MINUTE SHEET. Rejcence.......ll^/j/Jf H.E. Something may have been said to the Foreign Office via the United States Embassy in London about the State Department's decision to abrogate the Japanese Treaty, but if not then their failure to give us any warning of their intentions is rather odd. You may remember that on January 25th last we gave the State Department a long Aide Memoire discussing the possibilittesof economic pressure in Japan (see 15/17/39).In the course of this memorandum the possibility of denouncing our commercial treaties with Japan was raised and we said that His Majesty's Government would welcome the views of the United States Government (JU on this particular point as well as/the more general issue. We were informed on January 28th that our communication was being studied in the State Department (see 15/25/39) and on February 3rd that the State Department were busy, formulating a reply to our enquiry (see 15/28/39). On February 3rd we were also told that while the state Depart- ment generally felt that a policy of assisting China would be better than one of retaliation against Japan, they would, if there seemed any good reason in the future to change this opinio^ "immediately disouss the matter further with His Majesty's Government". Since then we have as fax} as X know, h?ttrrl nn rttmrnrV from the State Department on the subject of economic pressure on Japan, nor have they ever sent any reply to our Aide Memo Ire of January 2 4 th although we have given them on our side a great deal of information about our views towards the situation in the Fat1 East., and Craigie has, we know, been keeping in close touch with the United tates "Embassy in Tokyo. It all seems rather peouliar and if, in fact, nothing was said beforehand in London, I am not sure that the State Department have not brdte n their promise "immediately to discuss the matter further with H.M.G.". jujjrSrth 1939. [over. A Ufa <^~~wQ^> px^O I • ; II