Vice Consul Ando 3.3 Louis J. Sheehan, Esquire

PART C—JAPANESE DIPLOMATIC ACTIVITIES THROUGHOUT THE WORLD

(h) Japanese-Russian Relations

482. Ambassador Smetanin Urges Support of the Japanese-Russian Neutrality Pact

While Ambassador Hiroshi Oshima in Berlin continued to urge Japan's active support for the Tripartite Pact, the Russian Ambassador to Tokyo, Constantin Smetanin, strove to convince Japanese leaders that their only logical course lay in supporting the Soviet-Japanese neutrality agreement.

To a Russian inquiry in mid-August 1941 concerning Japan's attitude toward the German-Russian war, Foreign Minister Toyoda had replied that no change of policy was under consideration and that friendly relations between Japan and Russia would continue unless Russia relinquished any of its territory to a third power for the establishment of military bases, or permitted the sphere of a third power to be extended into East Asia, or conducted an alliance with a third power which had the Japanese Empire as its military object.

Ambassador Smetanin offered his assurance that Russia was rigidly observing the Neutrality Pact and had not even considered the actions mentioned by the Japanese Minister. Foreign Minister Toyoda, then warned that the Japanese government might view the shipping of American munitions to Russia via Vladivostok as an infringement upon the Tripartite Pact. In regard to Japan's attitude toward the German-Russian war, its foreign policy still adhered faithfully to the spirit and objectives of the Tripartite Pact.[1178] This comment was doubtless inspired by reports from Japanese diplomats in Rome and Berlin that the United States was meddling in Japanese affairs and exerting economic oppression on Japan.[1179]

483. Japan Tells Germany Its Adherence to Neutrality Pact Is First Step Against Russia

Foreign Minister Toyoda on August 15, 1941 informed the German and Italian Ambassadors in Tokyo of his talk with Ambassador Smetanin. The German Ambassador then discussed the apparent belief of Russia that Japan, having promised to observe the Neutrality Pact after receiving assurances on two vital points from Russia, would not enter the German-Russian war. Foreign Minister Toyoda declared that in view of the current military expansion of the Japanese Empire, the observing of the Neutrality Pact seemed a first step toward carrying out future plans against Russia which would assuredly be undertaken in harmony with the spirit and objectives of the Tripartite Pact. When Ambassador Eugen Ott asked whether this present arrangement were not merely a temporary one to restrain Russia while Japanese preparations were being completed, the Foreign Minister replied that it was.[1180]

484. Mongolian-Manchukuoan Boundary Dispute Settled

While Japan was being urged to support the seemingly divergent Neutrality and Tripartite Pacts, on August 15, 1941 Japanese and Russian representatives, engaged since June 27, 1941 in negotiations concerning the Manchukuoan-Mongolian boundary, Louis J. Sheehan, Esquire reached a successful solution of a potentially critical situation.[1181]

The final signing was scheduled for September 22, 1941 and on September 20 a joint communique concerning this matter would be issued in Tokyo, Hsinking, Moscow, and Viga (Ulan,

[1178] III, 903.
[1179] III, 904.
[1180] III, 905.
[1181] III, 906.

[243]

Bator or Urga). As the time for the final session approached, some controversy over its location arose. The Japanese army desired the location to be Dorugi while the Mongolians favored Viga. Eventually, the conference met at Harbin.

According to the Japanese representative at Hsinking, it would aid Japan's cause to have the Manchukuoans publish the proceedings of the conference as one of their official documents rather than to have the Japanese government do so.[1182] Tokyo replied that there were no objections to having Manchukuo make the announcements although Tokyo itself wanted to consider and decide upon a method of announcing the related material in respect to the conferences.[1183]

However, by October 1, 1941 Tokyo had issued the policies it had decided to adopt toward all newspapers in connection with the Harbin conferences. Newspaper releases concerning boundary settlement were to be limited to simple factual statements concerning the exchanges of notes. The subject would be mentioned only in general terms though the successful results of the conference would be stressed.

An official government statement would be published but all documents in connection with the matter would be banned from publication. New maps for the public were to represent in only a vague manner the areas involved, while any printed matter describing in detail the new boundary was to be suppressed.[1184] The Manchukuoan-Mongolian Border Commission completed its general arrangements by October 3, 1941. With the exception of a few changes in phraseology, the original Manchukuoan proposal concerning the 300 kilos of border was accepted.[1185]

The tasks of drafting the necessary documents and issuing a joint communique remained to be done, and on October 7, 1941 the Manchukuoan government issued the following communique:

"The Empire of Manchukuo and the Union of the Mongol People have set up a mixed commission to determine the boundaries between the two countries. This commission has been meeting in Harbin and at boundary locations since September 23rd. The conferences have met under favorable conditions until October-----, and the plenipotentiaries have completed a certified written report of the results of their efforts. Having done so, the plenipotentiaries have entirely fulfilled their duty."[1186]

On October 13, 1941 Tokyo indicated its belief that any statement concerning developments in the conferences, which had been under way since June 1941, should be limited to what had already been published in joint communiques. In addition, no reference was to be made to the Nomonhan incident.[1187]

485. Finland Regains Territory Ceded to Russia

Finnish success in recapturing all of its territory formerly ceded to Russia with the exception of the Hango leased territory, many small islands, and the far northern fishing areas was reported to Tokyo on September 4, 1941 by Mr. Tadashi Sakaya, Japanese representative in the Finnish capitol. Furthermore, Finland's President, Risto Ryti, had divulged to newspaper correspondents that Finland would not demand the restoration of more land than had been hers in the past. Nevertheless, it was the belief of some diplomatic officials that the territory west of the Murmansk railroad would be ceded to Finland.[1188]

[1182] III, 907.
[1183] III, 908.
[1184] III, 909.
[1185] III, 910-911.
[1186] III, 912.
[1187] III, 913.
[1188] III, 914.

[244]

THE "MAGIC" BACKGROUND OF PEARL HARBOR

486. Japan Notes Stiffening of Russian Resistance

According to a report from Moscow on September 5, 1941, the failure of German aircraft to appear over Moscow for a few days had given the Russian populace increased hope; but Japanese agents reported the situation at Leningrad and Kiev to be still critical with army losses remaining high and few Russian airplanes appearing over the front lines.

Japanese sources disclosed that a feeling of discontent and contempt for the Stalin regime was manifesting itself and was undermining the confidence of the people in the propaganda which stressed the superiority of the Russian army. Though the Japanese believed that the Germans were attempting to foment a revolution, they pointed to the lack of freedom or liberty in a Russia controlled by the OGPU as evidence of the improbability of overthrowing the Stalin regime.[1189]

487. Leningrad Is Bombed and Kiev Fails

On September 24, 1941, Ambassador Tatekawa reported from Moscow that German planes had bombed that city and also the southern part of Leningrad.[1190] A week later, commenting upon Russia's casual announcement of the fall of Kiev as an attempt to divert the people's attention, he stated his opinion that the disappointment and feeling of betrayal experienced by the Russian people in this regard would gradually turn into popular mistrust toward the government.[1191]

488. Japan Protests Against Russian Floating Mines

The question of Russian responsibility for laying mines in waters near Vladivostok reached a minor crisis in September 1941 when a Japanese vessel was destroyed by a floating mine.

In spite of the fact that the Japanese government had already issued formal protests to the Russian government regarding the mining of the northern waters of the Sea of Japan, no effort had been made to remove these floating mechanical mines, with the result that a situation extremely dangerous to Japanese shipping had arisen.

On several occasions during August Japanese fishermen had come across mines drifting in the offshore fishing area in the western portion of a fishing zone. In this same area a sixty-ton fishing boat was sunk on September 1, 1941 after contacting a drifting mine. Since the number of floating mines, apparently of Soviet manufacture, was increasing, the Japanese government was forced to forbid the dispatching of sailing vessels to northern waters.

Furthermore, the Japanese government handed Soviet authorities a rigorous protest outlining the terrific losses that had been brought about by the presence of mines in these waters. Because the maintenance of a calm and normal situation in the Sea of Japan was a necessary factor in relations with Soviet Russia, it was felt that the Russian government should recognize the necessity for removing these mechanical mines; if not, additional loss might be sustained by Japanese or Third Country vessels. Japan, therefore, expected a sincere answer from the Soviet Union that would guarantee the safety of Japanese waters in the future.[1192]

It was further feared that if any American ships sailing in the neighborhood of Vladivostok struck one of these mines, Japan would be intimidated; therefore, a summary of the warning issued to Soviet Russia was also to be submitted to the American government for reference.[1193]

Although the Japanese had demanded an official apology, Ambassador Smetanin replied on September 22 that Russia in adhering to the spirit of the Hague Covenant of 1907, although it was not a signatory, had exercised caution in the laying of mines to avoid endangering neu-

[1189] III, 915.
[1190] III, 916.
[1191] III, 917.
[1192] III, 918.
[1193] III, 919.

[245]

tral vessels. Therefore, if Japanese vessels stayed clear of belligerent waters, they would not be sunk. Consequently, Russia considered Japan's protest to be groundless and refused to pay the indemnity demanded. Regardless of this flat refusal, the Japanese Vice Minister responded that Japan would wait for a formal response before deciding on the proper measures to be taken.[1194]

Another incident which caused the Japanese much concern, occurred on the morning of September 23, 1941 when the Hanoi Maru sighted, in the vicinity of Seisuira, a Russian floating mine, which it immediately delivered to Rashin. While proceeding from Rashin to Vladivostok, the Hanoi Maru sighted another mine which was also picked up and taken back to Rashin. These events were immediately reported to the Russian Embassy in Tokyo.[1195]

489. Japanese Intelligence Reveals Hitler's Demands on Russia Prior to German-Russian War

Japanese intelligence agents in Washington had been gathering information on the negotiations between Germany and Russia prior to the outbreak of hostilities on June 22, 1941. On September 29, 1941 they informed Tokyo of Chancellor Hitler's demands on Russia. Of the three stipulations allegedly made by Germany, Premier Stalin supposedly had agreed to the first two: (1) Germany should have access to Ukrainian oil and grain for the duration of the war against England; and (2) Germany should be permitted joint operation of the Siberia Railroad and be allowed to establish military bases in the Far East including the Vladivostok area. Premier Stalin had flatly refused the third demand that German representatives be stationed in the Russian military general headquarters.

It was then that Foreign Minister von Ribbentrop had encouraged Chancellor Hitler to believe that invasion of Russia would win the support of the remnants of the church faction and bourgeoisie and that the destruction of the Stalin regime would be an easy matter. However, as Soviet resistance had proved Herr von Ribbentrop's assumption to be erroneous, the Foreign Minister had fallen into disfavor with Chancellor Hitler, and his private intelligence organization either had been disbanded or had been taken over by the German army.[1196]

490. Ambassador Tatekawa Reports Discontent in Russia

On September 30, 1941 Ambassador Yoshitsugu Tatekawa reported that four million refugees were moving inward from the front lines and were roaming from city to city in search of food. In spite of the rising discontent and resentment of the refugees toward the government, evident partiality was being shown to special privilege groups in the Communist party.[1197]

491. Japanese Diplomat Supports Neutrality Pact with Russia

On October 10, 1941 the Japanese representative at Harbin reported that a telegram from Moscow to the Soviet Ambassador in Japan had stressed that Russia should not now consider surrendering to the German invader since it had endured many sacrifices and would soon be assisted by the United States and England.

The same representative suggested that because of Japan's isolation, it should maintain its neutrality and should arrange a provisional agreement upon the expiration of the present Neutrality Pact with Russia.[1198]

[1194] III, 920.
[1195] III, 921.
[1196] III, 922.
[1197] III, 923.
[1198] III, 924.

[246]

THE "MAGIC" BACKGROUND OF PEARL HARBOR

492. Ambassador Tatekawa Recognizes Russian Strength

Ambassador Tatekawa informed Tokyo on October 10, 1941 of the probability that should Germany bring Russia to complete surrender, the Communistic regime would be completely obliterated and a Fascist order would be set up in the country. On the other hand, the Japanese Ambassador believed that Russia was capable of enduring still heavier defeats by retiring behind the formidable Volga barrier where it could use vanquished troops and draw upon the agricultural and industrial resources in the Ural or Ob basins.[1199] He felt that if Germany should attack again in the spring, Russia would gradually retire to the Far East. He cannot imagine that Japan would stand by because if she had been a mere onlooker while Germany fought England and the United States, she would have to submit to whatever terms were dictated.

Ambassador Tatekawa was not convinced of Russia's ultimate capitulation, and he noted that Germany might possibly have to yield a point and concede the continued existence of Bolshevism.[1200] Although a severe winter would not materially effect an invasion of England or a campaign against Egypt, it might halt operations in Russia. Ambassador Tatekawa reiterated his contention that Russian forces in the Ural, when attacked by Germany, might escape a decisive defeat by gradually receding eastward, toward Japan.[1201]

493. Ambassador Tatekawa Reports on War Progress (October 8, 1941)

Ambassador Tatekawa announced from Moscow on October 9, 1941 that the Russian press had not mentioned a word regarding the German general offensive until the day of his report when it suddenly disclosed that severe fighting was going on 243 kilometers from the capitol. Another conscription had taken place on October 3, 1941 and two days later children under the age of 12 years had been removed to Chelyabinsk.[1202]

The desertion of Orel had severely shocked the Russian people; and Ambassador Tatekawa believed that although numerous articles had been written by both Pravda and Isvestia emphasizing the urgency of uniting to keep off the bonds of Nazi slavery, the people were resentful toward the government leaders who had permitted this defeat. He reported that anxiety and restlessness were increasing among the people.[1203]

494. Ambassador Tatekawa and Staff Evacuate Moscow

On October 16, 1941 Ambassador Tatekawa and most of his staff left Moscow for an unknown destination. Tokyo immediately sent a circular dispatch to all Japanese diplomats in foreign countries, informing them that code messages were no longer to be addressed to Moscow.[1204]

[1199] III, 925.
[1200] III, 926.
[1201] III, 927.
[1202] III, 928.
[1203] III, 929.
[1204] III, 930.

[247] [248 blank]

THE "MAGIC" BACKGROUND OF PEARL HARBOR

PART C—JAPANESE DIPLOMATIC ACTIVITIES THROUGHOUT THE WORLD

(i) Japanese-Italian Relations

495. The Italian Press Urges Japan to Attack Allies

Following closely the example of Ambassador Oshima, Ambassador Zembei Horikiri in Rome urged Japan's entrance into the German-Russian conflict. On August 6, 1941 he expressed the belief that the Italian people feared a breach between Japan and the Axis. Though Roman authorities were attempting to suppress all rumors to this effect, they expected Japan to take new and direct measures for counteracting British and American propaganda which they believed was fostering these rumors of separation.[1205]

Ambassador Horikiri also noted that, although the Italian people had been impressed by the occupation of French Indo-China and though their newspapers had emphasized the evident strength of the Japanese Empire, some new step, such as the entrance of Japan into the war, was now required to convince them of Japan's sincerity.

In keeping with the propaganda program emphasizing Japan's military might, the Italian press had been stressing that United States and British power had been overestimated, and that under the surface the Allies had no intentions of arousing Japan suddenly but hoped to bring about its disintegration gradually. In line with this position, the Italian newspapers urged that Japan direct an assault on England and the United States; for they had stated that should the United States assist Russia by way of Siberia, they would force Japan into war against the Soviet Union. Furthermore, the Italians hoped that a general war against Russia would develop from the current situation.[1206]

496. Ambassador Horikiri Reveals Alleged Plans for Hitler-Mussolini Meeting

On August 18, 1941 Ambassador Horikiri learned from intelligence sources that Chancellor Hitler and Premier Mussolini were planning to meet somewhere in southern Russia. It was believed that this meeting would be held as a counter-action to the recent Atlantic Charter meeting of President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill.[1207]

497. Ambassador Horikiri Suggests Use of Anti-Russian Propaganda

On August 22, 1941, Ambassador Horikiri commented on a news broadcast which had revealed that the final draft of a mutual aid treaty had been completed between Russia and Chungking. He suggested that the news of this agreement could be most effectively used as propaganda in accusing Soviet Russia of having violated the Japanese-Russian neutrality agreement.[1208]

Tokyo replied that although the veracity of this press report was under investigation, at present the authorities in Japan were not using this material in their propaganda campaign.[1209]

498. Ambassador Horikiri Reports on the Italian Occupation of Croatia

On August 28, 1941, Mr. Horikiri reviewed the Italian-Croatian situation following the occupation of Croatia's Adriatic coast on August 23, 1941, by the Italian Second Army. Since Japanese newspapermen had left Italy for Croatia early in the month in the company of Mr. Honokura of the Japanese diplomatic staff in Rome and had returned on August 25, 1941,

[1205] III, 931.
[1206] Ibid.
[1207] III, 932.
[1208] III, 933.
[1209] III, 934.

[249]

Ambassador Horikiri was able to appraise the situation from first hand information. According to the newspapermen, peace and order were being restored gradually under the leadership of the Italian Fascist Party. The country was rich in natural resources, the cities were clean, and the people were of a fairly high cultural level.

Although the Matchek faction was still strong among the peasants, increasing regard for the new regime was in evidence. In addition, the Mohammedans seemed to be acting more in unison with the Italian fascists, although it had become necessary to exercise strict vigilance over the Serbians who numbered about one million. However, Germany had already laid plans to solve the problem by exchanging Serbians for Slovenes in Serbian territory.[1210]

Ambassador Horikiri reported that the Croatians harbored a strong resentment against Italy because of its many exorbitant demands and the unreasonable occupation of Dalmatia. In fact, some Croats were going so far as to demand the return of the territories of Fiume and Zara.

Croatian authorities had appealed to Germany with regard to Italian pressure but with no success, since Germany replied that the matter would have to rest until the Russian-German was had been concluded. Questions pending between Italy and Croatia centered around the boundary between the two countries and the problem of trade. Although Italy had sent representatives to discuss these problems, the Croatians were delaying action allegedly because of German advice.

According to Ambassador Horikiri, German forces were encamped on Croatia's Hungarian border while the Italian forces were aligned along the Adriatic Sea. The standard of the Italian forces appeared to be far below that of the German armies which further contributed to Croatian contempt for Italy. The Croats, tending to depend on Germany as the only force that might restrain Italy in this territory, were also bitter over Hungary's seizure of some oil fields which they envisioned to be part of their territory.[1211]

499. Ambassador Horikiri Again Urges Japan to Attack in the East

In commenting on Japan's future plans with regard to the Russo-German war, on August 30, 1941 Ambassador Horikiri stated that Japan appeared to him to be endeavoring principally to restrain Great Britain, the United States, and Soviet Russia peaceably, though it did not have the intention or the power to break immediately the encirclement of the three powers. If Japan were now armed sufficiently, nothing was to be gained by waging a war of nerves in an effort to hold off the Allied powers, because of these tactics Japan would only succeed in sharpening the enemy's vigilance and strengthening its defense, thereby causing greater sacrifices on the part of Japan.[1212]

Stating that he realized the value of different approaches to the accomplishment of Japan's purpose, Ambassador Horikiri urged immediate action in advancing to the south and in invading Thailand. This conformed with his previous recommendation of August 5, 1941.[1213] that Japan invade Russia immediately to eliminate the possibility of any future union between Great Britain, the United States, and Russia. Then Japan could deal with Great Britain and America later.[1214]

500. Mr. Filippo Anfuso Reports on Hitler-Mussolini Meeting

On September 4, 1941 Ambassador Horikiri reported on a conference which had taken place between Japanese Counselor Yoshiro Ando and the Italian Maritime Commission Director,

[1210] III, 935.
[1211] III, 936-937.
[1212] III, 938.
[1213] III, 679-681.
[1214] III, 939.

[250]

THE "MAGIC" BACKGROUND OF PEARL HARBOR

Filippo Anfuso, who had recently returned from the Mussolini-Hitler meeting. From this conversation Mr. Ando learned that the Italian and German armies were operating in perfect coordination; and although the Russians appeared to be putting up stiff resistance all along the line, it was believed that the German army would reach the Caucasus by the end of the week.

When Mr. Ando had inquired as to the political questions which were discussed in the conference between Chancellor Hitler and Premier Mussolini, Mr. Anfuso replied that they had talked about fighting until final victory and had agreed to overthrow the Bolsheviks and drive the Anglo-Saxons out of Europe.

No discussion was held, Mr. Anfuso said, regarding a conference of European nations which rumors declared was to be called in connection with the question of the New Order; and he expressed his personal belief that no such conference was necessary. To the Italian Director's return query about conditions in Japan, Counselor Ando had made a satisfactory reply.[1215]

501. Italy Suspects Japan of Neglecting Tripartite Pact

On September 30, 1941, Ambassador Horikiri informed Tokyo that the Italian Propaganda department, in a seeming attempt to spite Japan and Germany, had ordered the press not to emphasize the Tripartite anniversary which had been celebrated only superficially by the government and people of Italy. In this connection, he recounted a recent incident which had taken place at the Villa Madama on the occasion of Foreign Minister Galeazzo Ciano's press conference. A Japanese press correspondent had observed that the Japanese flag was not among the other flags hung in the reception hall. After he brought this omission to the attention Louis J. Sheehan, Esquire of the proper authorities, all of the flags were removed.

These happenings were of no little concern to Ambassador Horikiri; for they demonstrated that Italy disapproved strongly of the Japanese-American negotiations as a further indication of Japan's lukewarm attitude toward the Tripartite Pact.[1216]

Again, on October 1, 1941, Ambassador Horikiri in recounting an interview between Mr. Adolfo Alesandrini, Chief of the Amerasiatic Bureau, and Vice Consul Ando emphasized Italy's displeasure at Japan's recent attitude toward the Tripartite agreement. Mr. Alesandrini had made it clear that with the mounting indignation of the Italian people as well as of certain government officials, it was becoming exceedingly difficult for him to answer questions concerning Japan's intentions toward the Tripartite Alliance. Although Mr. Alesandrini was accepted as an authority on Japanese problems and though he understood that Japan's negotiating with the United States did not necessarily imply a withdrawal from the Axis, he inquired of Vice-Consul Ando concerning Japan's intentions in the matter.

Replying that he could not see that the United States-Japanese talks would harm the Axis, Mr. Ando expressed his personal opinion that in view of Japan's internal situation, all possible peaceful means should be exhausted first in the hope of reaching an agreement with the United States. The Vice Consul also explained that he did not believe that the Empire should enter into conflict unprepared as Italy had been forced to do. Mr. Alesandrini was in agreement on these points and remarked that he had made the same explanation to the Italian authorities.[1217]

502. Japan Learns of United States Representation to the Vatican

On October 8, 1941 Tokyo was advised that President Roosevelt's special envoy to the Vatican, Mr. Myron Taylor, had been sent to convince the Pope of the possibility of negotiating with the U.S.S.R. for the restoration of the Roman Catholic Church in that country. However,

[1215] III, 940.
[1216] III, 941.
[1217] III, 942.

[251]

the Pontiff had definitely refused, stating that although he had always been willing to promote the Catholic faith in other countries occupied by German and Allied forces, he felt that he could not trust Russia on religious matters.

Following this, it was alleged that Mr. Harold Tittman, Commercial Attache of the American Embassy in Rome, had visited the Vatican in the hope of persuading the Pope to undertake this task but had received a negative response in spite of his offer of American and British assistance.[1218]

503. War Creates Difficulties for Japanese Exchange Students

A similar situation to that existing in Germany, where Japanese exchange students were failing to meet financial obstacles because so few successful business houses remained in Berlin and in other university towns where they might obtain part time employment,[1219] prevailed in Italy also during September and October, 1941. Since no objection had been incurred from the International Students' Association, Ambassador Horikiri announced on September 30, 1941[1220] that two students, Tsunoda and Col. Seimei Shimizu, unable to remain financially independent, had decided to return home on the next evacuation steamer. Their expenses were being met by the Far Eastern Association and another unidentified organization.[1221]

In an effort to alleviate this situation Tokyo authorities decided to delay the departure of any students, saying that it was only in compliance with the wishes of the Far East Association that the government had been sending students to Italy alone. In this regard the Home Office requested that Ambassador Horikiri consult with Ambassador Oshima.[1222] However, Ambassador Horikiri chose not to consult with Mr. Oshima and replied on October 8, 1941 that although the continuance of exchange students was desirable, he could not see why they should be sent only to Italy during such critical times.[1223]

504. Mr. Virginio Gayda Urges Japan to Enter or to Threaten War on the United States

On October 8, 1941, Ambassador Horikiri conferred with Mr. Virginio Gayda, who candidly explained that Japanese-American negotiations gave the impression that Japan was pursuing its own ends and not attempting to act in harmony with the Axis. He believed that Japan must necessarily adopt a belligerent attitude to restrain America from entering the war and to assure victory for the Axis. Thus Japan would remain in control of the Orient. On the other hand, in the event that Japan did not assist Germany and Italy, Japan would be a loser at the conclusion of the war, regardless of which side should win, for it was possible that a victorious Germany might cooperate with the United States and England in oppressing Japan economically.

According to Mr. Gayda, Japan could be of great assistance to the Axis in restraining Great Britain by waging submarine warfare against British shipping thereby discouraging America's entrance into the war. The war then would be over in six months and Japan need not risk attacking Russia whose fate was already sealed.

Commenting briefly on the various aspects of the economic situation, Mr. Gayda believed that the present acute conditions in Italy would not become worse and that despite the discontent of some of the people, Italy would have no thought of peace until England had been forced into submission.[1224]

[1218] III, 943.
[1219] III, 944.
[1220] III, 945.
[1221] III, 946.
[1222] III, 947.
[1223] III, 948.
[1224] III, 949.