ACCEPTED BY VICHY

Wairarapa Times-Age, 24 July 1941, Page 6

ACCEPTED BY VICHY

JAPANESE DEMANDS FOR FURTHER “FACILITIES" IN INDO-CHINA. TROOP MOVEMENTS IN NORTH CHINA. (By Telegraph—Pr«ss Association— Copyright) (Received This Day, 11.55 a.m.) LONDON. July 23. Japanese demands for the use of facilities in Southern Indo-China have been accepted by the Vichy Government. A Vichy spokesman said France saw no objection to Japan temporarily occupying military bases in Indo-China. provided there were no threats to the colony’s integrity and to French sovereignty. Japan had not made territorial demands. She merely wanted to protect Indo-China. American diplomats predict that the French Government’s decision will arouse an unfavourable reaction in France. Meanwhile a tight censorship has been clamped down on the Japanese demands. x A Chungking report states that a large Japanese fleet and thirty troop transports are moving southward, following on a refusal by the French authorities in Indo-China to accept the Japanese demands. It is reported that the French in Indo-China are prepared to resist. Japanese troops, pianos and ships are reported to be massed at Hainan Island. The Associated Press of Americas Peking correspondent says there is a growing belief that the Japanese Army in North China and Manchukuo is undergoing major shifts. Twenty troop trains have passed northward from Tangshan. Civilian rail traffic in North China has been severely restricted and in Manchukuo has been stopped altogether. General Okamura has returned to Peking after inspecting the military situation in Inner Mongolia. ALLEGED FEARS OF BRITISH AND CHINESE ACTION. FRANCE UNABLE TO DEFEND COLONY. (Received This Day, 1 p.m.) LONDON. July 23. On the subject of Indo-China, a Vichy spokesman stated: “Chinese troop concentrations in _ Yunnan and concentrations of British troops and ] aircraft in Burma and Malaya have, caused France and Japan to fear an i attempt to occupy Indo-China. France] alone is unable to defend the colony." A questioner remarked: “We thought France was pledged to defend the Empire without foreign help." and the spokesman replied: “Events in Syria obliged us to make an exception.” Asked why France had not invited the United States to help defend IndoChina, instead of Japan, the spokesman said: “We asked the United States last year what help she would give us in Indo-China, but wo got nothing from Washington.” The spokesman denied that Germany had intervened at Vichy on behalf of Japan and added that Japan’s intervention came within last year's agreement, recognising Japan’s predominant position in the Far East, also her responsibility for maintaining peace in Asia. Negotiations were proceeding at Hanoi regarding details of the proposed Japanese occupation of IndoChinese naval and air bases. The spokesman insisted that the Japanese occupation would not be permanent. POSITIVE ACTION LIKELY TO BE TAKEN BY U.S.A. SANCTIONS AGAINST JAPAN. (Received This Day, 11.55 a.m.) NEW YORK, July 23. The “New Yorks Times” Washington correspondent, reporting that the United States is ready to impose vigorous economic sanctions against Japan, says it is considered that the Government will express its displeasure by all positive action short of war as follows: Firstly, the stoppage of gold purchases whereby Japan is now obtaining dollar exchange. Secondly, the freezing of all Japanese assets in the United States. Thirdly, the imposition of a complete embargo on essential exports to Japan, including petroleum products. BRITAIN’S STANDPOINT DEFINED BY MR EDEN. ißritish Official Wireless. I (Received This Day, 10.15 a.m.) RUGBY. July 23. Japanese policy in the Far East was the subject of a written reply by the Foreign Secretary (Mr Eden) to a question in the House of Commons. Mr Eden said the Government was aware of persistent reports to the effect that the Japanese Government in-] tended to take action to obtain naval and air bases in Southern Indo-China. The reports were the more significant since they coincided with a Japanese Press campaign of innuendo against Britain in respect both to Indo-China and- Thailand. He welcomed the opportunity, therefore, of stating that the alleged. designs of Britain in both those countries were entirely non-existent. “As regards Indo-China,” said Mr Eden 1 "British relations have been much restricted since the collapse of France, though a limited amount of trade has continued. As regards Thailand Britain has a treaty of non-ag-gression. with that country. That treaty was not designed to obtain exclusive advantages and it is not directed against any third party, except in so far as such third party might attempt to interfere with those excellent and neighbourly relations, political and economic and other, which have always existed between Britain and Thailand.”