I referred to the position taken in your note to Japan 58 but explained that I did not vote. HARRISON 793.94/10284: Telegram The Secretary of State to the Minister in Switzerland (Harrison) WASHINGTON, September 27, 1937-9 p. m. 5. Your No. 9, September 27, 3 p. m., just received. I note in the second paragraph thereof question presumably put by you to Cranborne "Would this not be first step along road to Article 17 which Eden had wished to avoid." The considerations contained in my No. 2, September 24, 6 p. m. were in the nature of suggestions which I believe might contribute to helpful action. They were not intended as any indication of what I considered should be a limitation of the scope of League action. The American Government has no desire to suggest in any way the limits to the action which League states may feel they are obligated under the Covenant to undertake. I know that you will feel as I do that it would be unfortunate if any impression should get abroad, even if it arises from misinterpretation of an informal conversation, that this Government was endeavoring in any way to restrain the action which League states might otherwise feel bound to take. I do not assume that Cranborne might have gained a contrary impression from what you said, but if you feel that there is any possibility that he might have, I would wish that you make sure that he understands my position as outlined to you in the second paragraph above.59 HULL 793.94/10291: Telegram The Minister in Switzerland (Harrison) to the Secretary of State GENEVA, September 28, 1937-8 a. m. [Received September 28-6 a. m.] 11. My telegram No. 9, September 27, 3 p. m. At the meeting of the Advisory Committee last evening the Chairman announced that Germany and Japan had refused the invitation to participate and Australia and China had accepted. Two further Chinese notes on bombing were communicated. 58 Dated September 22, Foreign Relations, Japan, 1931-1941, vol. I, p. 504. 59 The Minister in Switzerland replied in his unnumbered telegram of September 28, 11 a. m.: "Am confident Cranborne gained no such impression. Fully appreciate your position." (793.94/10289) Koo in public meeting urged denunciation of aggression, aerial bombardment, violation of international law and treaty obligations. He referred to American and British statements against bombing noncombatants, denied that the Chinese had used gas and asked the Committee to study measures which could be recommended under the League. An immediate expression on bombing was therefore strongly proposed by Cranborne, fully seconded by Delbos and supported by Sandler, Sweden,60 and Litvinov. The resolution as adopted was as follows: "The Advisory [Committee], Taking into urgent consideration the question of the aerial bombardment by Japanese aircraft of open towns in China, expresses its profound distress at the loss of life caused to innocent civilians, including great numbers of women and children, as a result of such bombardments, and declares that no excuse can be made for such acts which have aroused horror and indignation throughout the world, and solemnly condemns them." The Chairman will forward the resolution to the President of the Assembly with a view to its adoption also by that body. HARRISON 793.94/10779 Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Far Eastern Affairs (Hamilton) of a Conversation With the Second Secretary of the Chinese Embassy (Tsui) [WASHINGTON,] September 28, 1937. Mr. Tsui called at his own request. 1. Mr. Tsui said that the Chinese Ambassador wished him to inquire with regard to our attitude toward the resolution adopted yesterday by the Advisory Committee of the League in regard to the bombing by Japanese airplanes of open towns in China. Mr. Tsui said that the Embassy's latest information was to the effect that the Assembly of the League had also adopted this resolution. In reply, I handed Mr. Tsui a copy of the statement which the Secretary made public today.62 2. Mr. Tsui said that the Chinese Embassy had received instructions to inquire with regard to our attitude toward the question of imposing an embargo upon exports of oil to Japan. Mr. Tsui said that the Chinese delegation at Geneva had suggested to the British dele 60 R. J. Sandler, Swedish Minister for Foreign Affairs. 61 Maxim Litvinov, Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs. 62 Foreign Relations, Japan, 1931-1941, vol. I, p. 506; also see infra. gation there that the Advisory Committee give consideration to this question and that the British delegation had replied that the Advisory Committee might consider the matter. Mr. Tsui said that the British delegation had also raised the question as to whether or not the United States would cooperate in any such movement. Mr. Tsui said that the Chinese Ambassador would like to have my comments on this matter. I said that I could make two comments: (1) that if the British were interested in ascertaining our attitude, I wondered why they did not approach us in the matter; and (2) that in general our attitude toward any such hypothetical question was covered in the concluding paragraph of the note which the American Minister to Switzerland addressed to the Secretary General of the League under date September 20, reading as follows: "In order that there may be no misunderstanding with regard to the American Government's position and no confusion or delay flowing from uncertainty, the American Government feels constrained to observe that it cannot take upon itself those responsibilities which devolve from the fact of their membership upon members of the League. It assumes that members of the League will arrive at their common decisions with regard to policy and possible courses of action by and through normal League procedure. The American Government, believing thoroughly in the principle of collaboration among states of the world seeking to bring about peaceful solutions of international conflicts, will be prepared to give careful consideration to definite proposals which the League may address to it but will not, however, be prepared to state its position in regard to policies or plans submitted to it in terms of hypothetical inquiry." There then followed some discussion of technical and legal questions in regard to the placing of an embargo by the American Government on exports of oil. I told Mr. Tsui that I could not undertake to express an opinion with regard to the technical and legal phases of the matter. 3. Mr. Tsui said that there prevailed the impression that the American Government did not favor the convening of a special Far Eastern conference to consider the Sino-Japanese question and that due to this attitude of the American Government the Advisory Committee of the League had discarded that idea which it had first been considering and was now considering the setting up of a subcommittee of the Advisory Committee. Mr. Tsui said that the view attributed to the American Government was to the effect that the Sino-Japanese situation was a much larger question than just a regional one and that it was a world question which should receive consideration on the broadest possible basis. I asked Mr. Tsui where such an impression prevailed. He first said that he had noticed comments to that effect in the press. I then said that some days ago I had noticed items in the press to the effect that the American Government was seriously considering the question of taking some action under the Nine Power Treaty and that a few days later I had noticed other items to the effect that the American Government looked with coolness upon the idea of action being taken under the Nine Power Treaty. I told Mr. Tsui that I did not know the source of these newspaper reports and that we did not undertake to comment in regard to all the reports which were carried in the press. Mr. Tsui then said that the Chinese Embassy here had received information from the Chinese delegation at Geneva to the effect that the Advisory Committee had first given some thought to bringing about a conference of the powers interested in the Far East, which conference would be outside the League of Nations, but that later the Advisory Committee had discarded that idea and had substituted for it the idea of setting up a subcommittee of the Advisory Committee. I said that our information from Geneva was substantially to the same effect. I asked Mr. Tsui whether the Advisory Committee had yet decided to set up a subcommittee. He said that so far as he knew no final action had yet been taken. I then asked Mr. Tsui whether the Chinese Government itself favored the idea of a Far Eastern conference as contrasted with the idea of the setting up by the Advisory Committee of a subcommittee. Mr. Tsui indicated that the Chinese Government was favorably disposed toward the idea of a subcommittee because the setting up of a Far Eastern conference might mean the taking of the Sino-Japanese situation out of the hands of the League of Nations. Although Mr. Tsui did not specifically so state, I gathered the definite impression that the Chinese Embassy here had received a report from the Chinese delegation at Geneva to the effect that the American Government did not favor the idea of the Sino-Japanese situation being transferred at this juncture to a conference of powers with interests in the Far East. M[AXWELL] M. H[AMILTON] 793.94/10300a: Telegram The Secretary of State to the Minister in Switzerland (Harrison) WASHINGTON, September 28, 1937-2 p. m. 6. Please immediately communicate to the Secretary General of the League of Nations and suggest to him that he may care to inform the Assembly at its meeting today of the text of a statement which I am making public today reading as follows: "The Department of State has been informed by the American Minister to Switzerland of the text of the resolution unanimously adopted on September 27 by the Advisory Committee of the League of Nations on the subject of aerial bombardment by Japanese air forces of open towns in China. The American Government, as has been set forth to the Japanese Government repeatedly and especially in this Government's note of September 22, holds the view that any general bombing of an extensive area wherein there resides a large populace engaged in peaceful pursuits is unwarranted and contrary to principles of law and of humanity." If before there is an opportunity to have the statement quoted above presented to the Assembly there should occur a meeting of the Advisory Committee you should read the statement to the Advisory Committee. HULL 793.94/10299: Telegram The Minister in Switzerland (Harrison) to the Secretary of State GENEVA, September 28, 1937-4 p. m. [Received September 28-12: 23 p. m.] 13. My telegram 11, September 28, 8 a. m. At this morning's Assembly Munters informed it of the resolution adopted by the Advisory Committee and proposed that the Assembly adopt it as its own resolution in order to permit delegations not represented on the Committee to adhere to it. Del Vayo 63 declared Spain in defense of peace in the struggle against the aggressor condemns the bombardment of Nanking as well as of Madrid and warmly expressed solidarity with China in the struggle for independence. The President of the Assembly stated that the Advisory Committee as an organ dependent on the Assembly was entitled to submit proposals to it. The Assembly unanimously adopted the resolution with warm applause. Koo expressed his appreciation for prompt and unanimous adoption as indicating the League's devotion to the cause of humanity and the principles of international law. This approval would be received with satisfaction by the whole civilized world. No meeting of the Advisory Committee will be held today but there probably will be one tomorrow. A secretary of the British delegation today informed me that at the next meeting of the Advisory Committee a general discussion will occur on all phases followed by a summing up. In his opinion designation of the aggressor will be carefully avoided. The subcommittee would then be proposed and set up. Care would be taken, however, 63 Julio Alvarez del Vayo, Spanish Minister for Foreign Affairs. |