Foreign Relations of the United States Diplomatic Papers, 1934, General, the British Commonwealth, Volume I

500.A15A5/59: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in France (Straus)

Washington, May 24, 1934—2 p.m.

201. For Norman Davis from the Secretary. Our acceptance of the British invitation for preliminary naval talks at this juncture was based primarily on a feeling that we were committed to such a procedure. Ever since you left, however, we have been receiving one indication after another of some form of rapprochement between Great Britain and Japan which taken in the aggregate become very significant.⁴⁶

1. Sir John Simon in the House of Commons minimized the importance of the recent statement of Japan’s policy toward foreign assistance to China.

2. Sir Roger Keyes⁴⁷ was reported on May 18 to have said that Japan is destined to play a great part in the future of the East and will go toward her destiny with unswerving determination. He is further reported to have advised the British Government to come to a good understanding with Japan.

3. The British Naval Attaché in Tokyo⁴⁸ has recently said to several friends at the club that England sees no reason to oppose Japanese naval parity or to thwart Japan’s naval ambitions.

4. I have good reason to believe that Sir Frederick Dreyer, in command of the British Asiatic Fleet, stated to the Chief of the Bureau of Asiatic Affairs in Java, subsequent to the recent British Naval Conference in Singapore, that England would not oppose Japanese naval parity and sees no reason why a “crisis” should occur in 1935–36.

5. Sir Robert Clive, the new British Ambassador to Japan, is reported to have said to the press before departing from London that in his opinion the interests of Great Britain and Japan in China are identical.

6. Several days ago the Japanese press was full of vituperative comment on England’s proposed system of trade quotas which was held to be aimed against Japanese interests. This unfavorable comment suddenly ceased and has now taken a distinctly friendly tone.

The foregoing evidences of Anglo-Japanese rapprochement leave us in considerable doubt as to whether British policy in respect to the forthcoming naval conversations in particular and to the Far Eastern problem in general have undergone a change in the past few weeks. The inference is at least possible that the British and Japanese are seeking an agreement on policy in China in return for England’s support of or acquiescence in Japanese claims to naval parity. I think it of real importance that you have a full and frank discussion with Sir John Simon in Geneva early next week preliminary to the forthcoming naval conversations. I feel it only fair that Simon should realize our inability to gauge the present British approach to this problem and that we in turn should have the benefit of an unequivocal clarification of his views.⁴⁹

Hull

46. The summary which follows was based primarily upon telegram No. 98, May 23, 1934, from the Ambassador in Japan; this telegram was repeated to the Ambassador in Great Britain as telegram No. 213, May 25, 1934; neither printed (793.94/6701).
47. Admiral of the Fleet, inactive list; Member of Parliament.
48. Captain John Guy Protheroe Vivian.
49. See telegram No. 389, May 26, from the Ambassador in France, p. 240; and telegrams Nos. 851 and 863, May 29 and June 2, from Mr. Davis, pp. 241 and 244.