CHINA STRUGGLE

Evening Post, Volume CXXV, Issue 28, 3 February 1938, Page 5

CHINA STRUGGLE

WHO IS RESPONSIBLE?

THE CLAIMS OF BOTH SIDES

THE BASIC ISSUES

Who is directly responsible for the Sino-Japanese war? asks a writer in the "Christian Science 'Monitor." That question is being asked by thei law-abiding citizen of the world who understands, in a vague sort of way, that the conflagration in the Far East affects him—affects his sense of security j and his faith in human institutions] generally. I To supply an answer, it will be necessary to state briefly the case of the .Japanese and that of the Chinese, as they are set forth in various official statements and publications, and then to. leave the citizen or the world to draw .conclusions for himself. Both the Japanese and the Chinese, it will 'be observed, like most combatants in modern history, are deepiy concerned to clothe their cause m moral right—a circumstance that reassures the citizen of the world that his judgment of ttie quarrel is not without consequence to them. JapWha'ving' risen in the first thirtyseven years of this century from the status of a negligible quantity in world affairs to that of a great empire, has found ample precedents for quick; ruthless methods of empire-building. It is able to argue that the enlightened steps away from national aggrandisement which America has been able to show in the Philippines and Britain in its relations with the Dominions—lndia, Irak, and Egypt—do not apply at its present stage of empire-building. Granted the necessity of empire, Japan ( can show that its clashes with China have followed a natural sequence, beginning with the fighting over Korea, whose long finger, as the map clearly shows, was pointing right at the heart of Japan. For similar .reasons in earlier limes Britain got hold of Calais, France and. Spain occupied Morocco, and Italy entered Tunis. * RIGHT NOT QUESTIONED. 'Japan's right to be in China, therefore, is considered by Tokio .apologists to be not in question—particularly since America, Britain, France, and others are in there too. Moreover, China has no Monroe Doctrine, or none 'that it*has ever been able to anforce. The trouble is that while Japan considers herself "destined to extend her sphere on the mainland," so that it is "up to China and Japan to find a way to enable her to do so," China, it is claimed, has proved herself in >this respect unco-operative. Japan states that she has made repeated attempts at friendly co-opera-tion. At the Washington Conference in 1921, she says, Ambassador Shidehara made great concessions to secure China's good will, declaring: "We are vitally interested in a speedy establishment of peace and unity in China and in the economic development of her vast resources." China's only reply to this aad other attempts -at friendly co-operation, it is stated, was the organisation of the "Societies 'for -the Revocation of Unequal Treaties," which promoted the boycott of Japanese trade, and, when these activities were stopped by the 1935 treaty; the inauguration of the system of Blue Shirt agitators, who were sent round with "Dow » With Japan' and- '"Regain Lost Manchuria slogans: • The Blue .Shirts, say the Japanese, were instrumental in lining up with the Communists against Japan. Having noted other marks of hostility, such as the anti-Japanese textbooks and various attacks on foreigners since the Boxer rebellion of 1900, th- Japanese apqlogist passes to the night of July 8 last, when Japanese troops, manoeuvring south of Peking. ' m'*Jf said they were entitled to do, were shot at by Chinese. At that moment China is said to have .had 2fO,m armed men ready for action/ 198 diviS, and in addition 200,000 Communists, while Japan had only 17 divisions and 250,000- men,! on a' peace basis. China, says Japan, definitely meant war. ■ , . ■ ■ . "NECESSARY PRECAUTIONS." ■In face of this danger, the Japanese sa v it was Jio breach of the Kellogg Pact to take some preliminary precautions These precautions—evacuation of Japanesffrom places "ke Hankow where the 1738 Japanese had built up trade valued at 60,000,000 yen a year, were it is said, skilfully used by the Chinese as showing Japan's war intentions. When the vessels that had evacuated the Hankow families appeared off Shanghai, they were mistaken for a naval demonstration. The murder of two Japanese marines at Shanghai, the apologist goes on, necessitated the landing of troops at that port for the protection of Japans nationals. From August 13 to 23 the landings, which the Chinese desperately strove to prevent, it is said, were merely landing parties for defence. There was no" war, properly so called, until General Chiang Kai-shek's troops -entered Hopei Province in contravention of the Ho-Umedzo Treaty of 1935, the Japanese say, when it became obvious that China was determined on war on a vast scale. Japan, not being present at the League Assembly or the Brussels Conference, has left the world to learn its viewpoint from various official and semi-official statements. The Chinese case has been fully stated on both these occasions, mainly by the leading delegate, Dr. Wellington Koo. Dr. Koo told the Geneva Assembly, after listing Japan's recent incursions jnto China—into Manchuria, Jchol, Chahar, and North China within the wall—that China "on.: more than one occasion." had shown her willingness ■to co-operate economically with Japan, but that her intentions were, always frustrated by the Japanese "mailed fist." This obstruction, he said, has always- been dictated by the war party, •whiclv dominates and intimidates the Japanese people,' ! and prevents the liberal-minded statesmen having a say. "LUST FOR. TERRITORY." Dr. Koo charged-Japan with being motivated by. lust for territorial aggrandisement. ; He'counters the Japanese claim-that over-population calls for more room by asserting that with a population -increasing at ■ the rate of 800,000 a year,, there are in Korea, after 30 years of conquest and annexation, only 500,000 Japanese residents, while South Manchuria, ■ which , has teen under Japanese influence; for 25 years, has" hardly 300,000 Japanese, most of whom are army men, or railroad or other officials. Density of population in Japan, he says, is anyway less than that of Belgium or the Chinese Province.-of Hopei. ' As to the alleged need for Taw materials, these,'he says, are chiefly supplied to Japan by countries other than China, such as cotton from oil from the Netherlands Indies and America, iron from India and Malaya, and wool from Australia. The coal and soya beans of Manchuria, he says, have always - been available, without conquest," . . • - As for the opening shot of the present trouble, Dr. Koo lays this to Japan's capacity for "creating incidents." Such "incidents" were the night";manoeuvring of troops at the Marco Polo Bridge, .where, he says,

the troops had no right to.be, and the clash with the Japanese marines at Shanghai. ' • : Chinese apologists point to Che successive; "nibbling", operations by which ■Japan, has enlarged its empire. The story, of Korea is being repeated in North'.China as it was in Manchuria, they contend. Moreover, they point out-that the very fact' of an undeclared war places the Japanese military operations in the same category as Italian absorption of Ethiopia. Against the claim of Chinese legions ready, to fight the Japanese, the Chinese point to; the long record of military preparation in Japan itself. War budgets of unprecedented size have gone hand-in-hand in Japan with declarations by Japanese spokesmen that the "manifest destiny" of the Japanese nation lies on the Asiatic mainland. NO MOVE BY BRITAIN. . To.the Japanese claim that she must protect her £350,000,000 investments in China, the Chinese reply, that Britain has had to take no - such measures to protect 'her £300,000,000 investments there. . The attitude of the world to 4h;s conflict opens up too vast and controversial", a question for full discussion here. Briefly, it may be said that the difficulty of appraising f all the evidence assembled by the two parties has suggested to many that some tribunal with an all-world sanction would offer the only satisfactory way of handling the case in a properly judicial manner. The democratic world presumably accepts without question the validity of the resolution of 22 League nations on September 27 that "no excuse can be made for such acts (bombing.of defenceless cities'by Japanese) . ..'. and solemnly condemns them," or that of the League's Far,Eastern Committee's report: "The action taken by Japan is "a breach of Japans' treaty obligations," or that of the Brussels Conference Note: "There exists no warrant in law for the use of armed force by any country for the-purpb'se of intervening in the .internal regime of another." ' ' ■ . Unfortunately, Japan- has some ground for refusing to accept any of ithese bodies as judicially unbiased. A world tribunal to hear the pleas of iiations. that ■ say they must expand appears as the best substitute for Canned .'invasion,, for' the world is beginning to rsee;th,at if. Japan must be allowed to invade Chiria because the Belgians • once invaded the-Congo arid the; Saxons, invaded .Britain , and■ the Tartars invaded Russia/ there! can'be no security'for ■humanity^ The line must be- drawn : somewhere;.. The machinery for that line is;still available, possibly 'with some adjustments, in- the Kellogg Pact arid the Geneva League. Whether pressure to stop invasion; must come before the .world arbitration' machinery,; pr th'e arbitration before the pressure ;is perhaps the leading-controversial issue today.',