Taiwan Today

This is a life story of Dr. Sun Yat-sen for English-speaking children, written in a very direct and simple way, full of vigor and human interest. No doubt the author is uniquely qualified to write on this subject since, apart from her intellectual ability as a Nobel Prize winner, she looks upon China as her second home, having lived in this country for the most part of her life. More important, she is devoid of the bias which a Chinese can not easily avoid in writing about Dr. Sun. Throughout the book she keeps a considerable measure of detachment which can hardly be expected of a lesser writer.

As Pearl Buck has shared the fears and hopes of the Chinese people all her life, she has great sympathy with the cause of Dr. Sun Yat-sen. She aptly sums up her views on Sun in those few clear and definite words that make the title of the book—The man who changed China. Unlike many Chinese writers who ascribe the strengths and successes of Dr. Sun to the Chinese heritage that goes back many centuries before Christ, Pearl Buck finds in him a man who was educated at missionary schools in Western ideas of science and Christianity and so lacked something of the traditional subtlety of the Chinese. It was his knowledge of Western modernity, not ancient Chinese tradition, that made him the man that changed China.

Of course, Dr. Sun Yat-sen was a man of action. Pearl Buck cites the famous Chinese proverb, "To know is easy but to do is hard," and tells her young readers: To Sun Yat-sen this was "an enemy worse than all the Manchu Emperors. They could only kill our bodies, but this idea can kill our wills and our souls." So Sun's story, as she tells it, is one of a lifetime of wars, of unending personal danger, and of repeated defeat, and yet he was the man who brought about the downfall of the Manchu Dynasty and built on its ruins the Chinese Republic.

It is important to note that the author has a clear understanding of the most controversial question of Dr. Sun's relation to the Russians and the Chinese Communists. Unlike many contemporary writers, she passes a perfectly fair judgment on this matter in the following terms:

"...... He (Sun) sent Chiang Kai-shek to Russia to learn how the Russians trained their young party members, and he invited to Canton a Russian adviser, Borodin. Years later Chiang Kai-shek became alarmed at Borodin's power in a new outbreak of the Chinese Revolution and alarmed, too, at the influence he had over Madame Sun Yat-sen. Seeing these things, he determined to cut himself off from Borodin. So began Chiang's relentless war against Chinese Communists which might have been successful had it not been for a new war on China from Japan."(p.111) Pearl Buck, whose intellectual probity and acuity I regard highly, has made a number of errors in the book, which I hope will be corrected if a new edition is prepared. When Sun for the first time went to Hawaii at 14, he was accompanied by his mother. But the author makes the mistake of putting his age at 12 and claiming that he slipped away all alone by hiding himself among the passengers in a ship (p. 10). Liu Hao-tung (pp. 12, 17, 29) should be spelt Lu Hao-tung, and Li Hung-chang is twice misspelt with a "K" in place of the “H” in the middle of the name (p. 27). In several passages in the second chapter under the heading The Broken Gods, the order of the events recorded is reversed. The three anecdotes concerning Sun as narrated on page 41 are all legends. Yuan Shih-kai was never a premier under the Empress Dowager (p. 44) and there was not such a post in the Manchu government at that time. What Yuan actually was in 1898 was a ranking official of Chili Province known as An Cha Ssu in charge of criminal decisions and army training. In 1900 Cheng Shih-liang, Dr. Sun's old friend, organized a revolt at Huichow in eastern Kwangtung, not at Canton as the author stated (p. 52). Dr. Sun called himself Mr. Nakayama, not Nakagama (p. 53), during his stay in Japan after the failure of his second revolt in 1900.

To do the author justice, let it be noted that the above-mentioned errors do not detract from the value of the book as a whole. Pearl Buck has the greatest respect for Dr. Sun's integrity of character and his selfless devotion to the cause of freedom. Against the background of the Communist tyranny on the Chinese mainland today, she finishes the story with the following remarks, to which we completely subscribe:

"Today the people of China live under a great shadow. A free and unified China seems further away than ever. But the dream still lives in Chinese hearts. Sun Yat-sen planted it there, deep and true. Whatever the present bondage, they cannot forget. They cannot forget for they do not forget Sun Yat-sen. The body of that brave and selfless man lies in a marble tomb on the sunny side of Purple Mountain outside the walls of Nanking. But he lives on. He lives in the minds and hearts of millions of Chinese. Some day this soul will march again, in them, and they will win their country for their own at last." -HSIAO TSO-LIANG

THE CONFERENCES AT MALTA AND YALTA, 1945
The Department of State, Washington D.C., 1955
Part II as reprinted in the New York Times, March 17, 1955

There are many people who simply believe that history is made up of the willful designs of omnipotent God who controls all human beings, much as the puppeteer controls his puppets. Others maintain that history is made up of phenomena of the Natural Law which underlies the whole course of the universe. Still others hold that history develops according to the Hegelian dialectics and eventually towards what Hegel called “Absolute Reason."

If human history is like any of the theories mentioned above, I think human beings would be much happier than now, even if we have no free will in our own behavior. Fortunately or unfortunately as the case may be, our history, in reality, is not directed by invisible forces or Natural Law. It is in our own hands and it obeys the law of causality. "When melon seeds have been sown, beans cannot be harvested," as a Chinese proverb put it. After the publication of the 500,000-word secret papers of the Yalta Conference by the U.S. Department of State, another strong evidence in support of the foregoing assumption is provided.

The Yalta Conference was held at a time when the Second World War was on the eve of decisive victory over the Nazis. The Russians had just repulsed the German armies from their frontiers and they were advancing towards the borders of Poland. On the Pacific and Far East fronts, the situation was not quite so clear, though General MacArthur had recaptured the Philippine Islands. Under such circumstances, Joseph Stalin had a good chance to play his hand at the conference. Furthermore, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt went to the conference, he was already a sick man and he was anxious to achieve a quick victory over the enemies. Winston Churchill seemed to be more sober and realistic in dealing with Stalin, but he was also more cynical and selfish than President Roosevelt. Figuratively speaking, Roosevelt might be taken as a lion and Churchill a fox, but Stalin was the lion and the fox combined in one person. In "The Prince," Niccolo Machiavelli said, "The lion cannot defend himself against snares, and the fox cannot defend himself against wolves... Those who rely simply on the lion do not understand what they are about," According to the records, during a visit to Moscow in October, 1943, Secretary Cordell Hull reported Stalin's promise that Russia would, without being asked and without attaching strings, fight Japan after finishing up in Europe. And at Teheran five weeks later, Stalin had repeated the same pledge. It was obvious that Russia would voluntarily fight the Japanese if she had the chance. At any rate, there would be no need to pay her a bribe as an inducement for it. It seems that the greatest faux pas which Roosevelt took at the conference was his naivete in believing that Stalin said to him that it would be difficult for him and Molotov to explain to the Soviet people why Russia was entering the war against Japan if his political conditions were not met. When Stalin was alive, he was no less than Soviet Russia and Soviet Russia was no more than Stalin. The people in Soviet Russia had no chance to ask what Stalin was going to do since there were no people in the American sense of the word. So, Stalin's statements were nothing but sheer lies. It is not easy to understand why Roosevelt and his colleagues were so easily trapped by Stalin's tricks.

The apologists for Roosevelt usually say that he had no intention to sell out China to Russia. It might be true, but how could he neglect to consider the consequences after the Second World War? Intentionally or otherwise, Roosevelt could not be excused for his part in promising Stalin special privileges in dominating Manchuria because Manchuria was the volcano which caused the eruption of the Sino-Japanese War. It is not easy to see the justification of the Allies for taking back Manchuria from the Japanese and then hand it over on a platter to the Russians. Suppose Manchuria had not been occupied by the Soviet Army at the time when Japan announced the acceptance of the terms of unconditional surrender to the Allies, the Chinese Reds would never have been able to establish their stronghold in Manchuria, as they lacked sufficient armaments and equipment. If the Russian Army had not stayed there for a long time, the army of the Republic of China would have succeeded in controlling the whole area long before the Chinese Reds could build up their military strength in the rural districts of Manchuria. It follows that the Chinese Reds would never have the chance to carry out their ambition of establishing the Chinese Communist regime on the mainland. It is within the realm of the conceivable that the Korean War would not have taken place and the appearance of the whole world would have been completely altered. There would have been no threat of any World War III.

Before the publication of the Yalta papers, there had been many different versions of the ups and downs of recent Chinese history on the Chinese mainland. Now, it may be easier to settle the truth of the varying versions by the facts presented in these secret papers. We do not want to repudiate our responsibilities, but we do sincerely hope that friendly nations, especially the United States, would have a clearer view about it.

When the Government of the Republic of China was on the point of retreating to Taiwan, the United States Government published the White Paper of 1949, which brought about a lot of misunderstanding between the two nations. All that misunderstanding should be erased after the publication of the Yalta papers. To err is human, but after we have found our mistakes, we should not err again. The study of history would be of little value were we not to profit by it.

Since the exchange of instruments of ratification of the Sino-U.S. Mutual Defense Treaty on March 3rd Sino-American relationship has been greatly improved. From now on, it is hoped that the two nations would cooperate more cordially in fighting the common enemy—International Communism.

There were many American writers who favored the repudiation of the Yalta secret agreements long before the publication of "The Conference at Malta and Yalta, 1945." The Republican platform of 1953 had also maintained the same position. We hope the United States Government would declare the Yalta secret agreements to be null and void officially as soon as possible. It is the logical step after the secret papers have been made known to the world. It is the right time to do the right thing.

Modern history records many inglorious chapters which resulted from secret diplomacy. That was why President Woodrow Wilson proclaimed the doctrine of open diplomacy as one of his famous Fourteen Points at the end of the First World War. His noble ideas deserved the support of all enlightened people. But, unfortunately, that sound principle of international affairs was forgotten by his successor in the period of the Second World War, resulting in the enactment of a world tragedy. So, if we wish to avoid a repetition of the same tragedy, the practice of secret diplomacy must be done away with. At the present time, we are deeply suspicious of any talk of the convening of a so-called "top-level conference" among the big powers. The people of the free nations should stand up and do their best to condemn it, otherwise the world might suffer the consequences of another Yalta.

When President Roosevelt gave Stalin the privileges in dominating Manchuria, he did not consult Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek about the whole matter. China might have refused Roosevelt's advice to conclude the Sino-Russian Amity Treaty. But at that time, the National Government was so grateful for what the U.S. Government had done in the Second World War that it was very difficult to ignore the advice lest it should hurt the feelings of a friendly nation. So, the Government of the Republic of China could not but accept the terms to which Roosevelt had given consent at Yalta. The price was so dear as to cost us the mainland. The lesson to be learned is that hereafter, we should not sacrifice any intrinsic national interest for the convenience of other nations. In other words, we cannot blindly follow others in handling our national problems. The Yalta secret agreements were not only inimical to the interests of the Chinese people, but they also hurt the national interests of many other peoples, including the American people. Our world has shrunk politically and economically into a small entity. Due to present-day conditions of communication and transportation, all the nations have become members of one big family. After the Second World War, the world has been artificially divided into two belligerent blocs. The Communist countries are determined and have repeatedly declared their intention to carry out what they call the world revolution. If the free nations cannot stand together to resist the aggression of the Communist bloc, they would be destroyed one by one. There is no chance to be neutral. This fact is so clear that one may no longer be blind to it. If the statesmen of the free nations intend to handle world problems by sacrificing the interests of other nations in order to appease the Communist aggressors, then the free nations deserve to be swept away sooner or later.

The people of the free world must take a new stand towards the present "China Problem," because it is the key to the solution of the world problem. Unfortunately, short-sighted politicians are going to plot for a ceasefire in the Taiwan Straits and for the realization of their dream of "two Chinas." It is not only futile but also dangerous. When Secretary John Foster Dulles spoke at the Fifth All-Jesuit Alumni Dinner on April 11, 1955, he said:

"Modern developments have made war more terrible, but they have also made the consequences of retreat and surrender more terrible," Those who insist on appeasement for a temporary peace cannot preserve peace in the long run. Eventually, they will not succeed in escaping from the claws of International Communism. There is no possibility of peaceful co-existence between the free nations and the Communist bloc. If anyone does not believe these premises, let him read these Yalta papers with some care.—KUNG-HSUEN TENG

EL SENOR EMBAJADOR, 65 pages
CON UN FONDO DE VERDAD — UN LIBRO DE CUENTOS,152 pages
CUENTOS QUE CUENTO YO, 149 pages
By Ricardo L. Martinez Hauradou
Published by Editorial Inoue, Kobe, Japan

It is a treat to be able to read new works of literature in Spanish in this part of the world. I read with great pleasure Senor Martinez' Mr. Ambassador, With a Wealth of Truth and The Stories I Tell.

Mr. Ambassador is a comedy in four acts with two scenes each except the third act which has one scene only. With a Wealth of Truth consists of 22 short stories and one fable. The Stories I Tell has 19 short tales with one fable also.

The reviewer can do no better than to refer to what the author himself said regarding his own work. In the preface to the comedy, Senor Martinez writes, "I can imagine that some critics may be favorable and others may be not. But life is like that....." The author has done well with his lucid style in portraying life in a Latin-American background. He is both humorous and realistic.

Senor Martinez' humorous approach to life is especially successful in Mr. Ambassador which should be read by diplomats of all nations. There is little doubt that the author, knowing as he does all the secrets of the trade, must be a diplomat himself. The entertaining drama may be summed up as follows:

An ambassador started off by complaining about the embassy staff to his foreign minister upon the latter's arrival on a special mission to decorate his counterpart of the country in which the ambassador was residing. An inquiry was· made of the resident envoy regarding his plans for the reception which was to be given in conjunction with the decoration ceremony. The minister was horrified to find that a cocktail had been arranged for 25 persons at two o'clock in the afternoon, but no less than one case of whisky was called for. Under instructions from his chief, the ambassador hastened to extend invitations to some two hundred dignitaries arid compatriots. Six cases each of whisky and champagne were then ordered for the occasion.

The reception was then held according to the general notions of the minister. However, the ambassador had conveniently made use of the apartment of his girl friend for the occasion and had engaged two butlers to handle the crowd. The dignified host had to open the door when the guests arrived. Some of the guests found their way in through the kitchen. While the party was in full swing, the actual tenant of the apartment was seen calling upon the guests to be easy on the carpet lest that precious article should be spoiled.

The ambassador received from his minister a handsome check for US$500 to cover the necessary expenses, but he paid only 60% of the orchestra fees, leaving the band manager to collect the balance from the consul general. A hat was passed among the embassy staff for the purpose of raising the balance to settle the account of the band manager who, however, declined by saying "I see there are some candid people in your country. Sometimes even a piece of good cloth may have a bad thread woven into it."

In his short stories, Senor Martinez successfully pictured the realistic side of life. In each of his little stories, a theme is offered the reader. They deal mostly with some aspect of social life in Latin-America. Space permits me only to single out a few stories for comment. In El Cuento de la Hamaca, we find one curious and intrusive Mrs. Vidrio Empanado ever ready to spread a scandal. In El Terraje, one mediocre but politically-fortunate Juan de la Cruz, aided and abetted by the mayor of a small town, often contrived to cheat and suppress the poor and the helpless. In El Escudo de Famila, one Madame de Menthe, in order to glorify her imaginary past, always craved to invite people 'and to be invited by people.

As for the innocent villagers in Latin-America, Senor Martinez has two excellent stories to tell. In El Cuento de la Saga, one Pancho, when asked why he was in prison, said "Well, when riding quietly on my horse, I saw a rope and got down to pick it up, thinking that, should the owner turn up, I would return it to him. If not, a rope might always come in handy."

"Why did they accuse you of robbery when you had found only a rope and brought it home intending to return it to its owner if you could?"

"Well, it is not robbery. What happened is this. You know, on the other end of the rope, as it was not rolled up, I did not know who had attached a cow. I did not realize that until I came to my house. That was all. Nothing more, Do you think there is anything wrong in this?"

Then there is the story Buscando a Mi Gato, Na Maa. One Amadeo Chifundo, a client of the court, was caught climbing the window of a neighbor with a torch light in his hand. The judge ordered 90 days for stealing. "But I was not stealing" came the protest of the culprit. Pressed further by the judge, Amadeo explained "I was looking for my cat, nothing more."

The author's addiction to puns is strong. Tocar as a Spanish verb may mean to play an instrument, to knock at a door or to knock on a piece of wood to show impatience. In Madame Creppe Suzette, a young French woman of six feet was engaged in conversation at a musical gathering by a professor of philosophy who admired her beauty.

"Do you sing, Madame?"

”Oui… Oui,”

"Do you know any instrument?"

"I know all."

Do you play all?

"Oui, I even 'play' wood and 'play' doors," “Wood? Doors?"

"Oui, gentlemen, I knock at the wood when someone talks about a baleful theme,"

This is the work of a diplomat with a literary bend. I would hesitate to say that the author is a career diplomat and a literary artist of the order of Paul Claudel.—BEATRICE TANG

                *       *       *

Back against the River

Han Hsin, a famous general of the Han dynasty, was defeated in battle. He and his troops were retreating before the enemy. When they came to a river, the general issued an order to pitch tents with back to the river. His aides tried to persuade him to countermand his order. They wanted to show him that their enemy could easily push them into the river. But his answer to their objections, which has since become classic in Chinese literature and strategy, was as follows: "Put them in a death trap, and they will come out alive; place them in an impossible situation, and they will survive." —Retold by Edward Y. K. Kwong