AMERICA AND FAR EAST

Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 24985, 20 September 1946, Page 3

AMERICA AND FAR EAST

PUBLIC AWARENESS IN UNITED STATES POLICIES DISCUSSED BY MINISTER The post-war position of the United States in the Far East was discussed by the United States Minister to New Zealand, the Hon. Avra M. Warren, in an Ensom lecture to the open forum of the W.E.A. in the Trades Hall on Wednesday evening. He quoted Captain Stassen, a former State governor, as presenting coherently informed American thought, without foreshadowing American policy, when he said: “Let us make it very clear that we recognise that our responsibility in the western Pacific is a heavy one, but we intend to meet it, and to do so, not unilaterally, but in close accord with the other United Nations; that it is our wish that the slogan of the future in Asia will not be the narrow, isolationist Japanese slogan, ‘Asia for the Asiatics,’ but a new slogan of hope, ‘Asia, a brighter spot in one progressive world.’ ” There was a sustaining 1 public awareness of the Far East that was not generally true in the United States before 1941, and understandable impatience, on the part of world opinion, with the slowness in the negotiation of peace. Delay in the organisation of the world police force under *the control of the Security Council had raised doubts in many directions as to the practicability of such action, he said, but when negotiations of a similar nature and on a much smaller scale were borne in mind it mignt well appear that instead of impatience that all might have vocal expression of support and sympathy for the months of drafting of the peace treaties and the effective implementation of UNO. The success or failure of UNO to assume responsibility for world defence had a special significance in the Far East and t’-.oughout the Westfern Pacific. Security Arrangements » “Should there be no international responsibility for the maintenance of peace and security, then there must arise the necessity for commitment and security arrangements of vital import to the American people and of equally vit»l import to all peoples in this ocean area,” Mr Warren said. “In any Case the American position in the Far East is clear in terms of general support of the open-door policy in respect of China, and the guarantee of the independence of the new Philippine Republic. The maintenance of bases necessary for the defence of the Western Hemisphere is integrated in the general problem of the defence of the whole Pacific Ocean against any form of aggression. The American interest, while based on security measures adequate against any threat of aggression in the Pacific Ocean area includes also, as a major concept, the political and economic advancement* of all peoples. Recent decisions of the British Government which applied to India and Burma, and the attitude of the Government and people of New Zealand towards the native populations under whatever form of trusteeship may be agreed upon, demonstrate that while we may approach - these problems independently we have the world-mov-ing force of identical conclusions-*-conclusions that must appeal to the conscience of men.” A historical survey of America’s part in the Pacific was /given by Mr Warren, who said that Theodore Roosevelt’s empire building had less effect on the consciousness of the American people than might be imagined, as the great body of public thought was preoccupied with the growing industrialisation of the country. The only general interest in the Far East during the decade of the boom and depression was the relations between the United States and the Philippines and a preoccupation, at high policy level, with the internal situation in China. When on July 4 last, the Philippines Republic came into being, both the Philippine and American peoples welcomed the event, not as a gesture of separation or the casting-off by the United States of an undesired appendage, but as an act of faith in the strength of democratic government that gave them renewed strength and a greater spirit of co-operation and sympathy than had existed at any time in the history of their relationship. Between 1922 and 1927, China had received much of its inspiration and direction from Russia, and when the Nationalist Government was formed and China moved away from the Communist experiment, the United States Government encouraged, in so far as it was practically possible, the development of the new policy. The most positive American support in the war against Japan came after Japan attacked the United States in 1942; but all realised that during 1942 and 1943 the help to the Chinese people was more spiritual than material. A Major Preoccupation “But the Japanese surrender did not bring to China the relief, from struggle that so many of us had hoped for and quite a few had expected,” he said. “The internal dissension in China apparent even in war time broke out into open conflict the minute the Japanese menace had been removed. The inability of a central government to keep the peace within its own borders has retarded the organisation of the country and its people for peace, and to-day constitutes one of the major preoccupations of all the world Powers.” , . „ j New Zealand, as well as the United States, gave positive expression of its sympathy for the hungry and sick in China in its UNRRA contributions and was also tremendously interested in the outcome of the Chinese struggle. The expressed policy of the United States to China was a commitment to give all possible assistance to promote the unity and political integrity of China and to consider the Chinese Republic as a bridge between the United States and the U.S.S.R. The situation in respect of Japan presented quite a different problem. From almost every American point of view, the war against Japan was more bitter and more savage than the European war. yet 'the measures to be taken/for the pacification and regeneration of 85,000,000 Japanese had become very largely an American preoccupation. It was safe to say that the present attitude of Americans towards the Japanese was one of “work and see,” and America pinned its first hopes on the* effectiveness of the machinery of UNO to handle the problem of the future of. Japan and its people. U.S.S.R. and South-west Pacific Dealing with the relationships between the United States and the U.S.S.R. in the Far East, Mr Warren said the commitments made to Russia at Yalta were honoured when Japan

surrendered. He could only indicate that relations would be determined in terms of the over-all relationships as they developed with time between the two countries. It was too early to forecast what the relationships would be in the southwest Pacific; but they would undoubt-, edly be developed in the forthcoming session of the United Nations Assembly in October. Three factors inherent in the Mid-Pacific problem were the treatment to be accorded the native populations in their political and economic development, the integration of the islands, either into a general world defence scheme to be controlled by the United Nations Military Council, or the development of ney regional arrangements. Mr Warren answered several questions and had discussions with members.