First of all, we must know that the strategy of the Communist International is varied to fit different nations and different localities and persons in conformity with the different stages of development of the locality. The Communist coup d'tat in anyone locality or anyone country usually must have gone through the underground preparation for a long period of time. The present crisis in the Middle East is a good example.
I. Japan's Communist Problems
The Japanese anti-Communist policy is rather vacillating. In some respects it is hamstrung by constitutional provisions. The constitution provides that a majority of two-thirds vote shall be needed for constitutional amendments, and that any constitutional amendment must also be approved by a similar majority vote on referendum. In dealing with crucial problems such as rearmament, the Tokyo government has been anxious to revise the restrictions imposed by the constitution, but most of the opposition parties (just as what the Communist Party has aspired or plotted for) are lined up firmly against the proposed revision.
At present, the Japanese anti-Communist measures consist of the following four main points:
(1) On the domestic front, the Tokyo government has tried to apply every available means to curb the outward expansion of the Japanese Communist Party and to deal severe blows to its front organizations so as to make it impossible for them to hide among the masses. Such an endeavor has proved successful in the past three years.
(2) The Tokyo government has also publicly prohibited all administrative organs and educational institutes from employing Red party members as their staff workers.
(3) Japan has reformed her financial policy, stabilized her currency, expanded her foreign trade, increased the opportunity for business employment, improved the workers' standard of living, implemented social welfare system, all of which have greatly contributed to the stabilization of the laborers' livelihood. In recent years, Japanese workers are contented with their jobs and the betterment of their living conditions.
(4) In the international field, Japan may attempt to play a neutralist role, trying to evade commitments in the anti-Communist group so as to avoid friction with Soviet Russia and the Chinese puppet regime. But the fact remains that in this postwar period while Japan has yet no strength for self-defense against the threatening Red invasion, the U. S. -Japan mutual Security Agreement is an indispensable weapon to keep the Red bear out of her door. Again, as the Japanese economy depends upon development of foreign trade with the free world, the Tokyo government can find no way to desert the anti-Communist camp.
Take, for instance, the Sino-Japanese trade. This has been steadily increasing in recent years from the annual volume of some thirty million American dollars up to US$180,000,000. Taiwan is an important area for expanding the Japanese import-export trade. This may also be called a crucial factor in keeping Japan from openly setting up diplomatic relations with Red China.
II. Communist Menace in Southeast Asian Countries
None of the states in this area can resist the Communist invasion single - handedly. Fortunately, in recent years the United States has caused to be formed the 8-nation Southeast Asian Treaty Organization which serves greatly to hearten its members. The ferocious and violent conspiracy within as well as the Communist threat without has therefore considerably reduced. Nevertheless, the Communist infiltration still keeps on through some other forms of peace offensive.
Generally speaking, the anti-Communist measures of Southeast Asian countries are as follows:
(1) Several countries have outlawed the Communist party, making its open activities difficult if not wholly impossible.
(2) Some of them have also enacted and are enforcing specific laws or regulations banning political meetings or organizations and, particularly, the propagation of Communist ideology.
(3) Nearly all of them put foreign residents under stricter control so as to curb Communist activities among them.
(4) Many of them try to bring about political and economic reforms in response to the people's demand, so as to keep them away from Red temptations; while in their international relations, some of them still follow a sort of appeasement policy toward the Communist bloc.
(5) Some of these Southeast Asian countries play fence-straddling so well that they are in a position to receive economic aid from both sides of the fence. For instance, both Indonesia and Burma receive aid from the United States and the Communist countries.
Taken as a whole, the Southeast Asian area is one of the areas most susceptible to Communist invasion. If the threatened Communist invasion is not promptly checked, its development will be extremely terrible.
III. Anglo-American Conflict in Anti Red Measures
We cannot ignore or deny the conflict of interests or the difference in the anti-Communist policies of the United States and Britain in Southeast Asia.
For the last two or three centuries, the chief aim of the Western Powers in the Asian countries has been economic exploitation. From the economic field they have proceeded to dominate the government of most of these countries.
The development efforts of the Western Powers in Southeast Asia created momentous changes in both the economic and social life of the native peoples. Their former culture and stable social order were endangered. The ruling class could only continue to rule with the blessings of the exploiting Western Powers. The gap between the rich and the poor grew wider and discontent became widespread.
During the Second World War, the Soviet Communists took the rare opportunity to conduct propaganda while the Western European countries were busy struggling for their own survival. Under these circumstances, Britain, Holland and France, together with the United States, had to abandon a portion of their vested interests in order to help stem the tide of the Russian expansion. This growing fear of the Communist menace has considerably changed the Western notion of the importance of Southeast Asia to the West.
In coping with the threat of Soviet Russia and its Communism, the United States and Western Europe have to use their military, economic and psychological weapons. It is in the employment of these weapons dictated by their different national policies that the U. S. A. and Britain find themselves split for some time at least. To some extent, Britain may be regarded as representing the anti-Communist stand of all European countries.
In the military respect, there is the traditional policy of employing armed forces directly to check the Red open invasion, such as in Korea, or supplying the invaded country with technical aid and war equipment, such as in the Indo-China conflict; or help build up the defensive forces of the Red target area, such as the American military aid to Asian countries and the mutual security agreements that the American Government has concluded with them.
The U. S. financial aid to her allies or uncommitted nations follows various patterns, with the aid items ranging from daily necessities to heavy equipment needed for long-range economic reconstruction.
In the psychological phase, the task has been centering around the employment of publicity media such as written materials, radio broadcasts, and pictures to arouse the anti-Communist sentiments of the Southeast Asian peoples, and to persuade them of the identity of interests between the East and the West in the fight against Communism.
Briefly speaking, within the democratic camp all the countries are placed on a basis of equality, with liberty to all the people. This is the American policy which the American government has been carrying out with patience and firmness.
However, many European statesmen disagree with Washington in this respect. Some sort of close cooperation between the American and the European governments is very important in the fight against Communist aggression.
Next in importance is that the Western democracies must thoroughly understand the different conditions and circumstances in different areas in order to shape and to carry out a suitable anti-Communist strategy. Take, i for instance, Japan. We must understand that Japan's political situation is very different from that of most Southeast Asian states, yet her geographical and economic relationship is unmistakably closely tied up with that of the Southeast Asian group. It would be a blunder if we pay attention to her political tendency without taking into account her economic problems.
The differences in anti-Communist policy between the United States and Britain are attributable chiefly to the differences of view-points toward the Southeast Asian environment and the Communist ways of aggression.
In the first place, the prevailing American concept lays emphasis on appraisal of the people's welfare and progress with reference to their own living formula, moral standard and political and economic systems to see if they are similar to the American patterns. Most Europeans, especially the Britons, think that as every country possesses its own peculiar tradition and environment, the welfare and the progress of each nation may not be the same as those of others. This is because there are many small countries in Europe, in each of which there are heterogeneous groups of peoples speaking different tongues. Hence, the Europeans are inclined to think that there should be the tolerated existence of different forms of democracy growing out of diverse historical background and living formulas.
In the second place, the Americans firmly believe that the Chinese mainland, once Sovietized, will forever be subjected to Russian domination and endanger world peace. On the other hand, the British entertain the illusion that the Chinese Communists might try their best to preserve their freedom of action. The typical Briton preposterously assumes that Communist usurpation of the Chinese mainland is an inevitable result. Despite the fact that the Chinese Reds had massacred millions of innocent people under their rule, the cold-blooded Britishers still want to do business with them.
In the third place, since her acquiring of the dominion status, India has become an upstart and the second biggest country in the Far East. Except retaining her economic interests in her vassal state, Britain has let India, though with reluctance, make decisions on her own destiny. In her foreign relations, India says she will not join any power group. She brags about her independent foreign policy. Though he is generally dubbed a Communist, Jawaharlal Nehru brazenly denies the charge. He claims that, as he is not involved in any conflict of the two camps, he can do better to promote world peace and protect India's interests.
Lastly, having had enough bitter lessons on the Communist treacheries and atrocities, the United States has taken a stand entirely different from that of some other nations. The American people are convinced that:
(1) Democracy and Communism are two systems absolutely incongruous and incompatible to each other just as "black and white," and Communism is worse than war in its destructiveness.
(2) All the free nations in Southeast Asia are in danger of getting invaded or else subverted sooner or later.
(3) Only by concerted efforts with the help of American anti-Communist leadership may the Southeast Asian countries save themselves from the Red peril.
(4) In the long run, these countries will have to implement the principle of democracy and necessary economic reform to the fullest extent possible. Only in so doing can they effectively guard themselves against Communist infiltration.
Although the United States is firmly convinced of the correctness of her policy toward Asia, other nations such as Britain, India, Burma and Indonesia hold different but quite absurd views, which may be stated as follows:
1. There is no fear of open Communist armed aggression in the near future.
2. The expansion of Communism in Southeast Asia was brought about by the local independence movement and the current world-wide nationalism.
3. A military alliance with the United States will turn the tense situation into a hot war, for the Communists may be provoked into increasing its pressure in that area.
Right or wrong, the views of these Southeast Asian countries are undergoing the test of time. Meanwhile the Communists are not idle. Invariably they hold the initiative in both strategic and tactical maneuverings.