TOKIO AND THE TREATY

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23886, 14 August 1939, Page 7

TOKIO AND THE TREATY

THE OTHER SIDE OF THE QUESTION THE CASE FOR CHINA REPLY BY CONSUL-GENERAL In reply to a statement by Mr K. Gunji, Consul-general for Japan, which was published on Saturday, the Consulgeneral for China (Mr Feng Wang) has issued the following statement:— "Mr K. Gunji, Consul-general for Japan, claimed that Japan was fighting in self-defence, and attempted at some length to develop the contention that China was responsible for the present trouble. But what are the facts? Briefly, they are these: On the evening of Julv 7, Japanese troops held illegal manoeuvres at Lukouchiao. a railway junction of strategic importance 10 miles south of Peiping. where their presence could not be defended under any existing treaty or agreement. Alleging that one of their soldiers was missing, the Japanese troops demanded after midnight to enter an adjacent garrisoned city of Wanping to conduct a search. When permission was refused by the Chinese authorities the Japanese suddenly opened an attack on Wanprng with infantry and artillery forces When the Chinese garrison offered resistance in self-defence the Japanese at once resorted to large-scale operations against the Chinese troops in order, to quote their own words, 'to punish the Chinese army' and to ' uphold the Japanese military prestige' The Shanghai Incident

" Regarding the Shanghai ■ incident, briefly the facts are these: On August 9 a Japanese naval officer and a Japanese seaman attempted to approach the Chinese military aerodrome in the suburb of Shanghai in spite of the Chinese warning. When they were stopped by a Chinese guard a clash took place in which the two Japanese and a member of the Chinese Peace Preservation Corps were killed. "While the Chinese local authorities immediately proposed a settlement through diplomatic channels, the Japanese navy concentrated 30 warships in Shanghai within 48 houjs and increased their naval forces by several thousand marines. On August 13, four days after the incident, the Japanese naval forces, both ashore and afloat, using the International Settlement as a base of operations, attacked the Chinese districts of Kiangwan and Chapei. In defence of her territory and independence, China has been obliged here as in North China to resist force with force. Peaceful Settlement Attempted " From the moment of the Lokouchiao incident the Chinese local authorities made repeated efforts to effect a peaceful settlement with Japan and, though the responsibility did not rest with the Chinese authorities, went out of their way to accept the Japanese demands for an apology, punishment of the officers involved in the conflict, and guarantee against recurrence of similar incidents, the replacement of Chinese regular troops at designated points by the Peace Preservation Corps, and effective suppression of the so-called anti-Japanese and Communist organisations in Hopei Province. J "The Chinese Government itself repeatedly proposed simultaneous withdrawal of Chinese and Japanese troops. Seeing that Japan insisted upon the socalled non-interference on its part in the local settlement, it went so far in the interest of peace as to refrain from raising objections to its terms. But each concession and every act of forbearance on the part of the Chinese Government or the local authorities was taken by the Japanese military authorities as a sign of weakness and fear, and was followed by sending more Japanese troops to Hope! province for the purpose of pressing forward the plan of conquering North China. The Nine-Power Treaty "Mr Gunji's contention that Japan's action in China does not violate the provisions of the Nine-Power Treaty and the Pact of Pans of 1928 is answered by the first report adopted by the League Assembly on October B. 1937. The following quotations are taken from sections 2 and 3 of that report:— "Under the Nine-Power Treaty of 1922 regarding the principles and policies to be followed in matters concerning China, the contracting Powers, other than China, agreed, inter alia, to respect the sovereignty, the independence and the territorial and administrative integrity of China: to provide the fullest and most unembarrassed opportunity to China to develop and maintain for herself an effective and stable Government. The contracting Powers (including China) further agreed that whenever a situation arose which, in the ODinion of any one of them, involved the amplication of the stipulations of the Treatv and rendered desirable discussion of such application, there should be full and frank communication between the contracting Powers concerned. " Under the Pact of Paris of 1928. the parties solemnly declared in the names of their respective ■ peoples that they ■ condemned recourse to war for the solution of international controversies arid renounced it as an instrument of national policy in their relations with one another. They further agreed that the settlement or solution of all disputes or conflicts of whatever nature or of whatever origin they might be, which might arise among them, should never be s.ought except by pacific means. Alleged Breach of Faith "Prima facie, the events described in the first part of this report constitute a broach by Japan of her obligations towards China and towards other States under these treaties. The conduct of hostilities by Japanese forces, under the circumstances described, by land, water and air throughout China is prima facie inconsistent with an obligation to respect the sovereignty the independence and the territorial integrity of China, and also with the obligation never to seek the solution of a dispute with China, of whatever origin or character except by pacific means.'" The following quotation is taken from the Declaration of the NinePower Conference on November 15 1937:-

"The Japanese Government has affirmed in its Note of October 27, to which it refers in its Note of November 12, that in employing armed force against China it was anxious to make China renounce her present policy The renresentatives of the above-mentioned States met at Brussels are moved to point out that there exists no warrant in law for the use of armed force by any country for the purpose of intervening in the internal regime of another country and that general recognition of such a right would be a permanent cause of conflict.

"The Japanese Government contends that it should be left to Japan and China to proceed to a settlement by and between themselves alone. But that a just and lasting settlement could be achieved by such a method cannot be believed. Japanese armed forces are present in enormous numbers on Chinese soil and have occupied large and important areas thereof Japanese authorities have declared in substance that it is Japan's objective to destroy the will and ability of China to .j-esist the Will and the demands of Japan The Japanese Government affirms that it is China whose actions and attitude are in contravention of the Nine-Power Treatv; yet. whereas China is engaged in full and frank discussion of the matter with the other parties in th»» Treaty, Japan refuses to discuss it with any of them."

Foreign interests Affected

" Life other Japanese spokesmen, Mr Gunji assures us that Japan has no desire to establish sovereignty over Chinese soil. These assurances might be reassuring if the solemn pledges of the

Japanese Government and Japanese high officials had not been broken repeatedly in the past. One has to turn back only a few pages of history to see these same promises made before with the same earnestness and gravity that Japan was devoid of territorial ambitions on the continent The only difference was that they were made with reference to Korea prior to 1910 and with reference to Manchuria only a few years ago. Since 193' every industrial or commercial enterprise that has been established in Manchuria is under control either by the Japanese themselves or by the Japanese-con-trolled regime there It has not only been impossible for foreign interests to exnand their activities, but it has been necessary foi them to reduce or entirely close their business. Such foreign concerns as the Asiatic Petrol eum Company, the Standard Oil Company, of New York, and the Texas Oil Company, which prior to the Japanese occupation did 80 per cent of the refined oil business in the region, the Skoda steel works, the British-Ameri-can Tobacco Company, and the Mukden branch of the National City Bank have been forced to seal their offices. These are onlv some of the foreign companies that have withdrawn from the field. This is what Japan has done in Manchuria.' Can one expect the situation to be different in other parts of China which should fall under Japanese control?—l am, etc.."