711.94/964
Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Far Eastern Affairs (Hornbeck) of a Conversation With the Japanese Ambassador (Saito)
The Ambassador called at my office by way of farewell yesterday. As I was at that moment absent, I called at the Japanese Embassy this morning.
In the course of our conversation there was brought up no matter of great immediate importance. I took occasion to say to the Ambassador that there were, in addition to various matters to which I knew that he was giving thought and attention, some two or three [Page 665] matters which he might like to think about during and in connection with his trip to Japan:
- First, the question whether the Japanese Government might be interested in the negotiation and conclusion between Japan and the United States of a consular convention.41 This seemed to be something of which the Ambassador had not thought. After some discussion, the Ambassador stated that he would give the question attention.
- Second, the question of free access by foreign vessels, particularly naval vessels, to the area of the Japanese Mandated Islands. I explained to the Ambassador that this question had not been brought to the front, so far as I knew, at any time since he had come here as Ambassador; but that in the past it had on several occasions been brought up by American naval authorities, which authorities (and I understood also British and other naval authorities) had sought free access for naval vessels to harbors of and waters around the Japanese Mandated Islands.42 This the Japanese Government had always refused. From time to time our naval authorities bring this matter to the attention of the Department of State. It seemed to me that it might be useful for the Ambassador while he is at home to look into the question and see whether anything could be done, without creating excitement or ill feeling, toward removing this cause of suspicion and basis for allegations on the part of foreign critics of Japan, and at the same time toward affording a convenience to foreign ships and creating good will and confidence. The Ambassador gave the appearance of knowing little or nothing about the history of this question. I therefore gave him some account of its history and of arguments which had been made, some through diplomatic channels and some in the press. The Ambassador finally said that he would give the matter his thought and attention.
- Third, I said that some of us here had
long had on our minds a question the mention of which is a
matter of some delicacy. We have been worried by, and, to be
frank, annoyed over some developments in the field of
propaganda, in connection with Japanese-American relations, both
in this country and in Japan. We have felt, in particular, that
there is in the press in Japan a good deal of misrepresentation,
some of it doubtless in consequence of ignorance or
misunderstanding and some of it probably deliberate, of thought
and attitude in this country with regard to Japan and of
developments here in the field of American-Japanese relations.
The Ambassador said that he quite agreed that such was the case.
I then went on to say that I was sure that it must be evident to
the Ambassador that there is not in this country, except among a
very few people (and there in
[Page 666]
negligible amount), any animus against
Japan, and that neither the people nor the Government of this
country has any thought whatever of entering upon any course of
aggression toward or against Japan. The Ambassador said that he
quite realized this. I then said that both he and I know that
the matter is often and at great length otherwise represented in
the press in Japan. The Ambassador indicated assent. I then read
to the Ambassador a paragraph from a note of comment by Mr. Owen
Lattimore in the current number of Pacific
Affairs, which reads:
“Western propagandists in the East, and Eastern propagandists in the West, can no longer do anything but harm. The need of our day is for better Chinese, Japanese and Russian journalists in Europe and America—not to tell us about their countries, but to interpret us to their own countries. We need—and we have not begun to get enough of them—Western journalists who can understand Japanese politics and economics as the Japanese understand them, interpret the conflicting forces of Chinese history and Western pressure by Chinese standards, and feel the creative, formative period in Russia as the peoples of the Soviet Union feel it—or as Duranty43 feels it.”
I said that it struck me that the suggestion which Mr. Lattimore makes there is one which all of us who are struggling with problems of relations between Japan (and other countries of the Orient) and the United States may well ponder. The Ambassador said that the subject was one to which he gave much thought. I said that I thought that governments might do a good deal toward improving the situation. The Ambassador said that he thought so too. He then advanced the view that the concluding of agreements by governments would be helpful toward signalizing to the peoples concerned and to the world that relations are amicable and making of trouble is not intended. I advanced the opinion that the reading public takes “in its stride” its reading of news of the conclusion of an agreement; it makes passing note thereof; its eyes then go on to the next item of news and, having seen on one day only the news that an agreement has been concluded but seeing day after day articles and books filled with conjectures of suspicion, erroneous and misleading information, incitement to fear or to hostility, etc., etc., the net result is that the concluding of an agreement does not very materially impress the public, whereas a constant stream of propaganda develops conviction. The Ambassador said that Mr. Hirota had done a great deal toward putting an end to the publishing of war fiction, etc. I said that we had observed this fact with gratification; that the Japanese Government had more authority in such matters than had we; that they could command whereas we could only persuade; that fortunately there had [Page 667] been in this country a paucity of objectionable war fiction; that if at any time that type of thing appeared in this country it would be without the approval of and, where our disapproval could be manifested, with the disapproval of the American Government.
At this point I said that I knew that the Ambassador must be very busy and that, wishing him a pleasant and profitable summer, I would be on my way. The Ambassador said that he would give his best thought to the matters which we had discussed.
- See also pp. 839 ff.↩
- See Foreign Relations, 1933, vol. iii, pp. 748 ff.↩
- Walter Duranty, Moscow correspondent of the New York Times.↩