Troafriea;  Gopunoiolai: U.li. and .Lpuu'
BRITISH iSMBASSY,
WASHINGTON, D.C.,
January 17th, 1940.
Wo. 62
My Lord,
With reference to my despatch
(ftf/ffa'       1312 of the 20th November, 1939, to
\3dX^7jvj Sir Ronald Lindsay's despatch No, 831 of
the 28th July, 1939, and to connected corres-
pondence regarding the denunciation of the
United States-Japanese Commercial Treaty, I
have the honour to transmit herewith copies
_ oT a long letter which Hr. Henry X*. Stirason,
former United states Secretary of State,
addressed on the 10th January to the "Mew York
Times", proposing (i) a "moral embargo" on the
export of iron ore, scrap iron and aviation
spirit to Japan, and (11) passage of legisla-
tion, such as has already been introduced into
Congress, to prohibit tho expert to Japan "of
arms, munitions and the raw materials out of
which arms are made",   buch action, in
Hr. Stimson's viow, would redound both to the
mor al credit and to tho material advantage of
the United states.
2.   Commenting on Mr. Stimson's letter
the "New York Times" accepted the moral argument
but/
The Right Honourable
The Viscount halifax, K.G.,
etc.,       etc., etc.,
CB:ACEM:EK
INK
but had doubts about the material Interest.
"Can we be certain", it asked, "that the
imposition of an American embargo would not
mean morely a diversion of Japanese war orders
to other markets?   V.'ould an American embargo
have the moral support of the other nations
which are signatories with us to the Nine-Power
Treaty for the preservation of the territorial
integrity of China?"   These questions brought
the "New York Times" a quantity of letters some
of which took the view that an action which was
morally right should be taken regardless of the
attitude of others or of the material advantage
or disadvantage which it might bring.   In a
second editorial the "New York Times" cautiously
rejoined that, all the same, "to Impose a
unilateral embargo on a nation with which we are
at peace 13 a very grave step indeed.   On moral
as well as on practical grounds we have every
reason to wish to be as certain as we possibly
can be, before taking such a step, that its con-
sequences will be beneficial".
3.     alter Lippraann, the columnist,
writing on the same day, expressly accepted
Mr. gtlrnaon's moral judgment of the Japanese
aggression and his "conception of the political
responsibilities of the United States" but
argued that this is not the prope:* time for
Congress/
»
-3-
Congress to exercise its right to Impose an
embargo.   He quotes Hr. Stimson's view that
"the very last thing which the Japanese
Government desires is a war with the United
States", and thinks it may he correct, "But",
he continues, "the danger is not that Japan
will declare war if Congress imposes an
embargo; the danger is that Japan, relying upon
the fact that the United States does not wish
to go to war, is not really prepared to go to
war, and, in view of the ivuropean situation,
ought not to go to war, will be driven by
resentment and necessity to commit new aggressions
in the belief that it is safe to do so!!. rfhe
proper course, in Lippraann's view, is to devise
ways and means to reduce the arms traffic
"without defying Japanese opinion in such a way
that any Japanese Government v;ould have to make
an equally spectacular reply", and concurrently
to ''explore by negotiation the problem of a
general settlement in the Par "'last" while keeping
Chinese resistance i;oing with a loan to China
until the end of the war in I3urope.
to His Majesty1s Ambassadors/at Tokyo and Shanghai
and to the High Commissioner for the United
Kingdom at Ottawa.
4. I am sending copies o£^this despatch
I have the honour to be,
with the highest respect,
My Lord,
Your Lordship1s most obedient,
humble sorvant,
(MB) LOTKIAH