Omaha daily bee., 1919-07-24
Shdntun g
From the YillaRer.


The Shantung arrangement is not only an
imperfect arrangement; it is 4 shockingly bad
one. If the administration is going to attempt
to defend it as very fair arrangement indeed,
benehcent for China, quite without menace to
the United States, then the administration has
busy, busy time ahead of it. 1t is not of i'm
portance whether the disposition Of Shantung
contravenes the IA points or whether it can be
argued into some specious accord with them;
the thing transgresses the feeling of decency
and no amount of Interpretation" will mitigate
the fact.
The only argument or better, explanation,
which an honest man may offer in regard to
the Shantung transaction is the explanation of
necessity. 1t costs something to defeat a ma
ton like Germany and we all have to pay, not
what we choose, but what it costs; the solution
OF so great wrong is not so simple as merely
setting up good for bad evil is no such
trifing thing as that. Shantung is price paid,
it is price paid for something more important
than Japan's adherence to the League of Ma
tons, as Mr.. Lodge very we'll knows. The
adherence which has cost so much was not to
the League of Nations but, if we may so dis
tinguish it, to the league of nations, that real
league which has been slowly rising as Ger
many lifted up its anti-western philosophy.
Japan may not be affirmatively antwestern; it
has not proved that yet. But it is certainly not
western; by none of its temperament nor ways
does it belong to our league. But is anyone in
doubt where our league would be now had
Japan broken out of it three years ago?
Who among us is to blame for this unwor-
thy arrangement which bought Japan's adher-
ence? England and France? Let US do little
accounting Germany overran France and
pressed hard on England. On the other side
of the world, Japan Englands peril and
put on the pressure; it demanded its free-let
us not euphemize tits imperialistc way in
h ntj for n1a 6na 1T To
sist Germany. England had no choice. An i'm
perialistic Japan could conceivably menace Eng
lands safety, but it could not menace it as did
Germany, driving down on Paris.
Where were we in the meantime? While
England was miserably making miserable
Shantung, where were We? If the United States
had not been clarifying neutrality and lauding
the German people, if they had not been elect
ing a president to keep them out of the war,
if the administration they elected had not been
urging a peace between equals and protesting
angrily against the blockade it is now proposed
to make a world obligation, would England
have been pressed to quite all these desperate
pledges? If England and France had been sure
that America would come to the rescue in
1917. would they have capitulated so thor
oughly to those who frankly more mer
cenaries than allies? Not only were the allies
not sure America would join them in 1917 or
at any other time; in March, 1916 they were
quite sure we were considerably too proud to
fight: a summer had passed, a winter had
passed; if America would not go to war on
issue like the Lusitania. it would not go to
at all. 1t would be extreme to say that
the United States is solely responsible for the
Shantung settlement But we should feel highly
uncomfortable were we among those of our
Countrymen who are now denounclng the allies
for doing what, our delinquency considered
they had to do, or are beratng Mr.. Wilson for
not saving China at Paris; perhaps China could
not have been saved, but if there was ever
time to save it. it was considerably before the
peace conference.
1t is fatuous to talk about two wrongs not
making right; who supposes they do? But
when you substract a wrong from a greater
good, you sometimes have little good left.
Germany is, after all. defeated; that was the
first business 1t took some bad pledges to do
it. but Paris could not revoke the pledges. Over
and above that. Paris could not leave China
free "to work out its Destiny as the
irresponsibles say so lightly. One of our cor
respondents who is learned in the affairs of
the Orient writes us the assurance that China
would rather have Germany in Shantung than
Japan. Paris knew that we'll enough. China is
not pro-German: it is merely helpless. No
nation has right to be SO weak as China
so far we are willing to go with the German
philosophers Belgium is strong and good
flows from its strength but China's weakness
its only vigor is its hatred of Japan and it must
be admitted that at least the peace conference
has not weakened that virtue in it!
But this leads out of analysis into specu-
aton. The Shantung affair is evidence of
this; that the probability for the next great war
has been shifted from Europe to side of
the water. If the increase of Japan's power by
the cession of Shantung menaces anybody, it
menaces first If the present arrangement is
too monstrous. if future arrangement
growing out of it shall prove intolerable, ours
is the business of the war that will settle it.
Japan is nearer our safety than Germany;
Germany nearer England's safety than
Japan. England shifted the peril of war from
its front to ours. Who is to blame? England?
No. England looked after its own interests
at Paris as did every other nation save ours.
We held it selfish and barbaric to look to our
own interests; our delegates did not represent
us but humanity, and it has come about
that the potential danger of the next conflict
has been pushed over to US. If we candid,
We must say it serves us right. But the after
thought comes that Mr. Wilson has served us
wrong, and that without any perceptibe benefit
to anyone, least of all to China.