University Daily Kansan Monday, Feb. 16, 1953
---
Europe Quick to Disagree With Ike's Formosa Plan
First European action to the Eisenhower statement on Formosa was undoubtedly one of great disapproval and indignation, and there is a long list of those who spoke against the move.
Herbert Morrison, chief opposition speaker in the House of Commons, declared that the decision "added little to the strategic advantages of the United Nations and increased the danger of an expansion of the war in Korea." The people and the press echoed the view, according to New York Times correspondence, "demanding declaration of independence from the U.S."
Bevanite Crossman accused Ike of "doing with Formosa exactly what the Russians were accused of doing with the North-Koreans—war by proxy." Many Conservatives too shared the concern about the decision, and Foreign Minister Anthony Eden tried to reassure them after the talks with John Foster Dulles, U.S. secretary of state. He told the House he was convinced "that no aggressive intention lay behind the U.S. decision," and he hoped that "it would be possible to develop the kind of collaboration with Washington that would make it impossible for any important international step to be taken without the British government having an opportunity to express its views before-hand."
Many Frenchmen also thought that end of neutralization will do more harm than good. The Newsweek Paris bureau cabled: "The French feel that any Nationalist raid against the mainland will be mere pinpricks to Peking while furnishing the Reds with a pretext for intervening in Indochina."
In Italy there was similar concern, and the Communist leader Togliatti wrote that the Formosa decision "opened a new war front against the Chinese Peoples' Republic and aggravated the international situation."
On the second day and following days reports were milder, and from England it was cabled that the tempest was just a tempest in a teapot. From France the move was seen as "not so bad as they expected." Nevertheless, from those countries it was easy to draw negative conclusions about Formosa. The American plan seemed to be not well shaped, the move was hasty and rather unfortunate, and no consultation was taken in advance with any European nation.
As the Christian Science Monitor pointed out, "Clarification is lacking . . . all ramifications may not yet have been studied in Washington." Name-ly the connections and reactions of India, IndoChina and Japan, or also England and France,tied in different degrees of trade or interest with Red China.
From the military point of view, in Europe, it
was argued that Mao Tse-tung can invade Formosa with his jet-planes and 5 million men and easily defeat the 500,000 soldiers and propeller-planes of Chiang. In this extreme case, the only thing that might determine American intervention would be the slaughter of the 700 Americans under Gen. Chase. Gen. Chase himself declared in an interview with Newsweek that Chiang is not likely to win and not even to start a war on the mainland without U.S. help.
It is easy to see how the "Asians fight the Asians" issue looks premature also in China. And the blockade of the Reds looks difficult, too. Secretary Dulles in London had to deny any blockade of Red China—aware of the trouble the U.S. might create for the English trade with Hong Kong and the mainland.
The move is not only incomplete and hazy, but it was taken in Washington without any consultation with the probable American allies. In England it was wondered what on earth Winston Churchill has been talking about with like, if he had to make a phone call costing $9,600 to get some information about the Formosa step.
"The move s only psychological," argued some American commentators. In this case the effect seems to have gone in the wrong direction, toward the American allies that jumped at the explosion of the news either in Western Europe or in the Far East. And if in 1950 Truman took a unilateral decision under pressure of the Korean war, there was no sufficient reason why Eisenhower should take another unilateral decision in 1953 about the whole Asian matter.
If something happens in China, this something may mean a war—a war to be fought in Asia and Europe more than in America, and the European nations would like to have been consulted in advance.
The discontent or at least suspended animation toward the American policy also was determined by the hasty visit of Secretary Dulles—who in nine days toured the continent crying to speed up a union that vanished in 476 A.D. As a result, in France Premier Rene Mayer did not drop the new anti-German attitude, England showed—as usual—to be interested—in trading with the Reds, and De Gasperi in Italy candidly spoke about Italian overpopulation and the 35 per cent Social Communist electorate. Only Chancellor Adenauer in Germany acted as a willing host.
Let's wait for the next steps, the Europeans seem to think. Of course they like Ike, too. And they wish him to be more fortunate in the next decision.
—Al Traldi.
Mr. President, the semi-autobiography of Mr. Truman, has been reduced from $5 to $2, and is even on sale as a 98 cent special in some areas of the country.
Letters
Is It Dangerous To Play With Fire?
Perhaps Mr. Mitsakis has heard our little adage, "A burnt child dreads the fire". A child dreads fire because he doesn't understand how to prevent the fire from burning him again. The precise reason why we send children to school is to teach them how to care for themselves in situations such as these and many others much more complex than these. He must learn the workings of the world under all circumstances.
During the second World War a very dear step-relative of mine and his parents and sister were executed by the Nazis because their beliefs did not coincide with the ruling order. I too know the personal pain of this sort of injustice, but I cannot believe by any stretch of imagination that I can stop this injustice by ignoring it.
Both Mr. Traldi and Mr. Mitsakis seem to have ignored the basic issue in Margot Baker's letter. It is well-known that teachers on the hill and on other hills are more than a little shy of giving their personal opinion of communism. This I believe is wise because the wrong teacher might do a great deal of harm by preaching only the good sides of communism to idealistic minds; however, a required course in Russian communism taught to all the students, not excluding the engineers and fine arts students, certainly would be highly beneficial to all young Americans today.
Joan Page Sargeant
Little Man on Campus by Dick Bibler
"That poor girl gets called on every day—She is about th' only student Proff. Snarf can remember by name."
Today's World Needs Belief in Brotherhood!
Editor's note: Brotherhood week begins February 15. We thought that this editorial by Mr. Roberts brought forth the need for mutual understanding, not only during the week but in general as well.
Not since the days of Adolph Hitler has the spirit which animates our annual Brotherhood week carried such significance for Americans of every race and creed as it does again this year. It has been evident for some time, of course, that organized intolerance was being revived in postwar Europe under the Kremlin's auspices. But the last twelve months have seen virtually open persecution of the Jews in Communist countries added to the heavy disabilities long imposed there upon Roman Catholics.
Just as the infamous racial and religious policies practiced by the Nazis impelled us to examine our own consciences in the 1930s, so now the apparent resurgence of those policies under communism should furnish us a special incentive for more self-criticism of the same variety.
Fifteen years ago we were saying that although human relations in the United States were still far from perfect, our democratic system at least gave us an opportunity gradually to improve them through a common effort. In mid-February, 1953, we might ask ourselves how well we have employed that opportunity.
Statistics in this connection possess only a limited validity. As a nation, we have certainly made some progress toward eliminating prejudicial practices, especially as they pertain to Negroes and Asiatics. But it is easier to correct a bad law than an undesirable attitude, and many persons who sincerely believe themselves to be tolerant are so only in theory—and toward anonymous groups.
True brotherhood involves the relationship of individual to individual. It concerns our common, daily actions. By that test most of us could profitably do a little soul-searching on our own, as we thank God we live in a land dedicated to the preservation of human dignity and not in a dictatorship, black or red, where personal rights count for nothing against those of the state.-Roy Roberts, Kansas City Star.
Short Ones
We wonder about the one carred man of the campus—he doesn't hear both sides of a story.
The United States is distinguished by having two living ex-presidents. Does that make the University outstanding with an attending ex-president of the All Student Council?
After wading through the history of the pre-historic Aleuts we think the English department should offer a course in elementary text writing.
Some professors may be dry but they never dry up.
We wonder if the Ornithology I class (Early Morning Bird Calls) is ever out early enough to catch the KU nighthawk.
Russia promises to be able to define the source of the universe before long. Wouldn't it be a better idea if she'd concentrate on defining her own country and communism?
Chivalry is not dead. One fellow came to the rescue of a coed in distress who punched the Lucky Strike button of a cigarette machine and got Chesterfields instead. The guy bought them from her.
Mail Subscription rates: $3 a semester or $5.40 a year (add $1 a semester if in school) and $6 a semester every afternoon during the University year except Saturdays and Sundays. University holidays and examination periods.
Entered second class matter Sept. 17,
1910, at Lawrence, Kan., Post Office
under act of March 3, 1879.