OPEN DOOR IN CHINA

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXVI, 1 May 1934, Page 5

OPEN DOOR IN CHINA

PRINCIPLE OF EQUAL RIGHTS ATTITUDE OF BRITAIN RECENT JAPANESE STATEMENT (British Official Wireless) RUGBY, 30th April. Japan’s reaffirmation of her acceptance of the policy of the open door in China, communicated to Sir Francis Lindley on 25th April by Mr Hirota, and an account of that interview, were given by Sir John Simon in reply to a question in the House of Commons. Sir John Simon said that the Ambassador’s communication to Mr Hirota was a friendly enquiry. It was to thp cll'cct that the principle of equal rights in China was guaranteed very explicitly by the Nine-Power Treaty of 1022, to which Japan was a party, and liis Majesty’s Government must, of course, continue to enjoy all rights in China which are common to all signatories, or are otherwise proper except insofar as these rights wore restricted by agreements, such as the consortium agreement, or insofar as Japan had special rights recognised hv other powers, and not shared by them. Sir Francis Lindley added that the anxieties regarding China expressed in a recent Japanese statement could not apply to the United Kingdom, since it was the aim of the British policy to avoid dangers to the peace and integrity of China, to which the statement referred. His Majesty’s Government naturally could not admit the right of Japan alone to decide whether any particular action such as the provision of technical or financial assistance promoted such danger, if that had indeed been the implication of the statement, which they did not believe.

Under Articles I and VII of the Nine-Power Treaty -iipan had the right to call the attention of 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 was not intended in any way to infringe the rights of other powers in China, nor infringe Japan’s own treaty obligations.

In reply, Mr Hirota indicated that His Majesty’s Government were correct in this assumption. He assured the Ambassador that Japan would observe the provisions of the NinePower Treaty, and that the iiolicy of the Japanese Government and of "His Majesty’s Government in regard to the treaty coincided. Ho stated in conclusion that Japan continued to attach tile greatest- importance to the maintenance of the open door in China, and reaffirmed her acceptance of that policy. Sir John Simon was further asked if any explanation was forthcoming of the statements issued by the press officer at the Japanese Foreign Office to the. Ambassadors of Japan in Washington and Berlin and their renresentativc in Geneva which seemed to conflict with the latest statement of Mr Hirota.

Sir John Simon said it must not be assumed that information reaching readers of the press in every press statement was authorised. The statement made by the Japanese Foreign’ Minister was reasonably clear ■ and Majesty’s Government was content to leave this question where it was. “I would only add that His Majesty’s Government lias resolved to assist to the utmost possible extent the spirit of international co-operation in the progress of China towards peace and prosperity, and in the maintenance of the spirit of harmony and goodwill in the Far East.”

The British attitude towards the recommendation of the League Assembly report in February 1933 that the League should afford technical assistance to China as one of the methods of the policy of international co-oper-ation 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 tlie principle of equality of opportunity for'all nations. The Council of the League laid down that the functions of their agent in China were purely tecln)cal and entirely of a non-political character.