Winston Churchill expressed his view that Hitler’s move against Czechoslovakia by no means signified a turn towards the east. Before striking a serious blow to the west, Hitler simply had to secure his rear, i.e. liquidate the Czechoslovak army, the Czechoslovak air force, etc. Moreover, Hitler was very keen to reinforce himself with Czechoslovak weapons, ammunition, aircraft and excellent armament factories.

Winston Churchill inquired with great anxiety about the meaning behind Stalin’s speech. Was it a refusal to cooperate with the democracies?

I replied that such an interpretation would be incorrect. We have always been and remain advocates of collective retaliation against aggression, but it is essential that the ‘democracies’ should also be prepared to fight against the aggressors and not just chatter about it.

Churchill attaches great significance to Hudson’s visit. This is a manifest sign of change in the sentiments of the ruling circles. Even if Chamberlain conceived Hudson’s visit as merely a tactical manoeuvre (I raised this possibility), the logic of events will give it a far more serious tone.

I did not like Roy Howard – too self-assured, too primitive, too ‘American’. I had a minor wrangle with him. In a rather arrogant and disparaging manner, Howard began to lecture all of us, particularly the British, about what they must and must not do in the sphere of foreign policy. He gave the impression that we, Americans, could not care less about Europe. Winston Churchill disputed this at length, arguing brilliantly that Britain and France represented the United States’ first line of defence, and that if it was broken the Germans would appear in South America and Canada and threaten New York and Washington. But Howard didn’t even want to hear about this.

His attitude enraged me, and I moved onto the offensive. I’m very unhappy with the state of affairs in Europe and I frequently and severely criticize British and French policies because they deserve it. But who gave the USA the right to hector us all like this? What is the position of the USA itself? American statesmen deliver fine speeches against Japanese aggression in China, while American industrialists supply Japanese aggressors with guns and aeroplanes. Is this an example of proper conduct? I continued in this vein for quite some time, much to the delight of the British.

Encouraged by my speech, one of them (I think it was Lord Camrose’s son) thought it wise to defend Britain’s position in the Manchurian issue. Here I had to speak out against the English and I deplored their conduct in 1932, using very strong language. Now it was Howard’s turn to rejoice. He clasped my hand and exclaimed: ‘You see, we are on the same side of the barricades!’