Papers relating to the foreign relations of the United States, 1931, The Far East, Volume III

793.94/2305: Telegram

The Consul at Geneva (Gilbert) to the Secretary of State

Geneva, October 22, 1931—6 p.m.
[Received 10:37 p.m.¹⁵]

242. The Council convened in public session at 4 o’clock this afternoon. The Japanese representative immediately read the following statement:

“As you will remember, I raised the objection the other day from a constitutional point of view to inviting a representative of a non-member state to participate in the deliberations of the Council. I still maintain the legal stand I took on that occasion, but now with the representative of the United States at this table I am glad to be able to assure him and the members of the Council that it is the traditional policy of my country to promote the principle of friendship and amity with the United States and that both the Government and people are determined to live in peace and good will with that country for all times by pursuing this policy consistently.”

I replied to this as follows:

“The conditions of my association with you and the limitation with respect to my speaking are of course understood. In this instance I wish, however, to beg the indulgence of the President of the Council that I may be permitted to respond to the words of the representative of Japan.

I have heard with deep gratification what the representative of Japan has said and I wish to assure him that I heartily appreciate the spirit in which he has spoken. I have never had any thought of attributing his position in this matter to other than juridical considerations, but it gives me great pleasure, nevertheless, to be able to hear him say this and to reassure him that on my part he may have no fear of my interpreting his attitude in any other light.

The sentiments which he has expressed as to the relations between our countries are cordially reciprocated. We look upon the long record of peace and friendship between our people and the people of Japan as among the happiest pages in our history, and the thought is furthest from our minds that that record should ever be broken.

Briand then spoke as follows:

“I desire to inform the Council that most of the Governments represented on the Council having felt it necessary, as signatories of the General Pact for the Renunciation of War, to send on the 17th October by telegram, and through their diplomatic representatives, an identic note to the Governments of China and Japan calling their attention to the provisions of this Pact—and more especially to the terms of article 2 thereof—I was requested to inform the other signatory Governments of that Pact by telegram of this fact.

These communications have been duly made through the representatives of the French Government to the Government of the United States, and also to the other Governments concerned. There has been handed to those Governments a copy of the identical note sent by the members of the Council. Since this communication of the French Government was received by the Government of the United States, that Government, through the agency of its diplomatic representatives, sent by telegram an identical note to the Governments of China and Japan. I am not in a position yet to inform the Council of the action which may have been taken, as a result of my communication, by the other Governments concerned. As regards the reception by the parties of the identical note which was sent to them, I have received, so far as I am concerned, this morning, a communication from the representative of China, which will be read.”

The Chinese representative then read a communication from his Government which incorporated the reply of the Chinese Government to the French note invoking the Pact of Paris. As this reply or a similar one is doubtless available to the Department, I am not transmitting it in this telegram.

Briand then made a statement summarizing the positions of both China and Japan and spoke briefly regarding the long negotiations which had taken place in an effort to find a formula satisfactory to all. He declared that the results of these efforts are incorporated in the draft resolution which had been unanimously agreed upon, with the exception of the two disputants, which he then presented to the Council. The resolution follows:

“The Council,

In pursuance of the resolution passed on September 30th, and noting that in addition to the invocation by the Government of China, of article 11 of the Covenant, article 2 of the Pact of Paris has also been invoked by a number of Governments;

(1) Recalls the undertakings given to the Council by the Governments of China and Japan in that resolution, and in particular the statement of the Japanese representative that the Japanese Government would continue as rapidly as possible the withdrawal of its troops into the railway zone in proportion as the safety of the lives and property of Japanese nationals is effectively assured, and the statement of the Chinese representative that his Government will assume the responsibility for the safety of the lives and property of [Japanese] nationals outside that zone—a pledge which implies the effective protection of Japanese subjects residing in Manchuria;

(2) Recalls further that both Governments have given the assurance that they would refrain from any measures which might aggravate the existing situation, and are therefore bound not to resort to any aggressive policy or action and to take measures to suppress hostile agitation;

(3) Recalls the Japanese statement that Japan has no territorial designs in Manchuria, and notes that this statement is in accordance with the terms of the Covenant of the League of Nations and of the Nine-Power Treaty, the signatories of which are pledged ‘to respect the sovereignty, the independence and the territorial and administrative integrity of China’;

(4) Being convinced that the fulfillment of these assurances and undertakings is essential for the restoration of normal relations between the two parties:

(a) Calls upon the Japanese Government to begin immediately and to proceed progressively with the withdrawal of its troops into the railway zone, so that the total withdrawal may be effected before the date fixed for the next meeting of the Council;

(b) Calls upon the Chinese Government, in execution of its general pledge to assume the responsibility for the safety and [of the] lives [and-property] of all Japanese subjects resident in Manchuria, to make such arrangements for taking over the territory thus evacuated as will insure the safety of the lives and property of Japanese subjects there, and requests the Chinese Government to associate with the Chinese authorities designated for the above purpose representatives of other powers in order that such representatives may follow the execution of the arrangements;

(5) Recommends that the Chinese and Japanese Governments should immediately appoint representatives to arrange the details of the execution of all points relating to the evacuation and the taking over of the evacuated territory so that they may proceed smoothly and without delay;

(6) Recommend the Chinese and Japanese Governments, as soon as the evacuation is completed, to begin direct negotiations on questions outstanding between them, and in particular those arising out of recent incidents as well as those relating to existing difficulties due to the railway situation in Manchuria. For this purpose the Council suggests that the two parties should set up [a] conciliation committee or some such permanent machinery;

(7) Decides to adjourn until November 16th, at which date it will again examine the situation, but authorizes its President to convoke a meeting at any earlier date should it in his opinion be desirable”.

Briand stated that this draft resolution must not be regarded as one that cannot be modified and he invited the representative[s] of Japan and China to express their views as soon as they have had an opportunity to examine it sufficiently.

Sze then stated that at the first glance this resolution “appears to fall far short of what the Chinese Government considers the situation demands and what it is entitled to ask.” He recognized however that it represents the results of the Council’s labors to safeguard peace and secure justice and must therefore be carefully considered. He announced that the text has been telegraphed to the Chinese Government and requested a short delay in order to obtain instructions.

The Japanese representative thereupon read a long statement which was not entirely pertinent to the question at issue. He reviewed the whole Japanese position with regard to Manchuria, which has been summarized in previous telegrams, and reiterated that Japan has no territorial designs in that region. He stated that his Government cannot “here and now fix a definite date at which circumstances will make it possible for the last of its men to be brought back within the railway zone” and declared that the exact moment of this withdrawal depends upon the “peaceful intentions and the good will shown effectively by the Chinese Government.”

Yoshizawa then reserved the right to present observations on the draft resolution after a thorough study of the text.

Briand thereupon interposed to say that in accordance with the desires of both the Chinese and Japanese representatives to study the draft resolution and the desire of the Chinese delegate to secure instructions the Council naturally would accede to the request for a brief delay.

After thanking the President for this courtesy, Sze made a brief statement in reply to the Japanese wherein he declared “the obligations that each country assumes under the League Covenant, under the Paris Pact or under the Nine-Power Treaty, or any other treaty which we have voluntarily entered into without any reservation, are expected to be carried out without any excuses for violating them.” He then stated that he would not discuss at this time the speech of the Japanese delegate but that he would give it careful study and if necessary make an appropriate reply later.

The Japanese representative also reserved the right of further comment.

Briand then stated that the holding of another meeting of the Council would depend upon the instructions being received, he suggested that the next meeting should be fixed tentatively for tomorrow, October 23, 5 p.m. This was agreed to on the understanding that if the Chinese delegate had not received his instructions some other arrangement would be made.

Gilbert

15. Telegram in three sections.