693.001/428
Memorandum by the Ambassador in Japan (Grew)
In a long conversation this afternoon with the Minister for Foreign Affairs I began by stating that I was fully familiar with his informal remarks to Mr. Dooman on Saturday, November 19, and that we could therefore start from that premise. I then said that as the Minister at that time had set forth certain elements of the Japanese point of view regarding China I would now like to bring out various elements of the American point of view, at the same time making it clear that I was not now attempting to answer the Japanese note of November 18 which my Government would need time to study carefully and in detail and on which I expected to receive my Government’s comments in due course thereafter.
I then talked for the better part of an hour without interruption by the Minister concerning the principles of policy and the broad objectives of the United States in the Far East, bringing out orally the substance of the final paragraph of the Department’s 389, November 17, 1 p.m. and the entire substance of the Department’s 393, November 20, 1 p.m.29 as well as various points embodied in former instructions.
In the course of this presentation I said I felt sure that the Minister would agree with me that the historical record shows clearly that the United States has never attempted to “exploit” China or to acquire any sphere of influence whatever in that country. Our desire always has been and is today to avoid spheres of influence and exploitation. Our interpretation of the Open Door is totally contrary to those principles. With these remarks the Minister expressed agreement.
I then turned from questions of principle to matters of fact, pointing out that the Minister had asked for patience but that for our part the patience of the American people is not inexhaustible and that my Government must listen to public opinion in the United States. I said that there could be no doubt that owing to Japan’s policies and actions in China there was good reason why the Minister and I should be disturbed with regard to the developing situation in Japanese-American relations and that I for my part was more disturbed than I had been [Page 807] for a long time. I felt that it was of the utmost importance in stemming this tide that the Japanese Government should forthwith take some of the more obvious steps to show the American Government and people that there is no truth in the repeated allegations reaching us from various Japanese sources that all foreign interests are to be gradually turned out of China.
I said that one obvious step of prime importance would be the immediate cessation of the bombings of and other interference with American mission and other American property in areas far removed from military or naval operations; that such unwarrantable acts are taking place constantly, the reports of which are daily pouring into our Embassy; and that the plea that these outrages are accidental is obviously untenable in view of the volume and constancy of these depredations which recently have involved not only the loss of American property but the loss of American life and the desecration of our flag.
I also brought out an oral rejoinder to the Japanese note of November 14 concerning navigation on the Yangtze River as envisaged in our 742, November 19, 1 p.m., paragraph numbered one.30
I furthermore again asked for an interpretation of Prince Konoye’s observation in his broadcast of November 331 that Japan will cooperate with foreign nations so long as they understand the true intention of Japan and adopt policies suitable for the new conditions. I said I would be glad to learn how this proposed cooperation is expected to work out in actual practice. For instance, Americans have continually been told in recent months by Japanese nationals in China that American trade with China will be tolerated only if American interests deal through Japanese middlemen. Does the Minister envisage such “cooperation” in that light? This practice is progressively being put into effect in China today.
The Minister, at the termination of my oral presentation, expressed his appreciation of my frankness. He agreed with me that complete frankness between us was most desirable even if unpalatable truths had to be expressed. With regard to the allegation that Americans would in future be expected to deal only through Japanese middlemen he authorized me to give the Secretary a categorical denial. He said that Japan desired and intended to assure for herself certain raw materials for the reasons stated to Mr. Dooman but that there would be a very large and probably increasing field for American trade and other enterprise which would be welcomed. He then went to his desk and brought and translated as a practical illustration a document indicating in round figures that the exports from Manchuria to the United States had risen from nine million yen in 1931 to fifteen million in the first nine months of 1937 and exports from [Page 808] the United States to Manchuria had risen from nineteen million yen in 1931 to forty-two million in the first nine months of 1937.
I once again appealed for immediate measures to meet our desiderata, again emphasizing their great importance in meeting American public opinion, and the formal part of our conversation there terminated.
I left with the Minister an informal record of my representations marked “oral”32 and said that this was in no respect a diplomatic document but merely to help him in accurately recording what I had said.
The Minister expressed appreciation of this procedure and said that he himself would follow it in his future talks with me. We agreed that it would be mutually helpful to meet often.