793.94/14671
Memorandum by the Adviser on Political Relations (Hornbeck)
Reference, Tokyo’s No. 3591 of January 7, 1939, and current communications from Tokyo on the subject of possible economic pressures against Japan; and Mr. Ballantine’s digest of despatch and comments thereon.73
During the first forty years after Perry’s “opening” of Japan, the world looked upon the Japanese as a comparatively amiable, artistic and art loving, and peaceful people who needed to be taught and could be patronized. In 1895, the Japanese defeated the Chinese in a “little” war. In 1905, the Japanese fought the Russians to a standstill in Manchuria in a war in which the Japanese gained a great reputation for bravery and military skill but which was brought to an end, prematurely, without a conclusive test of the “staying power” of either belligerent. Since 1905, that is, for more than forty years past, Japan has enjoyed the reputation of being a great power and the Japanese Army and Navy have been considered tremendously formidable.
The estimates of Japan, both earlier and later, have been out of perspective.
Japan’s character is not what it was thought before 1895 to be. Japan’s strength is not what it has been thought since 1905 to be.
Over and over, since 1905, the world has, because of fear of Japan, acquiesced in aggressive predatory activities on Japan’s part. Steadily, the self-confidence of the Japanese, thus encouraged, has grown greater; and the determination of the Japanese to make of their country not a great power but the greatest of powers has become more deep-seated.
Step by step, Japan has moved forward; and step by step other powers have yielded ground to her. Thus far the only people who have offered forceful resistance to Japanese aggression are the Chinese.
There are three methods by which, toward defending their rights and interests, nations whose rights and interests are invaded or menaced by other nations may offer resistance: by moral opposition (including all kinds of argumentation), by economic opposition, and/or by military opposition.
[Page 507]The United States and other countries have over a period of a number (many) of years been attempting to defend their rights and interests, vis-à-vis Japan, in China, by processes of moral opposition (only). In the case of the United States, this procedure has perhaps to some extent retarded the destruction of our rights and interests by Japan, but it has not effectively safeguarded our rights and interests. Nor will it effectively do so.
This country might place in Japan’s way economic opposition, but it does not choose to do so. To every proposal that it should do this, there is made the answer that the Japanese are a determined, a militant and a powerful people—and that they might retaliate by an appeal to arms.
Moral opposition not sufficing and economic opposition being not even tried, the prospect is that in the long run, barring unpredictable opposition to Japan by other countries, the situation will so develop that military opposition by this country will have to be offered.
- Digest not printed.↩