CHAPTER IV

PART A‑HULL‑NOMURA CONVERSATIONS

(October 17, 1941‑ November 20, 1941)

Advent of the Tojo Cabinet and Redoubling of Japanese Government's Insistence Upon an Early Acceptance of Its Proposals. [1]

1. Ambassador Nomura Complains of Lack of Coordination Between Japanese Foreign Office and Navy (October 18, 1941)

Following the change of government in Japan, Ambassador Nomura on October 18, 1941, offered his congratulations to the new Cabinet. At the same time, however, he pointed out that throughout the term of the former Japanese Cabinet he had been unable to accomplish anything through Japanese‑American conversations. According to Ambassador Nomura, certain things which had taken place in spite of his personal recommendations had forced him to question his own value to a future Japanese government.

Since Minister Wakasugi and Mr. Iguchi were capable of handling negotiations, Ambassador Nomura requested that he be allowed to return to Japan in order to report personally on the existing Japanese‑American situation and to receive instructions regarding future policies. [1a]

Two days later, on October 20, 1941, Ambassador Nomura stated that, since his appointment to the post in the United States, there had existed a complete lack of coordination between the Japanese Navy Department and the Japanese Foreign Office. [2]

Referring again to Japanese‑American problems, Ambassador Nomura emphasized that, although the United States might desire to avoid military action in the Pacific because it was already faced with war on the Atlantic front, America would still refuse to renounce its national policies even to effect a conciliation. In Ambassador Nomura's opinion, China was primarily responsible for the present attitude of the United States toward Japan. For that reason, Ambassador Nomura had attempted to bring about a "modus vivendi" between the two countries, leaving out the China question entirely. But Secretary Hull had insisted that China was inseparably concerned with the stability of the Pacific. However, from a conversation with Lord Halifax, Ambassador Nomura learned that Great Britain agreed with Japan that a "modus vivendi" should be worked out in order to avoid a crisis in the Far East.

At the conclusion of his report, Ambassador Nomura re‑emphasized his ineffective position as Ambassador from Japan possibly because of his lack of understanding of the principles of the present Japanese government. [3] In fact, Ambassador Nomura frankly stated that he should have been asked to resign along with the members of the former Japanese Cabinet. In spite of the encouragement of Secretary Hull and other American statesmen who trusted his sincerity, Ambassador Nomura recognized that his lack of actual influence in Japan forced him to lead a hypocritical existence as Japanese Ambassador to the United States. Although not anxious "to flee from the field of battle", Ambassador Nomura urged his government to order his recall. [4]

[1] Chapter title taken from the division arrangement of the State Department documents‑Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States‑Japan, 1931‑1941 in two volumes, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, 1943, Volume II, 343. Hereafter referred to as S.D., II.

[1a] Appendix IV, No. 1. Hereafter Appendix IV will be referred to as IV, 1.

[2] IV, 2.

[3] Ibid.

[4] IV, 3.

1

2. Tokyo Refuses Ambassador Nomura's Resignation (October 23, 1941)

After considering Ambassador Nomura's report of the Japanese‑American situation and his request for a transfer of duty, on October 23, 1941 Tokyo asked that Ambassador Nomura sacrifice his personal wishes and remain at his post. Assuring Ambassador Nomura that the Japanese government was relying completely upon his judgment, Tokyo stated that the policies of the Japanese government, determined by the outcome of these negotiations, would be based upon the information which Ambassador Nomura forwarded. [5]

3. Japanese Government Declares Policies of New Cabinet

Agreeing with Ambassador Nomura that the Japanese Embassy in Washington must be kept well informed on any changes of policy made in Tokyo, the Foreign Office assured the Japanese Ambassador that instructions had been unavoidably delayed because of the formation of a new Cabinet. [6] Tokyo assured Ambassador Nomura, however, that the new Cabinet still retained the desire of the former Japanese government to adjust relations with the United States on an equitable basis. Yet, Ambassador Nomura was told that the Japanese government, having set forth its principles completely, could take no further action.

In order to emphasize Japan's desire that a formal United States counter proposal to the Japanese document of September 25, 1941 be submitted, the Japanese government urged Ambassador Nomura to discuss this matter discreetly with American representatives. [7]

4. Ambassador Nomura Reports British‑German Peace Rumors [8]

Realizing that the trend of events in Europe would affect the situation in the Pacific, Ambassador Nomura kept his government informed on developments in the war between Britain and Germany.

In the latter part of October, 1941 Ambassador Nomura was told that Germany was preparing to offer Great Britain generous peace terms. Since the British public was apparently satisfied with taking Ethiopia, Syria and Iraq, and since Lloyd George appeared to be gaining in popularity over Prime Minister Churchill, it was thought that Hitler's offer of peace might be accepted. On the other hand, Ambassador Nomura believed that the English people would continue to place their trust in Prime Minister Churchill and that President Roosevelt, representing the United States government as a whole, would assist the British in withstanding German movements.

Yet, Ambassador Nomura felt it necessary to point out that up until this time his informant had believed in a German defeat while now he was convinced that Germany and Great Britain were ready to arrive at a satisfactory peace. [9]

5. Welles‑Wakasugi Conversation (October 24, 1941)

a. Under Secretary Welles' Report [10]

Louis J. Sheehan, Esquire  At his own request Mr. Wakasugi called upon Under Secretary of State Summer Welles on October 24, 1941 to inform the United States government that the new Japanese Cabinet desired to continue the informal conversations with a view to resuming friendly diplomatic and economic relations.

Mr. Wakasugi then inquired whether the United States had any counter proposals to make to those offered by Tokyo on September 25, 1941. In reply, Mr. Welles pointed out that during

[5] IV, 4.

[6] IV, 5.

[7] Ibid.

[8] IV, 6.

[9] Ibid.

[10] "Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State Welles", October 24, 1941, S.D. II, 692‑697.

2

THE "MAGIC" BACKGROUND OF PEARL HARBOR

the past seven or eight months the United States government had earnestly endeavored to establish the basis for an equitable agreement between the two governments. However, recent statements made by prominent authorities of the Japanese army and navy and other parts of that government had created an atmosphere detrimental to the conclusion of such an agreement. [11] The recent public statement made by an officer of the Japanese navy declaring that the Japanese navy was "itching to fight [12]" had had an undesirable effect upon the American navy. Furthermore, Mr. Welles continued, the tone of articles and editorials appearing in Japanese newspapers created a serious obstacle to any satisfactory agreement which might be arrived at during the informal conversations.

In an attempt to show that the attitude of the United States government was not wholly conducive to peace, Minister Wakasugi stated that he had seen a statement by Secretary Knox indicating that because war between Japan and the United States was inevitable [13], the United States navy was forced to remain on twenty‑four hour duty. In correcting this interpretation, Mr. Welles insisted that the statement attributed to Secretary Knox merely implies that. the situation was such that some incident might possibly occur and consequently the United States navy must be prepared for an emergency. If the Japanese navy was willing to announce that "it was itching to fight" with the United States, Mr. Welles pointed out, the United States navy had to adopt precautionary measures. Although anxious to find a successful outcome to the present conversations, Under Secretary Welles said, the United States government must seriously consider the attitude of the Japanese press and public as a whole.

In answering Minister Wakasugi's questions regarding American counter proposals to those offered by Japan on September 25, 1941, Mr. Welles stated that both he and Secretary Hull in previous conversations with Mr. Wakasugi had emphasized that the views of the United States government had been completely clarified in the communication handed to the Japanese government on June 21, 1941. Since another United States document was delivered to the Japanese Embassy on October 2, 1941, Mr. Welles did not feel that any further counter proposals would be forthcoming from his government. In fact, during the last conversation between Mr. Hull and Minister Wakasugi, the American Secretary of State had impressed upon the Japanese representative the benefits which Japan would derive from following those economic principles already laid down by the American government in the documents mentioned. Minister Wakasugi stated that he had transmitted the details of that conversation to his government but had received no opinions upon it from Tokyo.

As far back as April 1941, Minister Wakasugi declared, he had urged Ambassador Nomura to find a practical, concrete basis for an agreement with the United States on any phase of the situation affecting the Pacific. However, the interference of both American and Japanese gentlemen, introducing certain peace formulas without any authority from either government, had succeeded in complicating the situation. Since these unofficial, unauthorized documents had created misunderstandings, Minister Wakasugi suggested that a fresh approach to the situation be made by having both governments submit entirely new formulas, setting forth basic principles upon which to formulate peace. Mr. Welles stated that all the officials of the United States government would be willing to contribute any time and effort necessary to arrive at a satisfactory agreement.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Captain Hideo Hiraide, Director of the Naval Intelligence Section of Imperial Headquarters, Stated‑"the Imperial Navy is itching for action when needed." It is important to note here that the promotion of Premier Tojo to full General (New York Times, October 19, 1:6), and the statement of Naval Minister Shimada that the Japanese navy was ready for any situation, added to the existing martial atmosphere. (New York Times, October 20, 1941, 3:1, 3, 4.)

[13] The New York Times reported that Secretary Knox's statement that a Japanese‑American war was inevitable and the clash of the two countries only a few days ahead, was viewed in Japan as unfortunate. (October 25, 1941, 1:8).

3

From the standpoint of expediency, Mr. Welles felt it advisable to reach an agreement on the economic principles first. Therefore he was anxious to illustrate to the new Japanese Cabinet the practical advantages Japan would experience if Secretary Hull's economic policies were adopted. Mr. Welles pointed out that the abolition of such trade barriers as British Imperial preferences, Japan would be able to trade with Canada, Australia and New Zealand without danger of discrimination.

Mr. Wakasugi agreed wholeheartedly, but he insisted that a lack of natural resources made Japan the victim of economic aggression and encirclement. Under Secretary Welles returned that Japan's modern history up to the year 1930, a time when its relationship with Both Great Britain and the United States was most friendly, showed Japan capable of becoming one of the great powers of the world. Mr. Welles continued that only Hitler's propaganda about the "have and have not nations" had caused Japan to adopt its aggressive policies. Disagreeing with Mr. Welles' conclusions, Minister Wakasugi asserted that Japan had pursued its own national determinations of policy regardless of Germany or Italy, and in spite of the liberal tendencies of Japan's younger generation. Nevertheless, Mr. Welles replied, Japan had allied itself officially and publicly with the Axis policies. Mr. Wakasugi made no comment, but turned the conversation to the Japanese‑Chinese situation. In order that every approach be undertaken to settle this conflict, Minister Wakasugi suggested that Mr. Welles meet with the Chinese Ambassador and any other Chinese officials to discuss the problems in a purely unofficial manner. If President Roosevelt intended to mediate in the peace between Japan and China, Minister Wakasugi believed it advantageous to ascertain the attitude of the Chiang Kai‑shek government. Since Under Secretary of State Welles did not feel authorized to give even a personal and unofficial response without careful consideration, he promised to discuss the suggestion in a future conversation with Mr. Wakasugi.

Although Minister Wakasugi made no reference to any plans for Ambassador Nomura's departure, he specifically stated that the conversations between the two governments would be resumed as soon as detailed instructions were forthcoming from Tokyo. After promising to notify Secretary Welles of any further instructions from his government without delay, Minister Wakasugi ended the conversation [14].

b. Minister Wakasugi's Report

In compliance with Tokyo's instructions, Ambassador Nomura ordered Minister Wakasugi to continue his informal conversations with Under Secretary of State Summer Welles in a friendly fashion [15].

Throughout the hour‑long conversation with Mr. Welles, Minister Wakasugi attempted to explain that the new Japanese Cabinet, anxious for an immediate readjustment of relations, saw no reason why negotiations should not be concluded without further delay since the Japanese government had entirely clarified its principles. Minister Wakasugi then asked that the United States make a counter proposal to the Japanese document of September 25, 1941.

Mr. Welles pointed out that the attitude of Japanese statesmen and newspapers was provoking the breach of diplomatic relations, and cited the example of the naval spokesman who said that "the Japanese navy is 'itching for action.' [16]"

In reply, Minister Wakasugi referred to the criticisms of Japan that Senator Pepper had made and to the speech of Secretary Knox, who was quoted as saying that a Japanese‑American war was only a few days off. To convince Minister Wakasugi that this speech was merely intended as a morale‑builder for the United States Navy, Mr. Welles said that Secretary Knox often used exaggerated terms to achieve this purpose. Furthermore, Mr. Welles blamed the

[14] "Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State, Welles", October 24, 1941, S.D. II, 692‑697.

[15] IV, 7.

[16] IV, 8.

4

THE "MAGIC" BACKGROUND OF PEARL HARBOR

newspapers for placing too much emphasis on certain passages of the speech, thereby throwing the entire speech out of proportion.

In replying to Minister Wakasugi's request for an American counter proposal to the Japanese statement of September 25, 1941, Mr. Welles stated that the principles of his government were clearly set forth in the United States proposal of June 21, 1941. However, Mr. Welles felt that a solution could be effected if the wording of the American proposal of June 21, 1941 were adjusted to parallel that of the Japanese proposal of September 25, 1941 [17].

Since the mere consideration of each paragraph of past proposals would only result in the repetition of old arguments, Mr. Welles suggested that a general agreement be reached on the three major problems by means of a new short‑cut formula. First of all, Under Secretary of State Welles continued, it would be necessary to work out some understanding with regard to commerce. At this point in the conversation Mr. Welles asked if Minister Wakasugi had transmitted Secretary Hull's proposal to his government. Minister Wakasugi assured Mr. Welles that he had done so. Mr. Welles then touched on the possibility of adjusting the United States and Japanese views toward the Tripartite Pact [18].

Finally, when Mr. Welles turned the discussion to the China question [19], Minister Wakasugi asked that United States authorities enumerate suggestions in the form of a proposal and submit them to the Japanese representatives during the next conversation.

Next Minister Wakasugi mentioned the matter of the two Japanese tankers and three ships of the NYK line. All arrangements for the sailing of these NYK vessels had been completed by the Treasury Department. However, with regard to the matter of the tankers, Mr. Welles said, the United States banking laws required strict investigation of all deposits. In view of the fact that the money allotted to these ships had been transferred to an account with the Yokohama Specie Bank and because of the United States' freezing order, it was impossible to release the funds either in cash or draft form. In an effort to maintain some degree of the former friendly Japanese‑American trade relations, Mr. Welles promised that the State Department would assist in transferring the money through an American bank. [20]

6. Tokyo Urges American Reply to Japanese Proposals

Anxious to receive the United States' reply to its proposals of September 25, 1941, the Foreign Office in Tokyo urged Ambassador Nomura to attempt to ascertain the United States' attitude through the continuation of the informal conversations. [21] The Japanese government hoped that American views would be clarified during the Welles‑Wakasugi talk on October 25, 1941 [22].

In answering Ambassador Nomura's questions regarding a message sent by the Military General Staff [23], the Japanese government stated that the General Staff was studying the results of the Japanese‑American negotiations in an attempt to establish a national basic policy [24].

7. Ambassador Nomura Confers with Admiral Pratt (October 25, 1941) [25]

On October 27, 1941 Ambassador Nomura reported to Tokyo that on October 25 he had spoken with Admiral Pratt concerning the Japanese‑American situation. At that time

[17] IV, 9.

[18] IV, 10.

[19] Ibid.

[20] IV, 11.

[21] IV, 12.

[22] The State Department records no conversation between Under Secretary of State Welles and Minister Wakasugi on October 25, 1941.

[23] IV, 7.

[24] IV, 12.

[25] IV. 13.

5

Admiral Pratt had admitted to Ambassador Nomura that economic warfare produced results as devastating as actual armed conflict.

In regard to open warfare between the two countries, however, Admiral Pratt expressed the opinion that war would not be declared should Japan's aggression in the Far East be limited to China. If Japan moved either northward or southward, Admiral Pratt warned, war between the United States and Japan might be declared, although the final decision would rest with President Roosevelt and Emperor Hirohito.

Agreeing that Secretary Knox's speech was unfortunate, Admiral Pratt stated that Japan should be considered when any magazine articles or radio speeches were written. In an attempt to give Ambassador Nomura a clear picture of the navy's attitude toward Japan, Admiral Pratt said that the views of Admiral Stark, who was actually the Commander‑in-Chief of the Navy, and those of President Roosevelt coincided. Admiral Pratt continued by saying that President Roosevelt sincerely desired to maintain the peace and stability of the Pacific area, and that the views of Admiral Hart must be considered since he was a man of strong influence.

Referring then to the European war, Admiral Pratt said that Mr. Harriman, recently sent to Russia by the United States, had reported that Germany would be the victor in the German-Russian war and that Stalin was not even in a position to discuss peace.

Italy's status in the European war was a little unstable, according to Admiral Pratt; he did not feel that Italy could afford to seek a separate peace since it would put that country in a position similar to that of France.

In concluding his talk with Ambassador Nomura, Admiral Pratt said that the Atlantic should be saved for Great Britain and that Japan, in order to have a voice in the peace, should maintain its naval strength and avoid impairing its might on the seas [26].

8. Minister Wakasugi Reports on Status of Japanese‑American Relations

Since Japanese‑American relations were approaching a crisis, Minister Wakasugi felt it necessary to send Tokyo an informal report on the general attitude toward the Pacific situation which he had observed through numerous conferences with American representatives [27]. The basic policy of the United States, according to Minister Wakasugi, was the desire to crush so‑called "Hitlerism" throughout the world. In order to prevent the establishment of this new order through the force of arms, the United States set up Great Britain and China as a first line of national defense. Determined to plan for a long‑term program of peace, the United States instructed its government and people that no local agreements concerning separate questions in the Pacific area could be drawn up with Japan. For that reason, Secretary Hull insisted upon a general understanding covering the entire Pacific area.

During the conversation between Mr. Wakasugi and Mr. Welles on October 24, 1941, the Under Secretary of State had made it clear that the United States would continue to advocate absolute non‑discrimination for Japan, the United States, Britain, China, Australia and the Netherlands East Indies throughout the Pacific. Under this policy every nation offered to other countries opportunities equal to those existing between itself and its colonies. To this statement Minister Wakasugi replied that the United States presumed that Japan would develop French Indo‑Chinese and Thaiese areas in a monopolistic manner by means of military force. For that reason, the United States insisted that all countries be given equal access to the natural resources of French Indo‑China and Thailand.

Referring next to the effect of the China problem on Japanese‑American relations, Minister Wakasugi said that the United States would deal with it as only one phase of the "peace in the Pacific" issue. Furthermore, Minister Wakasugi reminded Tokyo that Secretary Hull

[26] Ibid.

[27] IV, 14.

6

THE "MAGIC" BACKGROUND OF PEARL HARBOR

had once stated to former Ambassador Saito that the United States would never war with Japan over China. On the other hand, China was relying solely upon the United States for aid in carrying on its warfare with Japan. Mr. T. V. Soong and other Chinese officials were negotiating with the Treasury Department to secure even greater financial assistance for  their country. In view of the fact that China was entirely dependent upon the United States,  it did not seem probable that the United States would cut off its aid to China.

Yet, in spite of the insistence of the United States to continue supplying China with the  means for continuing its warfare with Japan, Mr. Welles, on October 24, 1941, had assured  Minister Wakasugi that the United States would not be unreasonable in making demands  upon Japan. Although the implications of his statement were not entirely clear to Minister Wakasugi, he felt that they could be interpreted as meaning that the United States would not insist that Japan withdraw its troops from China immediately. Regardless of any interpretation placed upon the statements made by American officials, however, it was apparent that Japanese‑American relations were at a breaking‑point.

Although the United States insisted that it was anxious to adjust conditions between the two countries, it was willing to effect an agreement only on the basis of its June 21 and October 22, 1941 proposals. Minister Wakasugi did not believe that the United States' informal conversations were means of gaining time, however, since American preparations in the event of war were already completed. At the same time, Minister Wakasugi did not expect that any further counter proposals would be forthcoming from the United States government nor that any concessions would be made. If Japan were to insist upon an immediate settlement of differences, Minister Wakasugi believed that all negotiations would be terminated. Therefore, he suggested that the Japanese government continue the informal conversations in continued attempt to break down differences of opinion. Louis J. Sheehan, Esquire

Minister Wakasugi asked that the new Japanese Cabinet inform him of its basic policies as speedily as possible in order that he might know what attitude to take in future conversations with American representatives. [28]