Taipei newspapers were unanimous in supporting President Kennedy's naval blockade of Cuba. They termed it a highly encouraging decision for the free world.
The Chen Hsin Hsin Wen Pao urged the United States to press demands that the UN Security Council require dismantling and withdrawal from Cuba of all Soviet missiles and other offensive weapons under UN supervision.
"Otherwise, for the regional security of the Western Hemisphere, the United States should exercise its right of self-defense and take further steps against Cuba," the paper said.
The Lien Ho Pao (United Daily News) said Kennedy's proclamation of the blockade was tantamount to declaration that a state of war already existed between the United States and Cuba.
The Hsin Sheng Pao (New Life Daily News) said the blockade might not prevent Cuba from receiving Soviet weapons. The Soviets still can try to send military aid by plane and submarine, the paper said.
It added that the Soviet Union is not expected to risk nuclear war with the United States for the sake of Cuba.
"However," the paper said, "Moscow may create a tense situation in Berlin and Communist counter-measures may be carried out in such places as Korea, the Taiwan Straits and Southeast Asia."
The Chung Hua Jih Pao (China Daily News) called the blockade a counteroffensive against the Soviet Union and asserted that the United States should expel the Communists from Cuba.
The paper recalled that the Cuban exiles' raid on the Bay of Pigs last year failed because many Americans considered the Castro regime a group of fantastic nationalists and not a puppet of the Kremlin.
The Chung Yang Jih Pao (Central Daily News) hoped the U.S. action would have a positive effect in preventing Communist aggression against the free world.
Soviet Russia will not wage war against the United States but will order her puppets to start trouble in other areas, the paper said.
The English-language China News said the Americans could go in and take over Cuba at any time they wished. But they have not done so.
"Instead," the News said, "the blockade will prevent further buildup of Castro and give the Cuban people an opportunity to settle things for themselves.
"Free Asia naturally hopes that the same American determination will be made manifest in our part of the world."
The English-language China Post said on October 25 the blockade marks merely the beginning of actions that may be taken by the United States.
The Post said: "There can be no lasting peace in this world unless and until the Communist bloc is totally defeated. The losses to be sustained by humanity will be greatly reduced if both sides refrain from using nuclear weapons. The choice in the case must also be made by the Kremlin."
Another Proof
Nikita Khrushchev's softening in the face of American determination brought comment in the editorial of the Ta Hua Wan Pao (Ta Hua Evening News) on October 26: "This is another proof of a historical lesson—that only strength and determination can stop an aggressor whereas retreat and appeasement only serve to stimulate his greed."
The China Post (November 4) was concerned about "the future after the Soviet missiles have been dismantled and pulled back to Russia." The paper asked: Is there any way to prevent the secret construction of new missile sites in Cuba underground or under effective camouflage? How can the United States and other American countries be sure that all the Soviet missiles have been returned to Russia and none is concealed in Cuba for future use? Even if all of the present stockpile is pulled back to Russia, is there any guarantee that no new stock will be shipped to Cuba?"
The Hsin Sheng Pao (October 26) urged the United States to take further action to end the threat from Cuba.
The paper suggested on October 29 that the core of the question is not the dismantling of the missile bases on Cuba but the existence of the Castro regime. "If the Castro regime continues to exist, then not only will the problem remain unsolved but the whole situation in Latin America will keep deteriorating," the paper said.
This view was shared by the Chung Yang Jih Pao and the Kung Lun Pao (Public Opinion Daily News). Chung Yang said on October 27 that "to support the Cuban people's anti-Communist revolution and overthrow the Castro regime is the only solution." On October 30, Kung Lun said that the Soviet Union retreated at the cost of prestige because it wanted to keep the Castro regime for future use. If the United States is contented merely with the dismantling of Russian missile sites, the paper said, how can it be sure Moscow will not bring forth one or more additional Cubas?
The Chen Hsin Hsin Wen Pao (October 30) regretted that Khrushchev's retreat had won American assurance that it will not invade Cuba. This makes the Castro regime "a recognized fait accompli," the daily said.
It predicted Khrushchev would demand more. "President Kennedy has declared the dismantling of military bases outside the Western Hemisphere should be subjected to negotiations between NATO and Warsaw Pact countries," the paper said. "That means the United States did not turn down flatly Russia's demand for the dismantling of U.S. bases in Turkey ... and in future negotiations the United States will surely be caught in a very embarrassing situation."
The Lien Ha Pao, however, viewed the incident in another perspective. In an editorial entitled "Enlightenment in the Cuban Incident" November 7, it made these points:
First, "U.S. prestige has been heightened immensely."
Second, "Washington has regained the superiority in the cold war which was lost to Moscow after the failure of the Hungarian revolt."
Third, "the Americans are now aware that the Soviets are afraid to fight a real war" and "in the future the Russians will find it inadvisable to use war threats."
Fourth, and most important, "the greatest gain for the United States is the restoration of self-confidence and the new impression of the world."
The daily added that "the United States made an irreparable error in the Korean War—she won the war but gained nothing, and this placed her in a very bad position during the following decade." It advised America to take advantage of this new victory and at this time, when the Communist bloc is facing a split and needs time to solve internal troubles, to put more pressure on the Soviet Union and win more victories.
Security Officer
Local papers saw great significance in the defection of Chao Fu,* former security 'officer in the Chinese Communist "embassy" in Stockholm.
The Min Tsu Wan Pao (Min Tsu Evening News) said on November 3 that though his case appeared to be just another Communist defection, it has many new implications.
First, the paper said, Chao was a Communist diplomat. He must have known he was extremely fortunate to have obtained such a position, and that he enjoyed many special favors. A young man of 27 should have felt grateful or at least content. Yet he didn't.
Second, he was the security officer, handpicked to keep an eye on the others. Yet he himself betrayed the Peiping regime.
"Chao's story shows the bankruptcy of the Communist cadre system and is another sign of the Peiping regime's speedy collapse," the daily remarked.
Ta Hua Wan Pao analyzed the reasons for Chao's desertion.
"First," the paper said, "he was disillusioned with the Communists. The Red regime has its 'constitution,' which provides freedom for the people. But he knew people did not have even freedom of movement. Once he was on free soil, he immediately learned how dear freedom is to man.
"Second, he had discovered the brutality of Communism... His party membership and his Red training failed to change his human nature."
"And above all," the paper said, "he had come to know the complete failure of the Communist system. In many a village where there is no dog, at many a shop where one has to line up and wait two hours to buy a looking-glass, anyone would have reached the same conclusion."
The Hsin Sheng Pao (November 4) asked: "Even a man like Chao Fu has abandoned Communism and the Communists. Who else can be said fond of Communism and loyal to the Peiping regime?"
However, the paper said, if Chao had been on the mainland, he would not have been able to flee to freedom, but would have to wait painfully.
The daily challenged those foreigners who pinned their hope on a revolt of the people and Communist cadres. "The key to the question lies in whether we take timely action against the mainland," it observed. "If we do, not only will the people rise up but the Communist cadres will come over to our side - for they have waited only too long."
McMahon Line
U.S. Ambassador to India John K. Galbraith, former professor of economics at Harvard University, made a statement in New Delhi October 27 in which he said he regards the McMahon Line as "the accepted international border" between China and India. A few days later, his words were cited by a U.S. State Department spokesman in explaining the American stand on the Peiping-Indian border clashes.
In Taiwan, leading newspapers denied legitimacy of the McMahon line and suggested that the border issue must be settled in negotiations with the Republic of China after it regains mainland sovereignty.
On October 30, the China News said Galbraith's statement "tends to compound one mistake with another."
"Our view is that Professor Galbraith might have the last say about the 'Affluent Society' but he certainly knows very little about the history of that infamous McMahon Line," the paper said.
The Hsin Sheng Pao said on November 2 that the McMahon Line is illegal because:
1. It was drawn unilaterally by Britain and was never recognized by the Chinese government.
2. The area south of the line was Chinese territory before the British invaded it. China has never ceded that the land to any country.
3. China has repeatedly stated in the past that it reserves territorial sovereignty over the territory in question.
4. As India has become a sovereign state, the Simla Treaty has lost its effect unless India admits it is heir to British aggression.
The Ta Hua Wan Pao said on November 1 that the Tibetan delegate signed the Simla Treaty under pressure but that Tibet had to authority to sign an agreement with a foreign country.
"How ridiculous the Indian government is in regarding itself as an heir of British imperialism!" the paper said.
Ta Hua said it has no objections to U.S. sympathy for India, but that if the United States goes so far as to please Nehru by recognizing the McMahon Line, it is being "generous with another country's land and that it is an improper act to give away someone else's property"
Kuomingtang Meeting
On the opening day of the eighth plenary session of the fifth Central Committee of the Kuomintang November 12-15, newspapers wished the session success and urged the party to take strong measures.
The Kung Lun Pao noted a strong anti-Communist undercurrent in areas under Communist control and said this is expected to overwhelm Communism in the near future. Anti-Communist organizations have been reported not only on the Chinese mainland but also in Bulgaria, Poland, Hungary, East Germany and Russia itself, the paper said.
It urged the Kuomintang to take advantage of the international situation to achieve the mission of national recovery.
The Tsu Li Wan Pao (Independence Evening Post) said the government should start sending more men and supplies to the mainland to help organize the anti-Communist forces and facilitate the overthrow of the Peiping regime.
The conference's approval of a revised blueprint for recovery of the mainland received unanimous editorial approval November 16.
The Chung Hua Jih Pao lauded the Kuomintang resolution for its positive measures for mainland recovery. In criticizing defeatists, the paper said:
"Some international pundits and observers once entertained the idea that the difficulties facing the Chinese Communists are not insurmountable. They said it was overly optimistic to suppose the people on the mainland would rise up to oppose Communism and overthrow the puppet Peiping regime. But developments in the past year have presented irrefutable facts to correct their misunderstandings. Their thinking has changed and they are studying not the strengths but the weaknesses of the Communists. They can view with more objectivity the meaning and possibility of a return of the Republic of China to the mainland."
The Chung Yang Jih Pao termed the plenary session's achievements "a landmark in the path to recovery of the mainland." The paper praised the Kuomintang resolution to unify anti-Communist efforts in free China with those abroad and behind enemy lines on the mainland."
The Lien Ho Pao said: "To achieve the goal of mainland recovery, the Kuomintang must concentrate its efforts on organizing activities behind the enemy lines."
"Economic disaster and failure of the communes on the mainland should have paved the way for a large-scale uprising. It is unfortunate that the mass exodus of refugees from the mainland last year did not lead to a popular uprising and revolt against the Chinese Communists.
"The Kuomintang must be alert to the fact that if we cannot coordinate military action with revolt of the mainland people, the success of the counteroffensive will not be certain."
The Chen Hsin Hsin Wen Pao also said: "The most pressing task now is to strengthen anti-Communist forces behind enemy lines on the mainland.
"Peiping is suffering from many internal crises. But its economic failure, although clearly reflected in the mass exodus of mainlanders, has not led to a revolt that would topple the Communist regime at one blow. We have yet to strengthen the organization of mainland freedom fighters into an effective force."
The Kennedy Way
Commenting on the American election, the China News said on November 8 that it "proved conclusively that the Democratic party is the majority party and it is moving more and more the. Kennedy way."
The News also observed that voting showed, "the political health of the American electorates Racists, John Birchites and unbridled 'liberals' met with resounding defeats. The leftwing and rightwing candidates gained in some places but their gains were so insignificant that the overall result meant further strengthening of the forces in the center."
Leading vernaculars attributed the Democratic victory to the drastic measures taken by President Kennedy against Cuba.
Chen Hsin Hsin Wen Pao predicted President Kennedy will "have a freer hand in implementing his new frontier policy."
"If the blockade of Cuba can be regarded as the direction of U.S. foreign policy, we then have reason to believe that with more powerful Congressional support, the policy will be more positive and more strongly opposed to Communism and aggression."
Birthday Present
Newspapers were gratified at the United Nations' rejection of Peiping by a 56-42 vote with 12 abstentions. They regarded the news, which broke on the eve of President Chiang Kai-shek's birthday, as a good omen.
The press attributed the U.N. success to support of African and Latin American nations, and said China's efforts to improve diplomatic relations with them have been rewarded.
However, the Chung Hua Jih Pao said there is room for concern. The paper noted last year's vote of 48-36 and that showed China had gained only two votes after a year of effort. A hot debate on the issue will be unavoidable in the next General Assembly and China must be exceedingly careful, the paper said.
It said the idea of two Chinas had grown in international circles and that efforts must be made to check the spread of such inclinations. The China News of November 3, ridiculed the support of Malayan delegate Dato Ong Yoke Lin for the "two Chinas" fallacy during the UN debate.
The paper editorialized as follows:
For the fallacious "two Chinas" idea, Dato Ong Yoke Lin of Malaya cited three reasons: realism, the need for Chinese Communist participation in disarmament and other agreements, and the possibility of UN moral influence.
By "realism," Lin meant the Mao regime is in control of the 500 million Chinese on the mainland. He assumes the regime will be permanent.
Such "realism" is far from reality. Although the mainland Chinese have been held captive at the point of a bayonet for 13 years, they have never demonstrated their loyalty to the Communist regime. On the contrary, they have time and again voted against it with their feet.
As to the need for Chinese Communist participation in disarmament and other international accords, Lin has failed to examine the record of Communist treaty and agreement violations.
No less absurd is Lin's belief that the United Nations is a reformatory. The UN Charter clearly states that only peace-loving nations willing to accept international responsibilities are qualified for membership.
The Peiping regime has been condemned by the United Nations as an aggressor for its part in the Korean War. Since then it has raped Tibet, created troubles in Southeast Asia and blatantly chanted the theme that total war is inevitable.
Even India, the regime's best friend outside the Iron Curtain, was recently forced to brand the Chinese Reds as ruthless aggressors. If a regime with this kind of record could be admitted, there would be reason to question the raison d'etre of the United Nations.
---------------------------------------------------------
*For details, see "Red Diplomat Defects" in this issue.