Evening star., 1950-10-03
Peiping, Formoso and the u. N.

Next month"; when the Security Council turns
It's attention to the Soviet and Chinese Communist
complaint accusing the United States Of "aggres-
sion" against Formosa, representative of the
Mao Tse-tung regime at Peiping will be permitted
toStestify. His testimony undoubtedly will take
the form OF a propaganda attack against our own
country and Nationalist China, but that is some
thing that cannot be avoided in view of the fact
that seven of the Councils eleven members have
voted in favor of granting the hearing
At the time the vote was taken, Nationalist
China sought to veto the whole proposition, but
the seven-member majority-made up of Britain
France Russia, Norway, Yugoslavia, India and
Ecuador-held that the issue was entirely pro-
cedural not substantive, and that action on it was
therefore not vetoable. For our part, although
we voted with the Nationalists and with Cuba
in a three-nation minority Egypt abstained)
against inviting Peiping to appear before the
Council we agreed that such an invitation could
not rightly be vetoed.
In taking that stand we acted wisely for
several reasons. In the first place. the invitation
had been proposed by Ecuador, one of our good
neighbors in this hemisphere, and 1t had the
strong support not merely of Russia but of
powers most friendly to us. Beyond that, as our
delegate pointed out, the United States and Ma
tionalist China-deSpte being opposed to the
action-could hardly veto it without violating
established rules and precedents. One such prec-
edent was set when the Council, regardless of
Soviet negative vote, decided to hear Chilean
representative during the Czechoslovak debate
few years ago; another was set when an Indone-
sian representative, in spite of British and French
negative votes, was granted Council hearing
during the debate on Indonesia.
In the circumstances, since most of our
friends were on the other side and since the
precedents were clear, the United States did we'll
in declining to support Nationalist China's veto
argument. Peiping's representative may mouth
nothing but vicious propaganda when he appears
before the Council but the Soviet world will
know that we ourselves argued against the idea
of vetoing the majority decision to hear him out
"a fact that will not hurt us any, propagandis-
tically or otherwise, among the free nations, par
ticularly among the free nations of Asia.
As for Formosa itself we need not fear that
the Chinese Communists will be able to get very
far with their charge of aggression" This is so
for the simple reason that our Seventh Fleet is
between the island and the mainland, not to at
tack anybody but to neutralize the area by pre-
venting an amphibiouS assault from Red China
and by persuading the Nationalists not to strike
at the latter. In that sense, the fleets role, in
addition to supporting the United Nations in Ko-
rea, is the role of pacifer, not an aggressor.
The Council majority, we can be sure, will not
be fooled by Peipings and Moscow's noisy pro-
paganda to the contrary.
1t is a fact moreover, that the United States
has made clear to the world that it has no inten-
ton of acting unilaterally as regards the future
disposition of Formosa. That disposition, as the
President has said, must await the restoration
of security in the Pacific peace settlement with
Japan, or consideration by the United Nations"
In other words, the issue is to be settled by in
ternational agreement, not by American strong
arm methods. In attacking such policy as "ag-
gression," the Communists are merely resorting
to their familiar trick of turning the truth up
side down.