Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1949-08-12
Report on China
Stirs Readers Retort

| To the Editor OF The Star:
The right-hand half of the first page Of
one of our local papers on August pub
lished a so-called synopsis Of the State De-
partment white paper" on China. This
article was headed in scare head capitals.
~. s. Rejects Role of Prop for Corrupt
Chang Regime"
If corruption is to be the measure, what
| about the near Communist-Socialist govern
| ment of Great Britain, where high official
| of the government recently was ousted Tor
confessed corruption, and where the people
are being dictated to by horde Of Commu-
nist-minded bureaucrats? What about French
| corruption and Italian landlordiSm and the
corrupt government Of Greece? And in our
own country, what about gangsterism and
| Bosses Hague and PendergaSt ct al ana De-
trayal in high places?
But corruption, bad as it is in every coun-
try, is not the issue. Let us ask some ques-
tons and give some answers:
Who have been our friends for many years?
Chang and China. Who for years before
we entered World War II fought our enemy,
Japan? Again Chang and China. Who dur
ing the war was our faithful ally and en-
gagged large numbers of Japanese who other
wise would have been thrown against us in
our own Pacific war theaters? Again Chang
and China. Who has been the unrelenting
foe during all these years Of communism In
China? Again Chang.
Now let's look at the other side Of the
picture.
Who betrayed our allies and friends,
| Chang and China, at Teheran and Yalta?
| Our State Department. What did this coun-
try receive for this betrayal? Nothing, be-
cause the japanese were defeated already
| and we had the atom bomb. What was the
actual result Of that betrayal? Russia got
large slice of China and her Communist
allies now have the rest
Wedemeyer Report Bottled"
Who kept the Wedemeyer report advo-
eating aid for China bottled up for two
years? Our State Department. Who tried
to make that unrelenting foe Of commu-
| nism, Chang, admit Communists into his
government? Our State Department.. What
would have happened If Chang had agreed
| to the State Departments pressure? Just
what has happened to Czecheslovakia. Pol
and and the rest Of the European countries
behind the Iron Curtain?"
Who thereupon practically abandoned
| Chang and China to the Communists? Our
StaA Department.. Who has inst published
white paper bitterly attacking Chang and
enormously helping the Chinese Commu-'
mist? Our State Department. ''
Why has Mr.. Acheson and our State De-
partment through the E. c. A. allotted the
| largest share Of the many billions spent
under the Marshall Plan to the Socialist
| British government and the next largest
| share to Socialist France? Since we can
only judge from acts. the inference is that
| Mr.. AcheSon and the State Department be-
| lieve in socialism Of the British stripe, which
| is not far removed from communism. and
which has brought the British Isles to the
brink of ruin.
|, Has the two billions in round figures al
lotted by the E. c. A. to the British under
the Marshall Plan for the two years of that
plan ending March !, 1850, strengthened
the British against foreign foe? 1t has
| not and will not. In effect, all Of it has
been, or will be. spent by the British in that
period on socialized medicine alone, and
this is verified by British official reports.
State Department Criticized.
Why is our State Department so opposed
| to using E. c. A. funds for buying American
| products where needed by Europe? Why
does Mr.. Acheson want to re-arm Europe?
Western Europe was very well supplied with
arms, largely by us. only. four years ago at
| the close Of World War H. and except for
airplanes there has been no radical change
in arms since then, and even in airplanes
any war in the next few years will be largely
fought with the weapons of World War II.
Particularly is this the case with Russia,
which has neither the means nor the skill
| to re-arm except in very small part. do
| not blame our military for wanting more
| arms. It Is their business to try to get I'M
limited arms for this country and everybody
| else, but that is why we have civilian con-
| troll. Otherwise we would be bankrupt and
could not fight if war came. Why does the
| State Department allege that the .400,-
100000 Of so-called surplus arms for
Europe are surplus? Actually these arms cost
| s. ,000, 900, 900 and are not surplus at all.
These arms would be needed for our troops
in any war. Do you remember how 1--WE
stripped ourselves to furnish arms for Eng
land in World War and then trained our
troops with wooden rifles and artillery?
Why does Mr.. Acheson have no thought
for American taxpayers but advocate end
less spending Of our money for Socialist Eu-
rope? Why Is our State Department merely
an annex of No. 10 Downing Street, London?
Why does our Secretary Of State tolerate
the arrogant threats Of the British govern
ment to cut our supplies of Congo uranium
ore when all he has to do Is tell that gov
eminent that if it does. any Marshall Plan
| money will be withdrawn from It? That
would make the Socialist government Of
Great Britain change its tune Immediately.
In short, what we need In this country Is
an American State Department.
All honor to Senators George, Mcclellan,
Taft, KEN, Malone, Donnel, Watkins and
other Senators who, with great courage and
patriotism, are trying to bring some sense
into the present fumhling foreign policy OF
this country and save at least part Of the
vast sums now spent uselessly In Europe;
Forcing Wage Increases
Held Unwise Fright Now"
To the Editor Of The Star:
r. hI,sjness has Il, give a fourth round Of