793.94112/317: Telegram
The Ambassador in Japan (Grew) to the Secretary of State
[Received February 7—10:03 a.m.]
90. In an interpellation in the Diet on February 5 Dr. Ichiro Kiyose, of the Kikyoku Doshikai, declared that Japan’s announcement of intention to reopen the Yangtze should be withdrawn at once; that the announcement had been made to conciliate the United States but that the latter had not responded; that, in view of early emergence of a new central government in China which would probably not permit Yangtze navigation by ships of countries not recognizing the new regime, Japan should avoid interference with that government’s prerogatives.
To this Foreign Minister Arita replied (close translation by Embassy):
“The Yangtze River had remained closed because of the strategic requirements of the Japanese Army. However, on November 18 a statement was issued by the army to the effect that, owing to the relaxation of the army’s strategic requirements, it was preparing for the opening of the Yangtze. Although it is true that former Foreign Minister Nomura referred to this matter in his conversation with the American Ambassador,43 yet I do not believe that it should be considered that this matter of the opening of the Yangtze was made a factor in the negotiations for treaty revision.”
At another point Dr. Kiyose declared that the Nine-Power Treaty44 should be denounced by Japan on the grounds that conditions had changed, even as the United States had abrogated the 1911 treaty45 on the grounds of changed conditions: that the Nine-Power Treaty was the Versailles Treaty46 of the Far East by which other nations sought to bind Japan.
[Page 496]In reply Mr. Arita said (Embassy’s translation):
“Mr. Kiyose mentions a note to the American Ambassador in which I am quoted as having said that it would be difficult to apply, without change, old principles and concepts to present and future situations. I did say that in my note, and my view is yet unchanged. However, in regard to the question of denouncing the Nine-Power Treaty, although various instances have been set forth by Mr. Kiyose I think the matter will require still further consideration.”
- See point 2 of Japanese aide-mémoire, quoted in telegram No. 687, December 18, 1939, 10 p.m., from the Ambassador in Japan, Foreign Relations, Japan, 1931–1941, vol. ii, pp. 48, 50.↩
- Signed at Washington, February 6, 1922, Foreign Relations, 1922, vol. i, p. 276.↩
- Signed at Washington, February 21, 1911, ibid., 1911, p. 315; see the Department’s note of July 26, 1939, ibid., 1939, vol. iii, p. 558.↩
- Signed June 28, 1919, Foreign Relations, The Paris Peace Conference, 1919, vol. xiii, p. 57.↩