itself in the form of the imposition by the French of retaliatory measures banning further importation into France of certain Japanese commercial products hitherto admitted under quotas. In February of this year an arrangement was entered into between the two countries by which Japan undertook to import from France during 1938 goods to a value not less than the value of the import figures for the calendar year 1936. A survey of the figures for the first six months of this year shows that the Japanese have fallen considerably short of the necessary imports; consequently the foregoing measures have been taken by way of retaliation. French trade with Japan has for some years in the past shown a balance consistently adverse to France. The arrangement of last February was entered into for the purpose of restricting the amount of this adverse balance but with no thought of attempting to convert this into a favorable balance; the arrangement provided that if the Japanese imports should fall short of the specified amount the measures which have now been taken should be put into effect, pending further negotiations in an endeavor to remedy the situation. In 1936 Japan sold to France goods to the value of Yen 43,475,000 and bought goods to the amount of Yen 19,898,000. During the first four months of 1938, imports from France amounted to Yen 5,101,000 as compared with Yen 7,327,000 for the same period last year; exports to France amounted to Yen 11,221,000 as compared with Yen 15,150,000 for the same period last year. It is understood that the Japanese will seek to negotiate a new arrangement.
Respectfully yours,