Chapter 2: The true purpose of establishing the Nanking Safety Zone
1. What is the International Committee for the Nanking Safety Zone
(1) The statement of establishment of the International Committee for the Nanking Safety
Zone

In the previous chapter, I briefly explained that the International Committee for the Nanking Safety
Zone (hereinafter, the International Committee) was established under the leadership of American
missionaries. Now, let us go into details. A statement was issued at the time of the establishment of
the International Committee:

An International Committee composed of nationals of Denmark, Germany, Great Britain andthe United States, desires to suggest to the Chinese and Japanese authorities the establishment of a
Safety Zone for Civilian Refugees, in the unfortunate event of hostilities at or near Nanking.
The international Committee will undertake to secure from the Chinese authorities specificguarantees that the proposed Safety Zone would be made free and kept free from military
establishments and offices, including those of communications; from the presence of armed men
other than civil police with pistols; and from the passage of soldiers or military officers in any
capacity. (Statement of the International Committee for the Safety Zone, November 22, 1937).1

As clearly seen from this statement, the purpose of the International Committee was to establish andmaintain a safety zone for Chinese civilian refugees and the members of the Committee are nationalsof Denmark, Germany, Great Britain and the United States.

Now, let us look again at the list of twenty-two Westerners who remained behind in Nanjing. They
are Germans, an Austrian, Russians and Americans. Among the members of the International
Committee, only Germans and Americans remained in Nanjing with Chinese civilians. A Dane andBriton, who were listed in the Committee membership list, left. (Briton Mr. Shields left theInternational Committee and acted on his own in Nanjing.) The International Committee for the
Safety Zone was formed for the protection and safety of the civilian population at the time of thebattle, However, not a few of the Committee members withdrew at the most crucial time, when thebattle was about to start and the protection of civilians was most needed. I cannot help but wonder
what kind of organization this committee was.

1

The Nanking Massacre Archival Project: Document, Yale University Library, NMP0125
1

So then what happened? Let us survey the situation at the time through statements of those who weredirectly involved.
“An International Committee has been formed, made up primarily of American doctors from
Kulou Hospital and professors from Nanking University, all missionaries.” 2Shields says “When it was started, things were already pretty much agreed upon; he was invited in
obviously to cast an international glow over something in fact quite partisan.”3

The main members of the International Committee were American missionaries and at the time of its
establishment, an agreement was almost completed. Formally, Westerners, other than Americans,were invited to join the Committee to make it a look like an international organization. To theAmericans, it made no difference in the operation of the Committee whether non-American
members were present or not and, consequently, the Dane and the Britons held nominal membership.
(2) Chairman Rabe’s position

Moreover, the American missionaries managed to elect Mr. Rabe, a German businessman, chairmanof the International Committee.
“Five p.m. meeting of the International Committee for Establishing a Neutral Zone for
Noncombatants in Nanking. They elect me chairman. My protests are to no avail. I give in forthe sake of a good cause.” 4Thus, the German, Rabe, set up as chairman and totally lulled by American missionaries, worked
laboriously for America and the American missionaries. He led the International Committee, like apuppet, as Chancellor Scharffenberg of the German Embassy points out:
“In my view, Herr Rabe as its chairman has indeed achieved extraordinary things, but he has let
himself be lulled far too much by the Americans and is helping promote American interests and2

Jon Rabe, The Goodman of Nanking, edited by Erwin Wickert, Little, Brown and Company,
London, 1999, p.25. (Originally published in German by Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt GmbH, Stuttgart,in 1997 as Der gute Deutsche von Nanking.)
3
Cabot Coville, Diaries of Cabot Coville 1938, Hoover Institution Archive, p.34
4

Rabe, Ibid., p.27.
2

missionaries who are out to catch souls en gros.” 5

While having a German chairman and pretending to be an international organization, theInternational Committee was in fact a body of American missionaries. Readers should now realize
this fact.

(3) Concealment of control by American missionaries
This group of American missionaries was concerned about appearing as “an internationalorganization” and they endeavored to conceal the fact that the International Committee was actuallycontrolled by American missionaries. Here is an interesting statement by missionary Bates at theTokyo Trials:

This committee was organized at first with a Danish chairman, with German, British, andAmerican members. But because foreign governments withdrew almost all of their nationals
from the city, there were at the time of the Japanese attack only Germans and Americans
remaining upon it. The chairman was a distinguished German merchant, Mr. John Rabe. 6
As we learn from Rabe’s diary, the International Committee was formed on November 19, 1937, and“made up primarily of American doctors from Kulou Hospital and professors from Nanking
Universities, all missionaries.” The Dane did not appear to be a key member. And three days later, on
November 22, Mr. Rabe was elected chairman. It was in December that individual governments
ordered their nationals to leave Nanjing. Mr. Bates said that at first the Dane was the chairman, butsince Danish nationals were ordered to leave Nanjing, Mr. Rabe became chairman, in the place of
the Dane. However, this is clearly false. In the first place, a Dane would have never been electedchairman under any circumstance. Mr. Bates never stated the fact that the International Committee
was established and led by American missionaries during the Tokyo Trials. This was the consistentattitude taken by the American missionaries, while concealing as much as possible, the fact that theInternational Committee was controlled by American missionaries.

Oddly, Mr. Rabe, who decided to remain behind in Nanjing as chairman of the International
Committee, by the way of the American embassy, received a telegram from his company, Siemens
China Co. on February 13, 1938, which was dated December 1, 1937, requesting that he leave

5

Rabe, Ibid., p.189-190.

6

Zhang Kaiyuan ed., Eyewitness to Massacre, M. E. Sharpe, New York, 2001, p.60.
3

Nanking immediately. Mr. Rabe finally left Nanjing after the Safety Zone was officially ordered todissolve. In his diary, Mr. Rabe was repentant for having disobeyed his company’s order toimmediately return home, of which he knew nothing.

The question is why a company telegram ordering Mr. Rabe to leave Nanjing was delivered to Mr.
Rabe more than two months after-the-fact by the American embassy. The fact is that the American
embassy thought it unwise for Americans to take full responsibility for the Safety Zone.7 Taking this
into consideration, we can assume that the telegram sent by Siemens Co., ordering Mr. Rabe toreturn home may have been intentionally suppressed by the American missionaries in order to have
Mr. Rabe remain in Nanjing. All the while, the American missionaries involved the American
embassy in their conspiracy.

(4) A list of members of the International Committee for the Nanking Safety Zone
Finally, let us examine members of the International Committee cited in Rabe’s diary (November 30,
1937). 8

NAME

NATIONALITY

ADDRESSJohn Rabe, Chairman [1]GermanSiemens China Co.

Lewis S. C. Smythe, Secretary[16] American

University of Nanking

P.H. Munro-Faure

BritishAsiatic Petroleum Co.

Rev. John Magee [21]AmericanAmerican Church Mission

P.R. Shields

BritishInternational Export Co.

J.M. Hansen

DanishTexacoG. Schultze-Pantin

GermanShingming Trading Co.

Iver Mackay

BritishButterfield & Swire

J. V. Pickering

AmericanStandard Oil Co.

Eduard Sperling [2]GermanShanghai Insurance

Dr. M.S. Bates [14]American

University of Nanking

Rev. W. P. Mills [18]AmericanPresbyterian Mission

J. Lean

BritishAsiatic Petroleum Co.

Dr. C.S. Trimmer [9]American

University of Nanking

Christian Kröger [3]GermanCarlowitz of Nanking“Nankin jiken shiryo-shu I, Amerika kankei shiryou-hen” [Nanking Incident source material I:
American References] p. 123)8
Rabe, Ibid., p.43.
74

George Fitch [20]American

YMCA⚫ The parenthesized numbers (inserted by the author) refer to the afore-cited list of twenty-twoWesterners remaining in Nanjing.
⚫ In the list of members of the International Committee submitted to Japanese authorities by theInternational Committee, Mr. Kröger and Mr. Fitch, who are at the bottom of the list, are deleted
and instead, Mr. Riggs (American) appears. 9

On confirming the list of Organization of Safety

Zone Administration in Rabe’s Diary (German version), we learn that Mr. Kröger is listed as
Treasurer and Mr. Fitch as Director, and both are active members of the International Committee.
Therefore, we cite here as shown above, the list of members cited in Rabe’s diary.

By comparing this with the list of the twenty-two Westerners remaining in Nanjing (shown in
Chapter 1), we can clearly see that seven out of the sixteen members left the International
Committee before the Safety Zone began its operation.

2. Characteristics of the Nanking Safety Zone
Now that readers understand that the International Committee in charge of the Nanking Safety Zone
was nothing more than a group of American missionaries, we now examine the Nanking Safety Zone,
established and administered by Americans. The Nanking Safety Zone, which was set up under theleadership of the American missionaries in the event of hostilities at or near Nanking, took after the
Shanghai Safety Zone. The latter was established to secure civilian safety in Shanghai during theBattle of Shanghai. So, first, let us look at the Shanghai Safety Zone and then examine thecharacteristics of the Nanking Safety Zone.

(1) The Shanghai Safety Zone
When the Battle of Shanghai broke out on August 13, 1937, the Shanghai Safety Zone wasestablished, led by Father Robert Jacquinot de Besange (the Society of Jesus) of Franace with the
purpose of protecting civilians in the event of hostilities, supported by the French Army in theadjacent Shanghai French Concession, and promising neutrality and demilitarization within the zone.
The establishment was approved by both the Japanese and Chinese authorities. It is also called the“Jacquinot Zone”.

In general, a demilitarized and neutral zone is established after consultation between the belligerents

9Documents of the Nanking Safety Zone, 1939, Kelly and Welsh, p. 3.
5and agreement is reached. However, in the case of Shanghai, the Safety Zone was unique in that it
was led by Father Jacquinot of France, a nonbelligerent third party, after consulting with both Japanand China. Furthermore, the concept of a demilitarized, neutral zone for the protection of civilians
emerged mainly among European states after World War I. This concept materialized for the firsttime with Father Jacquinot’s “Safety Zone.” In this sense, the Shanghai Safety Zone is Father
Jacquinot’s invention. Barricades were set up to separate the Safety Zone from the rest of the cityarea and the entrance to the Zone was administered by the French Army. When the Battle of
Shanghai broke out, it is said that more than 250,000 civilians took shelter in the Zone.

Let me briefly describe the French Concession in Shanghai and the situation related to Catholics in
China.

The Shanghai Concession at the time was divided into the joint concession, mainly administered byGreat Britain and the United States, and the French Concession. The French Concession was
administered by France. At the time of Taiping Rebellion (1850 – 1864), it was suggested that the
French Concession temporarily join the joint concession. However, France did not want to be under
British leadership and remained independent. The French Concession was about half as large as thejoint concession and France was powerful enough to maintain her concession on her own. Since theConcession was administered solely by France, it bore unique and strong despotic characteristics.

There were three million Catholics in China at the time headed by the French Catholic Church.
Furthermore, French Catholics had special status within China—they providing missionaries fromother countries with entrance permits into inner China.

Given such a background, relying on the French military in the adjacent French Concession andusing his position as a priest with three million Chinese Catholics behind him, together with his
personal connections and credit, Father Jacquinot successfully established the Shanghai Safety Zone.
Both Japan and China officially acknowledged the Jacquinot Zone, which came into effect on
November 9, 1937. It is also recorded that Shanghai Detachment Commander General Matsui Iwane,
in sympathy with Father Jacquinot’s cause of protecting civilians, personally donated ten thousandyen (current value of about two hundred thousand dollars).

(2) The Nanking Safety Zone
By contrast, the Nanking Safety Zone was established mainly by American Protestant missionaries,
modeled after the Shanghai Safety Zone. In China, at that time, there were about 3 million Catholics
led by France compared to about 0.5 million Protestants led by the United States and Britain. The
6

difference in numbers between these denominations is apparent. Though the number of Chinese
Protestants increased from nearly fifty thousand at the end of the nineteenth century, they were still aminority compared to the Catholics.

While the purpose of the Nanking Safety Zone was protecting civilians at the time of hostilities,
similar to the Shanghai Safety Zone did, unlike the Shanghai Safety Zone, the Nanking Safety Zone
was set up in the area where there was Chinese artillery and there were no barricades to separate thezone from the rest of the city. The only signs of demarcation of the zone were white flags hoisted
against buildings located at the boundary. Moreover, unlike the Shanghai Safety Zone, there was nothird-party military presence nearby. For these reasons, the Japanese authorities noted that it wasdifficult to establish a neutral, demilitarized zone in the designated area and so they were unable toconsent. Japanese authorities also noted that if there no troops or military facilities were within theZone, then they themselves would endeavor to avoid attacking the Zone.

In terms of international law, a neutral, demilitarized zone cannot be established without agreementfrom both sides. That is, the Nanking Safety Zone, unlike the Shanghai Safety Zone, was not a
properly constituted neutral, demilitarized zone and therefore, held no guarantees or official
sanction.

By the way, Chiang Kai-shek consented to both the Shanghai and Nanking Safety Zones, but
strangely enough, he donated food and money only to the Nanking Safety Zone. I will later point out
his reason for doing so.

(3) Unapproved Nanking Safety Zone
Unlike the Shanghai Safety Zone, Japanese authorities did not consent to a Nanking Safety Zone
and so it was an unofficial zone. This fact was made clear by Marcia Ristaino’s book Jacquinot
Safety Zone: Wartime Refugees in Shanghai, as “Nanking Safety Zone unapproved” (p. 81).
Curiously, this fact is not commonly known. So, this book shows readers a fact of the Nanking
Safety Zone.

The International Committee for the Nanking Safety Zone first secured approval from the Chinese
authorities about establishing the Safety Zone and then through the good offices of Pater Jacquinot,
the Committee asked the Japanese authorities to approve the Nanking Safety Zone. The Committee
received the following reply through Father Jacquinot (Reply from Father Jacquinot to theInternational Committee, December 2, 1937).

7

“Japanese authorities have duly noted request for safety zone but regret cannot grant it. In theevent of Chinese forces misbehavior toward civilians and/or property cannot assume
responsibility but they themselves will endeavor to respect the district as far as consistent withmilitary necessity. Jacquinot” 10

The fact that the Nanking Safety Zone was unsanctioned and therefore unofficial is very important inconsidering the status and activities of the American missionaries as the original text indicates.

Incidentally, the fact that this Safety Zone was unsanctioned means that the Safety Zone was not
actually a “safety zone.” In other words, the Nanking Safety Zone was fictitious. It thus follows that
the International Committee for the Nanking Safety Zone was also fictitious. In light of fact, only theAmerican missionaries and their intimate people claimed that there was a Safety Zone. Therefore,
when they decided to dissolve it or change its name, they did not need anyone’s permission at all.
The American missionaries simply declared that the International Committee for the Safety Zone
became a Relief Committee for refugees.
In fact, the appellation “Safety Zone” was used by a very limited number of people among American
missionaries at that time. The Japanese authorities called it “nan min ku” (refugee zone) and theChinese similarly called it “Nan Min Chu.” Missionary Mills writes:“In Chinese we always called the Zone “Nan Min Chu” – a place for the poor people or
refugees.” (January 22, 1938, Mill’s letter to his wife Nina)

11

The members of the International Committee, mainly American missionaries, used the appellation“safety zone” only with respect to documents and international propaganda. In Nanjing at that time,
the appellation and the real nature of the Zone was a “refugee zone,” simply a place refugees
gathered .
Readers now understand the actual status of the “Safety Zone,” but I will continue to use “safetyzone” merely for convenience’s sake.

3. The true purpose of establishing the Nanking Safety Zone was to support the
Chinese Army

10

Rabe, Ibid., p.46

11

Zhang Kaiyuan, Ibid., p.245.
8

(1) The recognition of the Nanking Safety Zone commonly shared by Mr. Shields and theJapanese authorities
So far, we have seen that the Nanking Safety Zone and the International Committee for the Zone
were established mainly by the American missionaries in Nanking with the purpose of protecting
civilians in the event of hostilities.
Shields says “The Nanking safety zone was a mistake. Nominally, for civilian protection, it was
really for American, German, and wealthy Chinese property. The Chinese had a large
anti-aircraft gun in it even before it was defined; they continued to use it. 12

It is interesting that the Japanese authorities had a similar view:“Appearing to be a philanthropizing organization and avoiding public suspicion, in fact, they areintent on making profits for themselves, while they win over refugees and take various actions which
seemingly obstruct smooth development of the Autonomous Committee. Moreover, such attitudes
tend to be used by discontented factions...” 13

To sum up, views in common with both parties are:1) Protection of civilians is least important,2) The true purpose is protection of property and profits,3) At the same time, it resulted in profiting the Chinese Army (including lawless soldiers).

Then, what was the true intention behind establishing the Safety Zone and the International
Committee? Let us find the answer from records of meetings of the American missionaries, the very
party concerned:(2) Missionary Mills’ confession
The following is the notes from a meeting of the American missionaries held one day before the firstmeeting of the International Committee, to be held on November 19, 1937, to set up the Safety Zone,
to report on a plan. This is a very important record, indeed:

12

Cabot Coville, Diaries of Cabot Coville 1938, Hoover Institution Archive, p.34

Report of the Special Duty Agency, January 21, 1938 ( Nanking “Gyakusatsu” kenkyu nosaizensen [Frontline of the study of Nanking “Massacre,”] Nihon “Nanking Society” yearly report,
2004. Tendensha. pp. 74-75.
913

“Confidential. At our meeting Mr. Mills expressed the longing that instead of having all
educated people trek westward that it would be far better for a group to go down and try to
encourage and comfort the Chinese army and help them to see what disorder and looting
among even a small group means to China.” 14 (Vautrin, November 18, 1937)

Thus, the American Missionaries want to support and protect the Chinese army as a part of theirreligious mission. First, let me describe Mr. Mills, who expressed longing to “encourage and comfort
the Chinese army.”

Mr. Wilson Plumer Mills was born in 1883 in South Carolina. After receiving a B.D. (Bachelor of
Divinity) from Columbia Theological Seminary in 1912, Mr. Mills served in the YMCA in China
from 1912 to 1931 and then with the Presbyterian Foreign Mission Board in Nanking from 1933 to1949. The Presbyterian Church is one of the most influential churches in the United States. 15 At
the time of the Battle of Nanking in 1937, Mr. Mills was 54 years old, many years senior to Mr.
Bates, 40, and Mr. Smythe, 36.
“I must tell you that Mr. Mills is the man–who originally had the idea of creating the Safety
Zone.” (Address of Mr. John H. D. Rabe at a Farewell Party given by Staff of the Nanking
Safety Zone, Feb. 21, 1938. Yale)16

As clearly seen from Mr. Rabe’s speech above, Mr. Mills conceived of establishing the Nanking
Safety Zone and the International Committee.
“My suggestion to name Mr. Mills vice chairman, and/or acting chairman is accepted.” (Rabe,
February 18, 1938) 17

Moreover, after Mr. Rabe, who had been chairman, left Nanking, Mr. Mills became chairman of thesuccessor to the International Committee (called the Nanking International Relief Committee). In
addition, when Mr. Bates worked on publishing What War Means with Mr. Timperley, Mr. Bates
took the trouble to check the contents of the book with Mr. Mills, although the latter’s records are

14

Vautrin, Ibid., p.74

15

Zhang Kaiyuan, Ibid., p.243.

16

https://web.library.edu/divinity/nanking/documents NMP0210

17

Rabe, Ibid., p.200.
10

not included in the book. These facts indicate that Mr. Mills was the leading figure among theInternational Committee for the Nanking Safety Zone and the American missionaries in Nanjing. Mr.
Mills also appears frequently in diaries of Miss Vautrin and Mr. Rabe, which shows how
energetically Mr. Mills acted in Nanjing.

However, published documents related to Mr. Mills are rare, compared with those of Mr. Bates and
Mr. Smythe. For instance, while Mr. Mills wrote mission reports in collaboration with Mr. Bates,
sometimes the final edition carried only Mr. Bates’ signature. 18 Within the American missionaries’organization in Nanjing, while Mr. Bates was in charge of refugee camps and its publicity, and Mr.
Smythe was in charge of business matters in general, Mr. Mills was accountable for virtually theentire operation but behind the scenes.

Now, let us examine Mr. Mills’ expressed longing, as quoted above. His view indicates several
important points.

First, note the date when he expressed his longing to encourage and comfort the Chinese army. It
was on November 18, 1937. The Japanese Army’s all-out attack on Nanking was on December 10,
1937, and they breeched the walls of Nanking on December 13. Thus Mr. Mills’ longing (that “itwould be far better to try to encourage and comfort the Chinese army and help them to see what
disorder and looting among even a small group means to China) had nothing to do with the JapaneseArmy’s actions in Nanking his longing was expressed almost a month before the Battle of Nanking
started.

Second, as we noted Mr. Mills position at that time, this statement, made by the leader of American
missionaries in Nanking and within the American missionaries’ inner circle, indicates, as aconsensus of the American missionaries in Nanking, a clear intention of encouraging and helping the
Chinese army.

Third, this statement was made on the day before the establishment of the International Committee
for the Safety Zone and at the meeting to announce the establishment of the Committee by the
person who first conceived the idea of the safety zone. This, in fact, was a declaration of the Mr.
Mills’ longing to encourage and help the Chinese army in a neutral, demilitarized safety zone,
allegedly established for civilian protection.

18

Nanking jiken shiryoshu I [Materials related to the Nanking Incident, I] Amerika kankei
shiryouhen [American references] p. 185.
11

Clearly, both neutrality and support for either side is paradoxical. In the first place, neutrality anddemilitarization are necessary for sanctioning a safety zone. Neglecting such essential requirements,
to express support for the Chinese army is sheer prejudice. It is tantamount to a sports referee stating
beforehand that he will side with either team.

Also, as a matter of fact, to support the Chinese army within the safety zone where civilians gathered
is to expose civilians to military danger. Mr. Mills’ statement indicates that the true purpose for theestablishment of the Safety Zone by American missionaries and establishment of the International
Committee was not the protection of civilians but supporting and protection the Chinese army.

12