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