OCR Text |
Show fifSfC Naticinal Topics Interpreted V"'"" by William Bruckart Z ''. Washington. More and more newspapers throughout the country are demanding Brutal that the President Japan invoke the terms of the American neutrality act with respect to the war undeclared though it is that is raging on Chinese soil. These editorial expressions obviously will have considerable weight and will convince a very great number of American citizens that President Roosevelt ought to invoke the neutrality neu-trality act and, by so doing, proclaim pro-claim that Japan is the aggressor. That, In simple terms, Is what a presidential announcement of application ap-plication of the neutrality act would mean. There probably has never been a brutality comparable to the unspeakable un-speakable outrage which Japan is committing in China; certainly, never in modern times. It is a stain upon the name of the Japanese Jap-anese people and the smooth working work-ing of the Japanese military machine will never be able to offset the hostility hos-tility which the subjects of the Rising Ris-ing Sun are creating by this display of brutality. Although the Tokyo government has yet to say it is fighting a war, the Japanese aggression in China is just as much a war as though the United States and Canada had taken up arms against each other and had proclaimed to the world that they were belligerents. The very fact that there has been no declaration of war, however, complicates the situation as regards the United States and Great Britain. Unless these nations, along with some others oth-ers which have interests in China, are willing to shoulder the responsibility re-sponsibility that comes when an outside out-side nation says publicly that two powers are at war, neither nation can afford to endanger its neutral position by saying to the world that Japan is trying to subjugate portions of China. That is exactly what is happening. In spite of the declaration of the Japanese statesmen that their military mili-tary machine is only protecting Japanese nationals, the whole affair af-fair may be treated as pure hypocrisy hypoc-risy as a movement by the Jap--anese to gain control of new resources, re-sources, new land, over which the teeming millions from Japan may run as the hordes of Chinese are displaced. The-whole thing shows how long we have been fooled by the persuasiveness of the Japanese statesmen. You may ask: What can we do about it? The answer is exceedingly exceeding-ly difficult. I have a fear that we can do nothing because of the international in-ternational policies that the United States pursued during the administrations adminis-trations of Presidents Coolidge and Hoover and those that are continuing continu-ing under President Roosevelt. Only once In recent years did the American government speak out firmly concerning the apparent Japanese Jap-anese plans and on that occasion the assistance given the United States by Great Britain and France amounted to little more than a whisper. whis-per. So now the patience of a great many people is wearing rather thin. I think also, from what I hear in diplomatic circles, that the British Brit-ish lion has begun to bare his teeth and unsheath his claws. Again, to what purpose I do not know, because the United States and Great Britain thus far have discussed no plan for acting in unison. Certainly, without with-out concerted action between them and including France, little can be accomplished. It does seem that they could get together because of the community of interests but either eith-er the United States lacks leadership leader-ship in the circumstance, or there are some bugs under the' British and French chips about which we do not know. I repeat that in the face of Japan's devastating actions and the ever-growing threat of her overlordship in the Far East, these three powers ought to work out an understanding by which they can trim the wings of the Japanese war birds. As the fighting continues on Chinese Chi-nese soil as one disturbing act after another is Tough committed by the Problem Japanese, I imagine imag-ine many persons are going to inquire why the United States does not brave world diplomacy diplo-macy and invoke the neutrality act. In that eventuality, there ought to be a clear understanding of the various implications and results that would flow from such an American Amer-ican action. In the first instance, Japan is now virtually self-sufficient in the matter of munitions. If we declare an embargo against shipment ship-ment of war materials' to the fighting fight-ing nations, I believe it is generally agreed the action would hurt China more than it would hurt Japan. It tvould result in cutting off supplies r.hich the Chinese sorely need. Americans are wholly willing to sell supplies to them because, generally gen-erally speaking, it is apparent that the sympathies of American individuals indi-viduals are with the Chinese even though the government officially remains re-mains neutral. Further, if our President declared that war existed between Japan and China, doubtless Japan would be encouraged to declare war on China formally. In that event the Japanese Jap-anese immediately would establish a naval blockade of the Chinese coast. In some quarters in Washington, one will hear arguments that the United States Some Say ought to keep its Hands Off hands off the Far East situation. That school of thought takes th position po-sition that the United States is not obligated either from a moral standpoint stand-point or from the necessity of protecting pro-tecting American interests, to use force in putting Japan back within its own borders. The basic reason why these thinkers think-ers argue against a firm American attitude, however, is that China never nev-er has been subjugated. China has been attacked; it has been overrun over-run from many quarters and it is now being overrun again; but it has never been conquered. That sounds like a broad statement but history proves its truth. The Chinese through all of their thousands of years of history have managed to survive and maintain their racial characteristics and traditions. They never have sought additional territory. terri-tory. They have been content to do things in their own way and to absorb ab-sorb Western civilization slowly. In other words, the Chinese have generally gen-erally allowed human nature to change only as human nature does change through the years. But what of other world powers? Lately, the Chinese have entered into in-to a treaty with What of Soviet Russia by Of her Powers .'which that nation promises not to participate in war against China. The treaty is simple enough and yet what is written there is only a shadow sha-dow of what it all means. The Soviet, So-viet, while apparently not desiring to engage Japan in hostilities, is unwilling to see Japan go too far in extending her frontier. It is only a short while since Japan set up the puppet state of Manchukuo. It borders bor-ders on Russian territory and the feeling along that border has been none too harmonious. It -seems quite logical then that the Soviet was desirous de-sirous of showing to Japan the possibility pos-sibility of an attack from two sides if Japan forces her tentacles too far inland in continental Asia. Also, it ought to be mentioned that the treaty between the Soviet and China may be influential in Europe. The general understanding is tha Hitler has committed Germany to the aid of Japan if the Soviet moves against the island power. Besides this circumstance, the Soviet is unwilling, un-willing, if one may judge circumstances circum-stances of the last two years, to encourage en-courage the ill will of Great Britain. Dictator Stalin does not want to have Great Britain and France arrayed ar-rayed against him and he can see obviously that Great Britain and France, as well as the United States, must favor China over Japan Ja-pan in sentiment even though it may never be voiced in an official pronouncement. pro-nouncement. Word comes by cable from Paris that the French government has nationalized na-tionalized all of Takes Over the railroads with-Railroads with-Railroads in the borders of that nation. It may be that this news item will be passed over by many persons with the remark that the condition is several sev-eral thousand miles across the Atlantic. At-lantic. It is, however, a most significant sig-nificant step because France,, along with the United States and Great Britain, long has held to the idea that private initiative and private brains always are better than government gov-ernment initiative and government brains. I call attention to this development develop-ment for another reason. It happens hap-pens that about three years ago members of President Roosevelt's so-called Brain Trust were planning "exactly the same thing for the United Unit-ed States. . Strangely, the terms by which the French government, which is now completely socialistic, took over the railroads of France are identical with those which were under consideration consid-eration by the Roosevelt Brain Trust. It may be news to many persons to learn that the bunch of theorists who infest our government once actually drafted a bill for action by congress to nationalize the American Ameri-can railroads. That bill would have taken over the rail lines for then-bonded then-bonded indebtedness and woula have left nothing at all for the stockholders. stock-holders. The French radicals have done exactly that thing in nationalizing national-izing the French railroads. It may be that "It can't happen here," but I must confess a very deep fear. It seems to me the time has arrived for those who believe in ownership of their own homes, possession of their own money whether the sum be small or large to awaken to the trend of worid events. i Western Newspaper Union. |