AMERICAN PUBLIC OPINION

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21579, 26 February 1932, Page 7

AMERICAN PUBLIC OPINION

IN FAVOUR OF CHINA WASHINGTON, February 24. (Received Feb. 25, at 9.30 p.m.) Mr Stimson’s statement marked an important stage in the gradual clarification of American public opinion, the trend of which now unmistakably favours China, and there is accumulative evidence of resentment which is ready to urge, some kind of measures against Japan. Comment is still somewhat restrained in official circles, Congressional leaders declining to discuss to any extent Mr Stimson’s statement, but popular reaction is shown in the chain movements urging a refusal to use Japanese goods, in the steps which are being taken by college and women’s societies to advise members to refrain from purchasing Japanese silks, and in the increasing discussion of the possibilities of a League of Nations boycott. As the New York Herald-Tribune’s correspondent summed up the position" There is no ignoring the fact that the use of economic sanctions in the Sino-Japanese situation is coming more into consideration.” There is considerable comment, even criticism, in the press and otherwise concerning the attitude of other great Powers toward Japan in the present crisis. The French Embassy was today again compelled to issue a statement denying that there was French support for the Japanese policy. The statement said; “We are sincerely concerned about tbe serious repercussions which such unfounded rumours may create in the Far East for the personal security of many innocent men and women.”

The New York Telegram asks in a leader: “Is Britain backing Japan?” and says that “ the fears of Americans that the Tory-controlled British Government would not co-operate in the proposed international economic boycott of Japan were not quieted by Sir John Simon’s statement of policy in the House on Monday night.” The New York Evening Post, on the other hand, expresses satisfaction with Sir John Simon’s statement, and adds: “ The boycott idea is quashed.” The New York Times Washington correspondent interestingly comments: “Mr Stimson and the President have been informed that there is pressure in the British Cabinet to declare sympathy with Japan,.and that Mr Ramsay MacDonald and Sir John Simon have been resisting this effort. Whether a call for help has been sent across the waters has not been repealed, but help came to the beleaguered Liberal and Labourite in Mr Stimson’s letter.”

A statement to-day by the Senate Naval Committee in connection with the favourable report on the Hale Naval Bill appears to give added point to Mr Stimson’s letter. The committee declares: “We believe that the enactment of the Bill into law will have a stabilisirig effect on world affairs, and practical necessity demands that the United States should take full advantage of the privileges accorded by the London Treaty.” The report declared that Japan had approved of appropriations for a building programme to bring her navy to its full treaty strength by 1936, with the exception of one aircraft carrier and six destroyers. It added that the testimony placed before the committee showed that “ our navy is rapidly becoming a navy of obsolete ships.” STRENGTH OF CHINA AND JAPAN RESPECTIVE FORCES COMPARED. At the present time it can be said with some truth that nobody even in China can give an accurate account of the present-day armies of the country. Probably about 2,400,000 Chinese are under arms. Detailed figures recently compiled give the Nationalist Forces as 214,000 the Central Government Forces as 862,000 plus 300,000 men in miscellaneous forces nominally under Government control and 320,000 men directly under the commander-in-chief. AntiGovernment forces are given as at least 602.000, though in some, cases the full strength of units is not known. The North-eastern Defence Force must be added to the above figures. It totals 414.000, and was formed by Chang Hseuh-liang. The higher command affecting the Chinese array as a whole, however, can be briefly described as nil. It is probable that there are more men serving in mixed brigades than there are in divisions, while the term “ army corps ” is misleading, the term “ army,” with some descriptive prefix, usually being substituted. Armies are grouped together with such a title as the “ Thiefsuppression ” army. A normal mixed brigade may be taken to mean two regiments of infantry, one of cavalry, one battalion of engineers, and one or more machine gun companies, with the necessary transport and auxiliary units. The mixed regiments are organised on similar lines for detached service. A division is usually made up of two brigades, each of two regiments, one cavalry regiment, one artillery regiment, and a company of engineers, together with machine gun units and transport corps. Its strength would be about 12,500, but there is no stability in such matters. Transport services are weak, but the armies are fairly well equipped. Four years ago there were known to be 1394 machine guns in use, for the machine gun is a popular weapon, and the number has probably increased fairly substantially since then. Many of the machine guns are of Japanese manufacture. Field and mountain guns are extensively manufactured in China, and a popular model is the Krupp 75 m.m., which can •be turned out in quantity in Shanghai, Hanyang, Honan, and Canton, where big arsenals exist. Coast artillery is' practically all Krupp—manufactured and imported, set up from 30 to 35 years ago and ranging from 10in to small guns. At many points on the coast these weapons are obsolete. Japan’s war strength is kept jealously guarded, and recent figures set it at possibly 51 divisions. Japan is capable of placing one and later on possibly a second reserve division in the field for every one on her peace time strength which is 17 divisions. A peace time division is about 5000-5500 strong, but in war time may bo expanded to 20,000. Full details of both peace and war time strength, however, are kept a close official secret, and aviators making forced landings in Japan have discovered how jealously the country guards its military secrets. Probably the Japanese forces would exceed greatly the figures given above. The war time strength of a division is known to be at least 30 field guns, 288 light machine guns, and 52 heavy machine guns, with four 37 ra.m. guns and trench mortars.