FROM WEEK TO WEEK

Grey River Argus, 5 December 1940, Page 10

FROM WEEK TO WEEK

By

H. Winston Rhodes

There Is Stnf ■ At the time of the closing of the Burma Road, there were many in China who said that it would serve France, Britain and even the United States right if China made peace with Japan, freeing the latter for military action in Asia. Today more than ever before during the past three years, China with her immense reserves of resistance revealed in the outbreak of democracy in wartime remains the chief bulwark against those tendencies inherent in imperialism which are hurrying the nations in the Pacific towards war. Japanese recognition of the Chinzj).' puppet government is tanta■aioiint to an admission that there is no hope of destroying Chinese unity. Recent victories of the Chinese armies both in the north-west and in central China suggest that the third stage of counter-attack may not be far off. The Chungking announcement that there were supplies of ammunition suiheinet to last for another three years if taken in conjunction with the continued development of the industrial co-operativhs, the training of technicians and the reorganisation of the whole of China’s economy stresses China’s ability and will to win.

Chiang Kai-Shek’s statement that Manchuria will be delivered from the Japanese yoke and that “as soon as Japan exhausts her supplies of American gasoline and aircraft, China will force the enemy to an accounting,” reminds us of the disgraceful fact that the policy of appeasement in the Pacific leads to the betrayal of democratic forces and the support of imperialist expansion. Writing in China To-day, Henry H. Douglas, an American authority on far eastern problems, states “We have been, and still are ’ supplying Japan with her needed foreign exchange by our gold purchasing policy. We have supplied, and are still supplying, the materials which have made possible the continuance of Japan’s war in China. We ar.e Japan’s arsenal. We have supplied the scrap iron which has gone into the steel for Japan’s navy, the machinery for the fashioning of that steel, and have supplied the oil for the operation of that navy.” But the policy of appeasement also means the preparation for war—a war for the redivision of the Pacific. It is quite incorrect to suggest that the policy of appeasement is a policy of peace, that its aim is to prevent war. Eyen the dullest mind must see that support of any sort for Japan, whether direct or indirect, must not only prolong the agony of the Chinese and Japanese peoples, but it must also immeasurably increase the danger of the outbreak of war in the Pacific area.

Who Is Responsible?: To the well-meaning, comparatively honest and straightforward common man, the tortuous policy of the great powers towards China must seem incomprehensible and totally lacking any consideration for the welfare either of the people of America or China not to say Japan and a dozen other countries. Even to-day with the announcement of new credits to China, an announcement obviously meant to answer Japanese recognition of the Chinese puppet • regime, it seems that much needed war materials are at least a major reason for America’s gesture. Put these credits to China alongside the figures of American support for Japan and it becomes clear that if and when war breaks out, in the Pacific, Japan will be in a position to thank America more fervently than the Chinese. From 1937-39 the United States bought over 580 million dollars worth of gold and over 23 million dollars worth of silver from Japan. From 1937-39 the United States sold over 500 million dollars worth of war materials to Japan. Who is responsible for J'apan’s policy of southward expansion which is becoming more open every day. It is not China except in so far as the Chinese have built up a wall of resistance to Japanese expansion in Asia. It is not the Soviet Union except in so far as the Soviet Union, by its strength, has placed an insuperable obstacle to Japanese expansion in the norm. The people responsible are first the Japanese imperialists and second those who by a short sighted policy have increased Japan’s military machine and strengthened her economy for the sake of profits and the maintenance cf a bulwark against the Soviet Union. Who else is responsible if these are not? I have tried to find an answer. I have attempted to acquire all possible information oh Pacific affairs but I can come to no other conclusion than the one just stated.

P'acific Diplomacy: There is still time to change the course of future events, but the time is not long. The London "Economist” urges that England should exert diplomatic pressure to bring Washington and Moscow together in the Far East. Chiang Kai-shek stated a few months ago that “If America and Soviet Russia can speedily take adequate steps to provide China with material assistance,, there can be little doubt of the early clarification and stabilisation of Pacific affairs, such as would not by any means benefit China alone.” The Chinese ambassador to London referred to the U.S.S.R. as "China’s great neighbour who has proved also to be a good neighbour . . . She has given us great material assistance bj’ barter arrangements without any political conditions whatever.” But the U.S.S.R. cannot prevent war in the Pacific. The only way to prevent war in the Pacific is a diplomatic policy which js a complete reflection of the feelings of the peoples of the Pacific uninfluenced by considerations of profit, uninfluenced by considerations of imperialist expansion—a diplomatic policy which will immediately render th.e aid which China re-

quires and will cease to support Japan directly or indirectly, a diplomatic policy which will bring about the closest possible relaticnr between America, the USSR, China and Britain, a diplomatic policy which takes into full account the welfare of the Japanese people instead of their rulers.

“China’s victory would have cleared the Pacific of any possible threat to the United States at any lime during the past three years,”, states an editorial in China to-day. “Even the cost of the billions of dollars that are now’ being poured into the ■frantic construction of armaments

would have been a very cheap price to have naid for American security.” And what is true of America is true of all countries bordering the Pacific. The new credits to China are a welcome contribution to the cause for yvhicb the Chinese are fighting, but what is wanted is a complete change in American policy towards China and Japan and a complete change in British policy towards China and Japan.