Stimson Pact

Words: 515
Pages: 3

Formerly under siege, world powers unified in a determined endeavor to conserve its cessation of bloodshed. After World War I, global leaders united in their pursuit to preserve peace to create the Kellogg-Briand Pact. The pact was an international agreement, made between a sundry of world nations, where signatory nations pledged to abstain from war as a mechanism of resolution of any nature of skirmish amongst them. In 1931, Japan dishonored this agreement by occupying and annexing authority over Manchuria. In 1932, the American Secretary of State, Henry L. Stimson, sent a notice condemning the actions of Japan and declaring the United States’ refusal to recognize the legitimacy of Japan’s actions. In “War Is an Illegal Thing,” Stimson declared that the pact was the key to a sustained world peace. He insisted that the determination to abolish war after World War I must not be forgotten. Joseph Grew, the American Ambassador to Japan during the 1930s, gave his thoughts regarding Stimson’s dispatch in “A More Forceful Response to Japan Is Needed.” He believed that the simple act of publically conveying condemnation of Japan’s actions was “paradoxical” to a peace loving nation. Grew argues, the …show more content…
Stimson had abundant conviction in the Kellogg-Briand Pact as a means of keeping peace and made so clear in his condemnation of the Japanese invasion of Manchuria. In 1932, shortly after sending his address to the Japanese and Chinese governments, the League of Nations approved Stimson’s nonrecognition principle. According to Stimson in “War Is an Illegal Thing,” the refusal to recognize the acts of an aggressor might have only minute bearing on that aggressor. He believed that a global unity in disapproval of an aggressor’s actions would place a strong burden on the aggressor, because never before had international opinion been greatly mobilized. Stimson wanted large-scale censure of violations of the pact to dissuade any nation from opposing