To understand how the UN deal on new members was regarded by the Chinese, one needed to be here on Taiwan at the time. Feeling was deep rather than high; it was a strong undercurrent more than a troubled surface. There were no parades, pickets or placards. But there was something strikingly similar to the dismay of the Chinese in 1931-2, when Japan's aggression in Manchuria was submitted to the League of Nations only to find that body impotent to act on a moral issue.
In China then there is a divergence of views within the government, or between the government and the people, a compromise may (and often does) result. But when government and people completely agree, there is room and no need for compromise. The Outer Mongolia issue was such a case. So great was the unanimity, and so deep and strong the feeling, that Vice-President Chen Cheng said, "We have no “alternative," and another high official said. "If we took any other position, the government would fall." This was a significant statement concerning a government which has weathered the storms of 28 years and still stands. It is also proof of its democratic nature, which so many Westerners refuse to recognize.
When a grave issue is settled irrevocably, President Chiang Kai-shek is likely to go into seclusion for a time. It is a custom that restores his equanimity and ends discussion. So he withdrew last week to the meditative quiet of Sun Moon Lake in the hills of mid-Taiwan. Here in Free China, we knew then the matter was decided.
The government's position was supported by the entire press, from Dr. Hu Shih's independent and oft-critical journal to the official government daily. Opposition parties, Social Democrats and Young China Party, admittedly weak but represented at cabinet level in the government, expressed whole-hearted support. The National Assembly, frequently critical of government policies, unanimously approved. Civic organizations such as the Chinese Association for the UN, the Overseas Chinese League, the Chinese National Chamber of Commerce, the Chinese Foreign Relations Association, all urged the government to use the veto if necessary. These and another people's organizations such as the All-China Industrial Association, the Taiwan Railroad Workers' Union, the All-China Labor Federation (mostly Taiwanese) cabled the UN in protest against the admission of Outer Mongolia. Even the Ryukyu Revolutionaries Association hoped another "Christmas present like the Amami Oshima islands" would not be made.
There was no indication, and obviously no need, of agitating the people on the issue. Such action was as unnecessary as urging the Chinese in the 1930's to boycott Japanese goods. This, too, was a clear moral issue, and the Chinese have not become morally bankrupt over the years. They know that Outer Mongolia was restored to Chinese sovereignty when the Republic of China in 1953 abrogated the Sino-Soviet Treaty forced upon them by the Yalta concessions to Russia. They know that the member nations of the UN have no diplomatic relations with the so-called autonomous state. They know that Outer Mongolia was guilty of aggression in Sinkiang and in the Korean War. They know that if the Mongolian camel gets one foot inside the UN tent this year, the red camels of Peking will stampede in next year. They know the UN charter speaks of independent governments and peace-loving nations, and that Outer Mongolia is neither. They deeply resent the fact that when horse-trading takes place among the Great Powers, they do not trade their own horses but those of their friends.
These are the moral aspects which many cynical voices claim do not count any more in international affairs. But the government of Nationalist China adds a very realistic appraisal of what will happen if it refrains from the veto. Five Communist states will become members; 13 states, some of which recognize Red China and a number of which are neutrals, will also be admitted. Next year when the procedural question of "which China" should be represented in UN arises, the Republic of China could expect the five Communist states and nine or ten of the others to vote against her. This year 42 votes favoring Free China were enough to keep her seated. With 18 more members in UN, a two-thirds majority would be 52.
For these reasons, both moral and practical, the Republic of China made its reluctant and painful decision. By early December the objective observer here could sense the growing indignation and a grim determination to hold the principle in the face of implied or open threats from both friend and foe. Russia has cast such vetoes on UN membership applications continuously for nine years, but was not ousted Russia would use 13 vetoes this year if necessary, but would not be charged with "inviting suicide.'' The Chinese remember that it was the League of Nations, not China, that committed suicide by bowing to aggression in 1932. The Chinese remember that the sacrifice of Czechoslovakia did not preserve Peace, but led to War.
Chinese newspapers call the package-deal "unconditional surrender to Soviet blackmail," "appeasing the Russians at the expense of China,''' "lack of courage and stamina," They were enheartened by Cuba's charge against the Communist satellites; appalled by the "spiritual bankruptcy" of free nations "paying the price” for a deal that violated the Charter.
When he was Chinese Consul-General of New York, Dr. James Y. C. Yu (now ambassador to Italy) said: "There is a thing called right, and there is a thing called wrong. We Chinese believe that in the long run the right will win,''' Sometimes it is a very long run, but in our hearts most of the rest of us believe it too.
* This is an article written by Mrs. Fitch from Taipei for publication in the United States when the package deal was the subject of heated debates in and outside of the United Nations.
* * *
All Can't Be Players
Though the most be players, some must be spectators.—Ben Jonson, 1573-1637