Office of the Historian

761.6211/181: Telegram

The Ambassador in China (Johnson) to the Secretary of State

Chungking, September 6, 1939—9 a.m.
[Received 1:47 p.m.]

519. My 515, August 30, 9 a.m. and Department’s 165, September 1, 7 p.m.

1.
I called upon Chiang Kai Shek September 5, 10 a.m. and read to him a paraphrase of the statement indicated by the Department. At his request I am leaving with him a copy to be regarded as a memorandum of an oral statement.
[2.]
Chiang observed that the Department had not dealt with his question regarding the attitude of the American Government toward the German-Soviet nonaggression pact to which I pointed out that for the time being the conclusion of that pact did not seem directly to affect the international situation of the United States but I said that affairs were being closely watched and that if developments promised to affect our position the American Government would deal with them in accordance with its established policy. I gave him a copy of the summary of press comments saying that I thought this answered his inquiry as to reaction in the press of the United States.
3.
He also indicated some disappointment that the Department’s reply had not commented on request that the American Government urge Great Britain and France not to come to any understanding with Japan concerning their interests in the Far East. I pointed out that the reply showed that the Department had not been approached by the two Governments in question in reference to this matter and that it knew of nothing to warrant his apprehensions. I pointed out as a further reason for him to lay aside anxiety that Great Britain already has terminated the Tokyo conversations on the Tientsin issue by insisting that other nations interested through the Nine Power Treaty must be consulted in reference to matters of common concern. Chiang admitted all this but he again earnestly requested that the United States bring influence to bear on the British and French Governments to conform strictly to the principles of that treaty. The point that caused him most concern for the time being was fear that they might [Page 234] be persuaded by Japan to close routes of communication through Burma and Indo-China; he argued that by closing these routes and thus making impossible the continuance of China’s struggle for independence they would be violating the treaty in a flagrant manner.
4.
Chiang evidenced disappointment that the Department’s reply had not been more specific in its indication of the line which future policy of the United States would take in the face of the changed situation in the world and he used a Chinese idiom to designate policy which carries the implication of a charted course of action, saying that it was most important that he should have this knowledge in order to associate China’s future course with ours. I observed that it was obviously impossible for the American Government to determine in advance upon any given line of action since the world situation was constantly changing, but I pointed out that he had just received unequivocal assurance that the American Government would not deviate from its announced principles of action, which is mutual respect between nations of their international obligations and of political and territorial integrity and he then seemed somewhat reassured. He inquired whether the message I had conveyed to him was from the President or the Secretary of State and I replied that while it was from the latter he could be sure not only that it was in accord with the President’s views but that he was acquainted with its contents. Chiang asked that I convey to the Secretary his deep appreciation of the nature of the reply just received.
5.
In conversations with the Minister for Foreign Affairs on the 4th and 5th the Minister informed me that the Chinese Government learned of a Japanese intention to disarm British and French armed forces in Concessions and Settlements on the ground that they were in occupied areas which must be neutral and to assume control of such areas (in this connection see Shanghai’s 796, September 4, 5 p.m.).

Repeated to Peiping, Peiping please repeat to Tokyo.

Johnson