Evening star., 1950-01-18
Believes We Now Are At War
With the Soviet Union
To the Edito.

1lAle VI reasoning lies IN the TACT that at the
present moment we are at war with Russia.
The so-called army of Mao-Tze- -Tung is Of
fcered by Russians of Stalin's general staff,
and has been for the past six months Mrs.
Chlang Ka1-shek has endeavored to make
this point, but her efforts seemingly have
been futile. The Chinese so-called Red
army simply consists of 200 divisions of
Russian troops (Chinese troops, Russian
officers.
In my opinion, and am sure William
Bullitt will concur with me, the present
Chinese situation is the first Russian blow
IN war which Stain has declared upon us.
Any recognition by the United Nations of
the present Communist government Of China,
therefore. means appeasement decidedly
worse and more appalling than Chamber
lain's appeasement at Munich. These facts
do not seem to have made any impression,
even upon the Joint Chiefs Of Staff,
l wish to reiterate that in my humble
opinion Russia is at war with us today in
military sense, and her major object in China
Is to shut us of from vital raw materials in
Southeastern Asia and Malaya Also to OBJ
tain ports from which to operate Russian
U-boats. and ultimately bottle up our West
Coast as well as our East Coast ports when
the Russians invade Western Europe at no
further distant time than perhaps IA to 16
months
T do not believe anything more need be
said by me to emphasize the fact that we
are facing much shrewder enemy than
Hitler. x. w.
Hopes Congress VIII "Question"
Experiences Of Admirals Denfeld and Began
To the Editor Of The Star
Very little reaction has appeared in print
to the recent announcements concerning
Admiral Began. His original letter in
response to the request of Secretary Mat
thews who asked his opinion in the Crom-
melin statement was published in The Star
October T. Since it struck me as an un-
usually sincere document from one in high
places saved it and would like now to
quote the last paragraph: II have been
informed that when the committee hear
ings resume in October the Navy will be
afforded the opportunity to state its case
completely on the items comprising the
agenda. Since Capt. Crommelin's press
statement, am more optimistic than before
that such will be the case. But the agenda
does not cover the fundamentals of our
national security. It embraces a total Of
eight items. all pertinent but by no means
the complete whole. It is my earnest hope
that at some time in the near future this
vital subject may be thoroughly explored
with no consideration being given to the
regulations or politics of the witnesses
who appear. 1t is bigger than personalities.
broader and deeper than politics. It is
our country"
Quotes Letter of October 4.
This man of obviously high achievement.
devotion to his subordinates, respect for his
superiors, and concern for his country now
has been denoted from vice admiral to
rear admiral and relieved Of his command
Of the 1st Task Fleet in the Pacific. SUBJ
sequently requesting retirement, his orders
came through three weeks early. The San
Francisco dispatch of January relaying
this information referred to Admiral Began
as "foe of unihcation policies" Allow me
to quote the second paragraph of his letter
printed October T.: Your dispatch, which
prompted this letter, is surprising in its
Interpretation of the motive in the basic
statement. It AYERS that the Crommelin
statement and subsequent public utterances
have embarrassed the progress of unifica-
ton and harmony and the Navy Depart
ment It further states that these remarks
have been inspired by apprehensions con-
cerning the future Of naval aviation Mr..
Secretary, while realizing that this is your
honest belief. that Interpretation of the
genesis Of Crommelin's release is the most
superficial gloss and does not remotely
touch the heart Of the question. The basic
reason behind all of 1t is genuine fear in
the Navy for the security Of our country if
the policies followed in the Department Of
Defense, since the National Security Act
became law, are not drastically changed,
and soon."
Here is an exceptionally honest opinion,
respectfully yet forcefully given in good
faith. Does the verdict on this man mean
that all of us who see danger signals in the
weakening of our international representa-
tion are foes of unifcation? If his state
ments constitute opposition to unifcation
then what comprises real concern for the
United States of America?
Citizens Seen Confused.
If navies really are outdated by the twin
achievements of atomic energy and long
range bombers, then why is the Communist
government Of the u.s.s.R. building it,