Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-sh8wx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T15:56:25.052Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘Trouble Must Follow’: Australia's Ban on Iron Ore Exports to Japan in 1938

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Kosmas Tsokhas
Kosmas Tsokhas
Affiliation:
Economic History Program, RSSS, Australian National University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Despite the attention that has been given to the role of economic sanctions in Japan's decision to launch the Pacific war, Australia's decision to ban iron ore exports to Japan has been given little attention, even though this was one of the earliest economic sanctions imposed onimperial Japan in the 1930s. To a degree this neglect can be traced to a preoccupation with the actions and objectives of the great powers and a failure to consider the opportunities available to small nations to take significant initiatives. The following article traces the origins of the iron ore embargo back to 1934 when Essington Lewis, the Managing Director of the Broken Hill Proprietary Company Ltd (BHP), Australia's iron and steel monopoly, visited Japan and subsequently advocated the development of an Australian armaments industry to counter probable Japanese aggression in the Pacific. In Japan Lewis crossed paths with J. G. Latham, the Minister for External Affairs, who was leading the Australian government's Eastern Mission. Latham returned to Australia with conclusions that differed fundamentally from those of Lewis, who came up with a plan to take advantage of Japan's dependence on imports of iron ore and other iron products to finance investment in Australian armaments manufacturing. In explaining this outcome the article discusses interactions between a number of conflicts: between Latham and Lewis; between the British Treasury and the Foreign Office; and between the Japanese army and navy. In London the Treasury wanted to focus on the European theatre, while also holding down military spending in order to achieve balanced budgets. The Treasury believed that the way to best defend British commercial interests in Asia was to appease Japan. On the other hand, the Foreign Office was committed to the protection of British interests in the Far East by a more forceful diplomacy, although it was only willing to counten-ance behavior short of military action. Consistent with Latham's recommendations to his government, the emerging consensus in London was that while a settlement in China would help to safeguard British interests there, as long as the Japanese were bound up in their war in China they were less likely to attack British colonies in Southeast Asia and the Pacific. In 1936 this orientation was challenged by a shift in the balance of power in Tokyo away from the army and in favor of the navy. Although priority continued to be placed on winning the war in China and guarding against an attack from the Soviet Union, now the navy's plan for southward expansion was given more careful consideration and credibility.

Type
Articles
Information
Modern Asian Studies , Volume 29 , Issue 4 , October 1995 , pp. 871 - 892
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

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 See especially Feis, Herbert, The Road to Pearl Harbor (Princeton University Press, Princeton N.J. 1950).Google Scholar

2 Lowe, Peter, Great Britain and the Origins of the Pacific War (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1977), pp. 6–8.Google Scholar

3 Earle Page Papers (EPP) National Library of Australia (NLA) MS 1663, folder 288. J. G. Latham, Report to Prime Minister, Australian Eastern Mission, 3 July 1934Google Scholar

4 BHP Archives, Melbourne (BHPA) M 9/4. Iron and Steel Industry in Japan, 15 May 1934.Google Scholar

5 For the above material in this paragraph including quotations see BHPA M 9/4. Japan, 14 May 1934.Google Scholar

6 For the above material in this paragraph including quotations see ibid.

7 Ibid. The above discussion is consistent with the conclusions in Blainey, Geoffrey, The Steel Master. A Life of Essington Lewis (Sun Books, Melbourne, 1981), pp. 138–41.Google Scholar

8 For the above material including quotations see BHPA M 9/6. Essington Lewis to H. G. Darling, 14 August 1934.Google Scholar

9 BHPA M 9/6. Essington Lewis to H. G. Darling, 11 july 1936.Google Scholar

10 Ibid.

11 Lowe, , Great Britain, p. 8.Google Scholar

12 Public Record Office, London (PRO) Treasury (7)172/1831. A. H. F. Edwardes to Sir Warren Fisher, 26 November 1934.Google Scholar

13 PRO T 172/1831. Comments on Mr Sansom's letter to Sir Edward Crowe, A. H. F. Edwardes, 26 November 1934.Google Scholar

14 Ibid.

15 For the above material in this paragraph including quoation see PRO T 172/1831. Chancellor of the Exchequer, 15 January 1935.Google Scholar

16 Lowe, , Great Britain, pp. 12–20.Google Scholar

17 Frei, Henry, Japan's Southward Advance (Melbourne University Press, Carlton, 1990) PP. 135–9Google Scholar

18 PRO Board of Trade (BT) 11/299. E. T. Crutchley to the Under Secretary of State Dominions Office, 7 May 1935.Google Scholar

19 Ibid.

20 For the above material in this paragraph including quotations see PRO Dominions Office (DO) 35/S79. G. W. Orde to the Under Secretary of State, Colonial Office, 10 February 1937.Google Scholar

21 For the above material in this paragraph including quotations see PRO DO 35/S79. Darwin Patrol Vessel ‘Larrikin’.Google Scholar

22 PRO DO 35/550. S. M. Bruce to the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs, 9 March 1937.Google Scholar

23 Ibid.

24 PRO DO 35/550. Foreign Policy Committee. Relations with Japan. Note by the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs.Google Scholar

25 PRO Foreign Office (FO) 436/1. Consul-General Fitzmaurice to Mr Eden, 12 July 1937.Google Scholar

26 PRO FO 436/1. Consul-General Fitzmaurice to Mr Eden, 22 July 1937.Google Scholar

27 PRO FO 436/1. Sir R. Craigie to Mr Eden, 30 October 1937.Google Scholar

28 PRO FO 436/1. Sir R. Craigie to Mr Eden, 3 November 1937.Google Scholar

29 PRO FO 436/2. Sir R. Craigie to Viscount Halifax, 22 February 1938.Google Scholar

30 PRO FO 436/2. Sir R. Craigie to Viscount Halifax, 23 March 1938.Google Scholar

31 Ibid.

32 Ibid.

33 Ibid.

34 Lowe, , Great Britain, pp. 41–9, 52–7.Google Scholar

35 PRO DO 35/549. Possibility of Retaliation Against Action by Japan in the Far East Detrimental to British Interests.Google Scholar

36 Lowe, , Great Britain, pp. 61–70.Google Scholar

37 PRO FO 436/3. Consul-General Fitzmaurice to Viscount Halifax, 30 October 1938.Google Scholar

38 Ibid.

39 Ibid.

40 Major B. Combes, General Staff, Army Headquarters to H. A. Peterson, Department of External Affairs, 29 April 1937. Document 21. Neale, R. G., Edwards, P. G. and Kenway, H. (eds), Documents on Australian Foreign Policy 1937–49, Volume 1: 1937–38 (Department of Foreign Affairs, AGPS, Canberra, 1975).Google Scholar

41 Ibid.

42 Memorandum from Mr Longfield Lloyd to J. F. Murphy, Secretary of the Department of Commerce, 6 October 1937. Document III, in Neale, Edwards and Kenway, Documents.Google Scholar

43 For the above quotations see ibid..

44 Cablegram from J. A. Lyons to S. M. Bruce, 7 April 1938. Document 181, in Neale, Edwards and Kenway, Documents.Google Scholar

45 BHPA A17/4. Memorandum of interview held at Commonwealth Offices, Melbourne, 4 March 1938.Google Scholar

46 Ibid.

47 For the above material in this paragraph see BHPA A17/4. Essington Lewis' to H. G. Darling, 6 June 1938.Google Scholar

48 BHPA A17/4. Memorandum of interview in Mr Lewis’ Office, 11 June 1938.Google Scholar

49 BHPA A17/3. BHP to G. Bass, Secretary, Newcastle Trades Hall Council, 13 December 1938.Google Scholar

50 PRO DO 35/599. Wakamatsu, Consul-General, Sydney to j. A. Lyons, 21 May 1938.Google Scholar

51 Ibid.

52 PRO DO 35/599. J. A. Lyons to the Consul-General for Japan, 1 June 1938.Google Scholar