Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1961-10-10
Bar Red China

Herbert SommerS' presen-
tation of the Republic of
China case (Star, October S,
1861 is entirely unfair to
Chang Kai-Shek and misrep-
resentS the United States pol
icy toward him.
1t is completely incorrect
that in giving generous &c
onomic and military aid to
the government of Formosa"
(sic). the United States
Government kept in mind
and hoped" that one day
Chang Kai-shek would in
wade the mainland =" The
contrary is true. On several
occasions the United States
prevented him from under
taking this invasion. The
most striking example of such
cases is, of course. Chiang's
offer, made at the time when
Red China sent its "volun-
teers' against the United Ma
tons forces in Korea. He
offered his total military CO.
operation and announced his
intention to attack directly
the Communist China MAIN
land. Not only was his offer
rejected. but he had TO re-
nounce his plans under pres
sure from the United States.
Since then. the American
veto has been exercised sew
eral times, and made effective
by the threat TO deny Chang
Kai-shek any economic. let
alone military assistance. 1t
is supremacy unfair TO Chang
to accuse him now of not
having done what we pre-
vented him from doing.
If Mr.. SommerS has any
evidence supporting his as
sertion that the hatred of
TOO million Chinese (all of
them Communists by impli-
Cation has been intensified
by our attitude toward their
enSlavers who starve them
to death, he should produce
it. 1t would be sensational.
II not, he should not present
his assumption as estab-
blished facts. AS to the
contention that by admitting
Red China to the U. N. we
would acquire a means for
dealing with those TOO mil
lion Chinese, it is an utter
self -delusion which can only
be based on an absolute ig-
norance of communism and
of the history of our deal
ings" with other Communist
states.
The U. N. is supposed to be
an association of peace-lov-
ing nations abiding by their
international obligations and
upholding the provisions of
the Charter. Red China
stands in defiance of the
U. NJ. has invaded the borders
of a nation with which it
has friendly relations and a
treaty india. has violated
and destroyed the autonomy
Of another nation whom it
pledged to India to respect
Tibet, has committed the
most atrocious crimes against
the U. N. military personnel
in Korea. To disregard these
facts and admit Red China
to the U. N. would be to sap
the deepest moral founda-
lions of the United Nations
whose single strength at this
time is but moral.
The League of Nations did
not survive its complacency
to the violations of it's Char
ter by Japan lin China, no.
tably Manchuria), and Italy
against Ethiopia. The day
the U. N. admits Red China
to its membership. it will be-
come walking corpse.
Nicolas de Rochefort.
y
The U. N. would really be-
come a Soviet vehicle if Red
China were admitted. Mao
and Khrushchev might then
run the place, and we have
seen that one of them alone
is enough trouble now! AS
things stand, many Of the
small Asian nations have not
acknowledged the Chinese
Communist government. But
If we let that government
come into the U. N. and be
fully represented, the status
OF Red China would rise"
Officially all over the
world! No small country
could then refuse to recog-
nize tin the U. N. or out
and this would be a bad blow
for morale! Their private,
individual resistance to what
Red China stands for would
be weakened. They could be
inundated at the U. N. and
the "neutrals" might, in that
case, become even quieter
than they were at Belgrade!
In fact, Belgrade might come
to seem noisy in comparison
to the awed silence which