OPEN DOOR IN CHINA

Hawera Star, Volume LIV, 1 May 1934, Page 7

OPEN DOOR IN CHINA

ACCEPTANCE BY JAPAN treaty provisions observed iHSCUSSTON WITH BRITAIN EXPLANATION IN COMMONS (British Official Wireless.) Received 1.15 p.m. to-day. RIUGBY, April 30. Japan’s reaffirmation of her acceptance of the policy of an open door in China was communicated to the British Ambassador on April 25 by Mr Hirota and an account of that interview was given by Sir John Simon in reply to •a question in the House of Commons. Sir John said the Ambassador’s communication to Mr Hirota was a friendly inquiry. It was to the effect that the principle of equal rights in China was guaranteed very explicitly by the Nine-Power Treaty of 1922, to which Japan was a party, and His Majesty’s Government must of course continue to enjoy all the rights in China which were common to all the signatories or were otherwise proper except insofar as these rights were restricted by agreements such as the consortium agreement and insofar as Japan had special rights recognised by other powers and not shared by them. The Ambassador had added that the anxieties regarding China expressed in the recent Japanese statement could not apply to the United Kingdom since it was the aim of the British policy to avoid dangers to peace and the integrity of China to which, tho statement "referred. His Majesty’s Government naturally could not admit the right of Japan alone to decide whether any particular action, such as tho provision of technical or financial assistance, promoted such a danger, if that had indeed been the amplication of the statement which they did not believe. Under Articles 1 and 7 of the NinePower Treaty Japan had the right to call the attention of the other signatories to any action in China inimical to her security. This right provided Japan with safeguards and His Majesty’s Government, therefore, assumed that the statement had not intended in any way to infringe the common rights of other powers m China nor to infringe Japan’s own treaty obligations. Ini reply Mr Hirota indicated that His Majesty’s Government was correct in this assumption. He assured the Ambassador that Japan would observe the provisions of the Nine-Power Treaty and that "the policy of the Japanese and of His Majesty’s Government in regard to the treaty coincided. He stated in conelusion thn-t Japan conitinuefl ix> attach the greatest importance to the mainenance of an, open-door in China and reaffirmed her acceptance of that policy. Sir John Simon was further askecl if any explanation was forthcoming of statements issued by the Press officer of the Japanese Foreign Office and the Ambassadors of Japan in Washington and Berlin, and -their representatives in Geneva, which seemed in con- 1 flict with the latest statement of Mi*. Hirota. Sir John Simon said it must not be assumed that the information reaching the readers of the Press was in every Press statement authorised. The statement made by the Japanese Foreign Minister was reasonably clear and his Majesty's Government was content to leave this question where it was. “I would only add that his Majestv’s Government is resolved to assist to the utmost possible extent the spirt of international co-operation in the progress of China towards peace and prosperity and in the maintenance of tho spirit of harmony and goodwill in the Far East,” he concluded. The attitude towards the recommendation of the League Assembly report of February, 1933, that the League should afford technical assistance to China as one of the methods of the policy of international co-operation initiated, at the Washington Conference was raised in a further question to Sir John Simon. He explained that international co-operation in China was governed by the terms of the Nine Power Treaty, which expressly safeguarded the principle of equalitv of opportunity for all nations. The Council of the League laid down that the functions of its agent in China were of a purely technical and entirely nonpolitical character.