Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T01:59:54.285Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Effect of the Non-Recognition of Manchukuo

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Frederick A. Middlebush
Affiliation:
University of Missouri

Extract

When the United States government, on January 7, 1932, and the Extraordinary Assembly of the League of Nations, on March 11, 1932, and again on February 24, 1933, invoked non-recognition as a sanction,1 the necessity at once arose of determining what would be the precise effects, as far as international relations are concerned, of withholding recognition of Manchukuo. It may seem strange that the decision to resort to non-recognition as a sanction was taken before an attempt was made to determine the practical effects of such action on the Far Eastern situation. Presumably, however, this must be the procedure in the application of international sanctions.

Type
International Affairs
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1934

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 In concluding its statement of recommendations regarding the Sino-Japanese dispute, the Assembly stated that the “maintenance and recognition of the existing régime in Manchuria” was excluded, as such action would be “incompatible with the good understanding between the two countries on which peace in the Far East depends.” It followed, therefore, that “in adopting the present report, the members of the League intend to abstain, particularly as regards the existing régime in Manchuria, from any act which might prejudice or delay the carrying out of the recommendations of the said report. They will continue not to recognize this régime either de jure or de facto. They intend to abstain from taking any isolated action with regard to the situation in Manchuria and to continue to concert their action among themselves as well as with the interested states not members of the League.” Document A (Extra;. 22. 1933. VII. Pt. IV, Sec. III.

2 The Advisory Committee consists of the representatives of the Committee of Nineteen (provided for in the Assembly resolution of March 11, 1932), Canada, and the Netherlands. The Committee was empowered to invite the governments of the United States and Russia to cooperate in its work. The United States accepted and Russia rejected the invitation. The general mandate of the Advisory Committee is “… to follow the situation [in the Far East], to assist the Assembly in performing its duties under Article 3, paragraph 3 [of the Covenant] and, with the same objects, to aid the members of the League in concerting their action and their attitude among themselves and with the non-member states.” Verbatim Record of the Special Session of the Assembly [February 24, 1933], Eighteenth Plenary Meeting, p. 1.

3 C.L. 117(a). 1933. VII; C.L. 117. 1933. VII.

4 The following is a list of the open conventions to which the above procedure applies, and the states with which acts of accession are to be deposited, and which would therefore assume the initiative in consulting the other contracting states in regard to the acceptance or refusal of an act of accession submitted by Manchukuo:

Belgium: Convention of December 31, 1913, for the constitution of an International Bureau of Commercial Statistics.

Convention of March 15, 1886, for the International Exchange of Official Documents and of Scientific and Literary Publications.

Convention of July 5, 1890, establishing an International Union for the Publication of Customs Tariffs.

Spain: International Convention on Telecommunications, Madrid, December 9, 1932, establishing the International Union for Telecommunications.

France: Convention on the Regulation of Aërial Navigation, Paris, October 13 1919 (Article 41).

Convention concerning International Exhibitions, Paris, November 22, 1928.

Agreement for the constitution of an International Office for Dealing with Contagious Diseases of Animals, Paris, January 25, 1924.

Convention for the constitution of an International Office of Chemistry, October 29, 1927.

Metric Convention, signed May 20, 1875, revised 1921, respecting the Constitution of an International Office of Weights and Measures.

Sanitary Convention, opened for signature at Paris, on June 26, 1926.

Italy: International Agreement respecting the constitution of an International Office of Public Health, Rome, December 9, 1907.

Netherlands: Conventions signed at the Second Hague Conference (1907). International Opium Convention, signed at The Hague on January 23, 1912.

International Sanitary Convention for Air Navigation, 1933.

Switzerland: Convention regarding Industrial Property (establishing the International Office of the Union for the Protection of Industrial Property; first convention concluded 1883, revised 1925.)

Convention for the constitution of an International Union for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (first convention concluded September 9, 1886, revised 1928).

Universal Postal Convention (latest revised text, London, June 28, 1929).

Geneva Convention for the amelioration of the condition of the wounded and sick in armies in the field (Red Cross Convention), signed at Geneva on July 27, 1929.

Convention relating to the Treatment of Prisoners of War.

“In regard to the Treaty for the Renunciation of War (Pact of Paris), the government of the United States of America might be looked upon as occupying a position similar to that of the governments of those states members of the League with which conventions have been deposited.”

5 This article is as follows: Temporary suspension of service. When, as a result of exceptional circumstances, an Administration finds itself obliged to suspend the execution of services temporarily, in whole or in part, it is bound to give notice thereof immediately, by telegraph if necessary, to the Administration or Administrations concerned.” Universal Postal Union: Convention of London (June 28, 1929) (Government Printing Office, Washington, 1930)Google Scholar.

6 United States consuls are still carrying on their functions in Manchuria. American consuls in China do not function under exequaturs; therefore the question of granting recognition through the acceptance of an exequatur does not arise, i.e., if Manchukuo is presumed to succeed to China in this area. The procedure in appointing consuls to China is for the American government merely to notify the Chinese government of the assignment of consular officers to the various posts in China where American consular offices are maintained.

7 The report is contained in C.L. 117. 1933. VII. Annex.