793.94/6257
Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Far Eastern Affairs (Hornbeck)
The Chinese Minister, after disposal of other matters, said that he had received from his Government information that suggestions were being made at Peiping for some sort of action on the part of the foreign powers toward bringing about a cessation of hostilities in the area north of Tientsin and Peiping. He wondered whether we had been informed of this and whether there was anything that the powers could and would be inclined to do.
I said that during several days past we had been receiving telegrams which indicated that both from Japanese and from Chinese sources efforts were being made to draw the representatives at Peiping of foreign powers into some sort of action in the capacity of potential mediators. I said that in connection with this information we had reports on the situation which, without definitely so stating, made it evident that any move toward an offer or an effort on the part of the powers to go into action in a “go-between” capacity would be a delicate and difficult undertaking—for the reason most of all that China’s leaders, both political and military, have not yet [Page 294] given evidence of having arrived at any position of unity or solidarity among themselves. I said that, in making that statement, I did not wish to imply or impute blame; that everybody who intelligently observes and studies Far Eastern affairs must realize that China is passing through a period of internal upheaval in the nature of what is frequently referred to as a “five-fold” revolution and that it stands to reason that there must be differences of opinion among her leaders and people and there must be internal political contests over a considerable period of time. These are simple facts which they as well as the rest of the world must take cognizance of and face. Nevertheless, it is particularly unfortunate, in view of China’s problems in the field of foreign relations, that such are the facts in her internal situation. It is highly desirable, toward the strengthening of China’s position in international relations, that China’s leaders “get together” and develop some way of expressing themselves unitedly on questions of foreign relations. It is exceedingly difficult for other countries to assist a nation which talks, in its foreign relations, through a multiplicity of mouths; and still more difficult to exert effective influence in connection with a controversy between that nation and some other country. I said that I believed that the Minister well realized that the world was viewing with regret and abhorrence the military activities which are going on in North China but that, under existing circumstances, the world can hardly be expected to take a firm stand with regard to the problem presented while the Chinese leaders and people show no sign of firmness in terms of singleness of purpose and centralization of authority and responsibility on their own part. The Minister indicated that he concurred in this sizing up of the situation.
The Minister then remarked that he was exceedingly glad that Minister T. V. Soong is coming away from China and coming to Washington, for the reason, especially, that this will make it possible for Soong to see China in a new perspective and to gain an understanding of the point of view from which the American Government and people observe the Far Eastern situation.
The Minister then went on to say that it was his estimate that the Japanese have a definite desire to push forward vigorously in the Tientsin-Peiping area and consummate the seizure of Tientsin and Peiping before the convening of the Monetary and Economic Conference—in order that their participation in the discussions at the Conference may be against the background of such a fait accompli.