Evening star., 1948-03-07
Who's Right on China?

Who's Right on China?
General Wedemeyer, in his testimony to
the House Foreign Affairs Committee, has
argued most persuasively in favor of ex-
tending military help to China to back up
and protect" the administrations pro-
posed s570,000,00O in economic aid. His
position on this point is much the same
as the one taken by General Macarthur
In his recent letter from Tokyo. But
though both of these distinguished soldiers
are outstanding authorities on the subject,
there is such a seeming conflict of views
between them and Secretary of State Mar
shall-also distinguished soldier and an
authority on the subject-that the Ameri-
can people are pretty much confused.
1t may be, of course, that this conflict
is more apparent than real. Nevertheless,
whether real or not, there is widespread
impression that it exists, and the result is
that the average citizen, with the whole
issue beclouded Is in no position to pass
a sound Judgment on who is right. On
the one hand, like General Macarthur,
General Wedemeyer has made clear that
he believes it imperative to extend large
scale help to China He believes that
Generalissimo Chiang's government, if it
is to check the growing Communist men
ace, must have not merely our dollars, but
more besides; it must have military aid
in the form of weapons, ammunition and
advice from competent American officers.
Secretary Marshall, however, apparently
iS rn11 fo ifn hot for OF tIo
moment. He goes along with the idea of
economic assistance, but he appears to shy
away from the proposal to back it up mill
tarily, to the limited extent advocated by
General Wedemeyer.
On the face of things at least the Wede-
meyer view seems to favor an arrangement
that differs very little, If at all, from what
we are now doing in Greece-an arrange
ment designed to establish internal
peace and security, without which eco
nomic aid for civilian recovery and re-
construction can make scant headway
against the Communists. But if Secretary
Marshall Is opposed to giving limited mill
tary aid to the Chinese, while wanting to
give 1T to the Greeks, he must have good
reasons for his position. He has yet to de-
fine them all, but he has reminded Con-
greSs that we have long had sizable mill
tary mission in Nanking to teach modern
methods to Chiangs armed forces and that
the MISSIONS advice "has been continually
and emphatically ignored" by the leaders
of those forces.
Another of the several considerations in
Secretary Marshall's mind may be this:
Great as they are, Americas economic and
military resources are not unlimited. Ac-
cordingly, in the effort to contain" COM
munism around the globe, we must not
make the mistake of trying to do every
thing at once everywhere and thus scatter
our strength in such way as to be effec-
tive nowhere. In other words, we must
give priority attention to the decisive
points, and on that basis Europe certainly
heads the list. After all, in terms of the
world balance of power, predominantly
agricultural China, which has been at war
with itself for the past thirty years, is not
nearly so important at this stage as the
relatively tremendous political, industrial
and military European structure This
does not mean, of course, that the Chinese
Sdil safely NC LeSleCteu, IL means, simply,
that in the apportioning of American aid,
the strategic realities demand major con-
centration on first things first.
Undoubtedly, both General Macarthur
and General Wedemeyer being military
experts with global outlook, have given
due weight to this strategic factor. Yet
their emphasis on China is very strong,
whereas Secretary MarshalIs is not The
difference in views may not be basic, but
is has served to breed confusion in the
public mind and in Congress. Who is
right? Which approach is representative
of the majority judgment of those best
qualified to speak on the subject? Before
they can know, the American people have
to be told. They ought to be told. The
time is about here for clarifying state
ment of the most authoritative kind, based
one the prevailing opinion of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, the National Military
Establishment, the State Department and
the White House