711.94/2073
Memorandum by the Secretary of State
The Ambassador of Japan called at my hotel apartment at his request. He first expressed his earnest appreciation of the manner [Page 412] in which I had dealt with the Japanese situation, especially in refraining from making controversial utterances on the occasion of my meetings with the press from day to day while Matsuoka and others were busily doing so. I made no particular comment on this statement.
The Ambassador then proceeded to say that he was also appreciative of the patience which I had displayed in respect to the difficulties he had encountered in his efforts to make progress in these preliminary talks, which difficulties could be traced to certain politicians and others in his country. He then made some references to politicians and Matsuoka with the inference that they were causing the delay and the complications, indicating that the whole matter, having been approved by the Army and the Navy and, if I understood him correctly, by other important Government officials, hinged only on the question of composing their political affairs.
If I understood the Ambassador correctly, and I think I did, he tactfully suggested as coming from his Government a non-aggression pact. I did not hesitate but promptly brushed it aside and said that that was an entirely different matter from the principles contained in the Ambassador’s document, and that this Government was not thinking of considering anything except broad principles, such as I had already pointed out, as a basis for any negotiations.
He then said he had something in the way of a manuscript either directly or indirectly from Matsuoka. Unless I misunderstood the Ambassador, he disavowed the so-called peace proposals that emanated from Government-inspired sources in Tokyo some days ago. He said that there were many things in the paper “that were wrong”, but that he would be glad to hand it to me, and then inquired if he might do so. I studied a moment and then said that since the paper, as he said, “had many things in it that were wrong”, I felt that, if the Ambassador had the discretionary authority to do so, he might well just retain this paper without delivering it, since, as he indicates, it would seem to negative most or much of his document, and hence no progress could be made along the lines of the Ambassador’s preliminary talks with me and certain of the principles set forth in the document to which he had referred. The Ambassador then proceeded to read some lines of greeting, all of which I could not clearly understand, and wound up on the first half of the first page with what seemed to be a statement of assurance that with just a little more time the whole matter would develop favorably in line with the Ambassador’s document and of his former expressions that his attitude and beliefs represented the attitude of his Government.
I stated that I desired first to pay very high tribute to the Ambassador himself for his conscientious and sincere purposes and his [Page 413] patriotic efforts thus far to bring about a real contribution to more friendly relations between our countries and the mutual benefits which would result therefrom. I said that the Ambassador knows I have been patient thus far and have striven to cooperate to the fullest practical extent with him in his efforts to clear up the political situation at home in order that a stage might be reached where negotiations could be instituted. I then very earnestly proceeded to say that I had striven to be absolutely candid in all of my conversations with the Ambassador, but that I would not be candid if I did not say to him that I could not give any assurances of further patience in the event of further delay for the reason that there were influences that cannot be held back; that this country, as I have heretofore indicated to the Ambassador, is determined that Hitler shall not get control of the high seas; that this means not one sea but the seven seas; that this country, therefore, does not propose to delay all necessary steps of resistance and defense until it is too late; that, as the Ambassador knows, things are moving fast in the direction of resistance, just as Hitler is endeavoring to move fast in his course of continued aggression.
I then said that Matsuoka and others in his country have been talking loudly and acting aggressively; such conduct and action were in the opposite direction of the entire spirit and policy of most of the document which the Ambassador had recently sent to his Government for approval and instructions authorizing him to make it a basis for the beginning of negotiations. I said that it is not comprehensible that Matsuoka, for example, could represent his Government in giving utterance to such opposing and threatening expressions while at the same time his Government was supporting the Ambassador here and the principles contained in his document; that the very idea of Matsuoka sending enthusiastic congratulations to Hitler upon the brutal military attack on the poor little country of Greece and its defenseless people presents an attitude and a philosophy that surpasses my comprehension.
I said that, in the light of all of these circumstances, the Ambassador must realize clearly the accuracy of my statement to the effect that I cannot be responsible a day longer as to the course of my Government in the face of the expanding aggression of Hitler and of our determination to see to it that he does not get control of any of the seven seas.
I then added that the Ambassador undoubtedly understood very clearly that, in this attitude, my Government was acting solely in its necessary self-defense and in defense of its rights and interests, and those of its nationals on the seven seas, just as I would expect Japan to do with respect to its rights and interests and those of its nationals on the seven seas.
[Page 414]I stated that I thought we knew Hitler and Hitlerism better than did Matsuoka and those for whom he speaks. We know that if and when he has his way, he will subject every nation to barbaric methods or methods of complete domination, including those, to all appearances, he once in solemn good faith took in as an equal partner, such as Italy; whereas German spies, German agents and German officials largely control the situation in Italy today, and in my judgment will continue to dominate Italy under typical Hitler methods, so long as Hitler retains military power and strength. I said he will administer the same treatment to Japan or to any other country without reference to past relations, if and as it comes within his power and suits his purposes. I reiterated that I thought we knew much more about Hitler than Matsuoka, and we have the experience of seeing fifteen victims of Hitler’s brutality and subjugation, including Italy to the extent indicated, in proof of our appraisal of Hitler and Hitlerism.
I said that it must be clear that my country wants absolutely nothing from any country abroad except the maintenance of those relations that are supported by all the basic principles of law, justice, equality, et cetera. We, in this connection, wish respect to be accorded to the territorial integrity and sovereignty of every country, large and small; that, in brief, we stand for the identical six or eight-point program of basic principles, which the United States and Japan maintained to the great advantage of each over a period of seventy-five years; that these are the identical principles we are maintaining as best we can in the difficult circumstances existing throughout the world, and, for illustration, I might point to the policies and principles maintained between us and the South American countries, under which Japan and all countries have equal access to markets and, generally speaking, equal access politically, economically, and in every way; that, of course, if Japan is at all disposed to turn back on this sound and wise course of peace and progress in lieu of a course in the opposite direction, there would be no difficulty in effecting suitable agreements to the former end. I pointed out the great benefits reaped by all countries and the world from such a policy. I added that it is clear, therefore, that wherever we offer resistance to an avowed movement of world aggression by force, such as Hitler’s or any other’s on the high seas or elsewhere, we are acting solely in our necessary self-defense against a world-wide movement of military aggression, and there is no other theory of our attitude that can possibly arise and that would not be false, if and as we proceed to resist whenever and wherever such resistance would be most effective.
The Ambassador without talking but a word here and there was constantly bowing and smiling and certainly endeavoring to make me think at least that he was himself approving my statements. In fact, from time to time he would give expression to his approval.
[Page 415]The Ambassador inquired about the possibility of an agreement on the policies contained in his document. I thereupon repeated my statements to him in previous conversations to the effect that from what I had heard about his document, a number of his proposals might be agreed to, while others would need to be broadened to the benefit, I thought, of both countries alike, and some new or substitute suggestions would naturally be offered by us. I then said that, of course, the matter of his sending the document to his Government for instructions was for his own judgment to determine, and that, in the meantime, this Government remained entirely free from any commitments. The Ambassador appeared to understand this, but I never know for certain how fully and accurately we understand each other in given instances.
I concluded by saying that, if all of these basic principles mentioned above were to be saved, it would require the prompt efforts of every nation still disposed to support them in lieu of Hitler and the Hitler methods of the most arbitrary domination of commercial and political relations just as far across the earth as Hitler can possibly extend domination, either military or economic, or other control by force or threats of force; and that, therefore, it was high time that his Government go forward, if it has such a purpose in mind, as I knew the Ambassador himself has; that I must repeat that from this time forward I do not know what steps of resistance may be taken in this country from one day to another.
The Ambassador expressed his full appreciation of the views and observations I set forth and added that he would urge his country at once to go forward with the proposals, as set forth in his document.