Manawatu Evening Standard. TUESDAY, NOV. 20, 1934. JAPAN’S MILITARISM.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIV, Issue 303, 20 November 1934, Page 6

Manawatu Evening Standard. TUESDAY, NOV. 20, 1934. JAPAN’S MILITARISM.

The voice of militarism in Japan lias developed a truculent note which has an ominous bearing upon Pacific problems. In an article in a London journal Lord Lothian dwells upon a “situation full of menace” caused by Japan’s “short-sighted military leaders abandoning the farsighted policy which led to the Washington Treaties.” He draws a striking analogy between Germany in 1914 and Japan in 1934, and Japan, he says, is being plunged into the same diplomacy as that which brought Germany to catastrophe and must similarly ruin herself. The militarism of the Kaiser and his war lords was the world’s greatest menace twenty years ago, and there is, in the view of authoritative observers of Pacific problems, an ominous note now being struck by Japan’s clique. They may not reflect the views of the moderates, but for the present are in supreme power, and patriotism in Japan would make the people follow their leaders. The new head of the Japanese Navy, ViceAdmiral Takahashi, on assuming his post has affirmed that his country will not relinquish the mandated territory and its Navy is prepared for every eventuality. It will be recalled that when Japan formally announced her withdrawal from the League of Nations, which w r ill take effect next March, her spokesman at Geneva said she would not forgo the mandates granted to her, and if anybody wanted them, they had better bring gunboats. The Prime Minister was more diplomatic; he affirmed a determination to hold the islands. The question has been given prominence by the discussion before the Mandates Commission of the League, where Marquis Ito w'as searchingly cross-examined for five hours regarding the administration of the islands. These are the three groups of the Marianne, the Marshall, and Carolines. The .Commission called upon Japan to explain large expenditures on allegedly fortified harbours and aerodromes, and the Marquis Ito replied that the construction of a harbour in one group was required for commercial shipping, while the Saipan aerodrome was being built for the study of atmospheric and fishery conditions, a most astonishing statement. Furthermore, it was alleged that Japan had refused the American Government permission to send a warship to the Ladrone Islands on a scientific mission, but had offered a Japanese vessel instead, and later the mission was abandoned

Apart from these islands Japan also holds the Kurile and Bonin Islands, Liu-Kiu, Formosa, and the Pescadores, which come within the restrictions she agreed to at Washington against their fortification. It is further alleged that the Bonin Group has been fortified, in similar manner to the former German possessions north of the Equator; and should this be so, though the Japanese Foreign Minister (Mr Hirota) has given it at times an unqualified denial, then an infringement has been made of the Washington Treaty and also of the terms of Japan’s mandate. The Marianne, Marshall, and Caroline Islands have a valuable strategic position for Japan. Close to American Guam, “the key of the Pacific,” it is called, they lie between Hawaii and the Philippines, and are also close to the Australian mandated territory of New Guinea. They will present a knotty problem in international law when Japan’s notice to quit Geneva expires next March. She claims that she holds the islands not from the League but from the Allied and Associated loweis by whom they were allotted before the League came-into being. She has pointed out that membership of the League is not a requisite for a mandatory Power, since

the United States was offered a mandate. On the other hand the League maintains that the title derives from it, that the allotment of the islands did not come into force until the Versailles Treaty was ratified. Moreover, by Article 22 of the Covenant the signatories all accepted the League as the mandant, with power of supervision over the administration of the mandated territory by the Power holding the mandate. The latter • must render an account of its stewardship. Clearly, such territory is held in trust by the Power to which it has been entrusted, and should Japan choose to flout the League next year she will create an international problem of firstclass importance. The League cannot compel her to return the islands, so for Japan they will, on present indications, become spoils of war of the greatest strategical value as she moves outward into the Pacific Ocean. The suggestion of Mr Milner, that a friendly conference should be called between the United States, Britain, and Japan to avert an explosion in the future, is not without merit.