Either moved by the morning's religious experience, or inspired by the militant anti-Communist delegates from eight countries and areas before him (or both), the chief executive of the Philippines opened up and narrated the whole story of his unorthodox campaign against the Hukbala haps which broke the backbone of their armed resistance. The audience was given in the ceremonial hall of Malacanan Palace where the APACL representatives, grouped according to delegations, stood about the long, highly-polished table of Filipino hardwood, with the president standing at one end throughout the interview.
Members of the Filipino delegation said later they had heard parts of the story before, but never all of it. They too were impressed with the time so generously given by their president, especially as he had been delayed by calling at the hospital on one of his motorcycle police-escort seriously injured that morning by collision with a bus.
Of many dramatic episodes in President Magsaysay's story, this was one. In 1946 the Filipino communists, the Huks, were at the height of their strength. With an armed force of 100,000 and about two million sympathizers, they were beating at the very gates of Manila as the "people's liberation forces." Military measures were not succeeding. Magsaysay, then secretary of Defense, recalled tactics used in guerrilla operations against the Japanese. He re-trained his army to use unorthodox tactics, at the same time initiating his "policy of attraction," offering home, farm and opportunity of peaceful life to the dissidents if they would surrender to the government.
A message came one day from a Huk commander for Magsaysay to meet him that night at midnight, alone and unarmed in a designated house. The Secretary's colleagues predicted betrayal. He insisted on going. With no more light in the room than filtered in from a street lamp, he met and talked with the rebel. The Communist leader said he was convinced Magsaysay really cared about the people and was doing more to help them than were the Huks. He wanted to surrender. The Defense Secretary persuaded him to continue as before, as his greatest contribution at the moment would be information.
Before parting, Magsaysay asked the names of the Communist Politburo in Manila, but received only silence in reply. Some weeks later, the Huk commander sent this message: "Station your men near my home tomorrow morning. An old woman with fruit and vegetables will come out the back gate. Follow her. She will make her way to 22 houses in different streets. Note them. These are the homes of the Politburo members. We have trained the old woman in this routine for six weeks. No one suspects her." At 1:00 a.m. next morning Magsaysay's men raided the twenty-two houses. Only one, who was not at home, escaped.
At the end of his thrilling narrative, the President said, "The danger is not over. We have always to be on the alert. But the hard corps of Communist leadership is gone!"
This second APACL conference had delegations from Korea, China, Vietnam, the Philip pines, Hongkong, Macao and the Ryukyus-the largest delegation understandably from the host country and the smallest (of one with an interpreter) from the Ryukyu Islands. Thailand, which attended the first conference at Chinhae, Korea, in June 1954 was not present. Nor had the expansion in membership proposed at that time been implemented.
Originally the Second Conference of APACL was scheduled for October, 1954, at Taipei, Taiwan, later postponed to May, 1955. In pre paring for it, and in accord with the announced purpose of "broadening the base," China as host had invited representatives from Burma, Cambodia, Japan, Malaya, Pakistan and Turkey, most of them accepting. When Korea reneged on its agreement (of November 13, 1954) to have Japanese present "as observers, or guests of the conference," the conference, seven months in the making, was cancelled within six days of opening.
None of these other countries who accepted for Taipei sent delegations to the Second Conference when it convened in Manila, a year and a half later than first planned. Possibly they had lost interest, or doubted the ability of free peoples to cooperate, as did a Hongkong Chinese friend of mine. My friend is one of the most effective fighters of Communism in the area of mass media to be found in Asia. Persuaded to cut short a stay in Singapore and fly to Taipei for the scheduled conference, he arrived to find it cancelled because of Korea's adamant position vis-a-vis Japanese participation. He lost faith in fighters of Communism who could not agree among themselves.
If eight prospective new members, as well as 18 months of valuable time, were lost by the disagreement over membership-basis, no account of the second conference can avoid facing this fact. The Manila Conference, too, was stymied for a time and threatened with failure, by the same inflexible position of the Koreans.
In the PREAMBLE adopted unanimously at Chinhae, the APACL stated: "Ours is a call to all free peoples everywhere to join with us in repelling the Godless communists …….. to educate those who are siding with the enemy because of ignorance and propaganda" and "to bring the full weight of public opinion to bear upon Governments to the end that they, all, will stand for the principles herein set forth." In the OBJECTIVES (Art. 2) adopted at Chinhae, they resolved: "to urge upon our Governments and all other Free Governments a resolute stand against the Soviet heartland of totalitarianism."
No one will deny that the Japanese are a "free people." If some, or many, of them "side with the enemy because of ignorance and propaganda," it is APACL's avowed purpose "to educate" them. APACL has implicitly resolved "to bring the full weight of public opinion" upon the Japanese Government (as well as all others in Asia) and "urge a resolute stand" on the part of that government against Communism. Who can bring this desired end to pass? Not a group of Koreans, a group of Chinese, of Filipinos or Vietnamese. Certainly not. Only anti-Communist Japanese can educate the misled, and urge resolute action on the government of Japan.
At Chinhae, President Syngman Rhee himself stated, "We can win over the Communist followers …. I hope you won't spend too much time on details," and again "details sometimes destroy harmony if they receive too much emphasis." In several statements the Korean president reiterated the thought that the members must put their ideas and proposals together "and let the majority decide," draw up resolutions "agreeable to the majority," and "the delegates must be guided by majority vote." He wanted the "anti-Communist leaders in every country to be represented," and urged that "anti-Communist groups in all these nations be invited to come together and discuss means to start an anti-Communist popular movement." That was surely the original intention of APACL. It was meant to be a people's movement, not an affair of governments. It was so plainly stated at Chinhae that he who runs may read. At least he who reads may know.
But the Koreans cannot see the forest of anti-Communist leaders or groups in Japan because of the thistles received from the hand of the government. On the question of membership, the Koreans held out at Manila for a unanimity vote. When others urged a majority vote (even as much as three-fourths), they intimated that if such a change were made in the drafted Constitution, they would not ratify and might "walk out."
The Korean delegation maintained the Constitution had been accepted at a caucus meeting held in Manila in September 1955; that ratification only was in order at this conference. Dr. Han Lih-wu of China reminded them that reservations made by him at that time were a matter of record. Advisers and observers present were asked by the chairman to express their views. It was pointed out that the unanimity (veto) clause had stymied the UN more than any other one thing; that APACL is not a little UN, but a people's movement where democratic procedure by majority rule should be adopted. In the end, emphasizing that Korean-Chinese cooperation was essential to AP ACL success, the Chinese did all the bending, agreeing to accept the Constitution, including the unanimity rule on membership, without amendment for three years.
Because of the initial impasse, workshops had only one day left for discussion. The Resolutions Committee had little more time to consider all proposals for action. Though the conference was stalemated over Constitution details, when it came to resolutions the sky was the limit.
In addition to resolutions of appreciation to the Manila Chapter as a warm, hospitable host, to Dr. Jose Ma. Hernandez as a diplomatic and preeminently fair Conference Chairman, and to His Excellency, President Ramon Magsayay, for graciously receiving the delegations to the second plenary meeting of the League, there were more than a dozen other resolutions. These embraced everything which the entire free world should do in countering Communism, from taking steps "to make further colonialism impossible for any nations whatsoever" to joining in "a great crusade of liberation for all enslaved peoples"; from strengthening "the embargo against trade with the Communists" to extending "the help and defense of the free world to the Matsus and Quemoys" and preparing "for the inevitable resumption of Communist aggression in Northeast and Southeast Asia." So broad a plan is not necessarily a bad thing, if the purpose of APACL is to create public opinion. If the purpose is to accomplish concrete projects, it might be well to concentrate on a few program points for this year, and expand the program as the movement grows. Some resolutions, such as effective use of mass media, and of farmers', labor, and civic organizations, and of the mobilization of women and youth to educate the ignorant and the misled in the evil designs of Communism and the benefits of democracy, lay within the realm of the practical for the present time.
Delegations remained too compartmentalized at the conference. Out of plenary sessions more intermingling for friendly discourse would bring about better understanding of each others' point of view, remove suspicions, and no doubt lead to less painful cooperation. The Biblical saying, "It is easier for a camel to go through the Needle's Eye than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven" might be aptly paraphrased: "How hardly shall democratic, independent peoples cooperate!" In comparison, Communists with their orders from the top, and no questions asked, seem to move forward with greater efficiency and speed.
However if Communists took the attitude that because a country (whether big USA or little Thailand) was definitely anti-Communist, there was no use working with Communist individuals or pro-Communist groups in that country, how effective would they be? The One hope of APACL becoming a mass movement, effectively countering Communist infiltration of the countries of Asia, is to broaden its base to include anti-Communist elements in every country. Telegrams read to the conference from the Free Asia Association of Japan and the Union des Solidaristes Russes are concrete evidence that there are organized groups of Japanese and even free Russians who are ready to cooperate with a true people's movement for FREEDOM.
* * * *
In the country of Lu, there was a man who was living by himself. Next door lived a widow also by herself. One evening the widow's house was damaged by storm and rain, and she came to the man and asked to be admitted. The man shut his door and refused to admit her. The widow spoke to him through the window:
"Why are you so unkind as to refuse to let me in?"
"I've heard," the man answered, "that before sixty man and woman shouldn't stay together. Now you're young and I'm young, so I don't want to let you in."
"Why don't you act," the woman asked, "like Liu Hsia-hui? He extends hospitality to homeless girls, but people in this country do not say he has acted promiscuously."
"It's all right for Liu Hsia-hui," the man answered, "but it'll never do for me. Starting from what I can't do, I want to learn what Liu Hsia-hui can do."
When Confucius heard of this, he remarked: "Very good, indeed! No one can imitate Liu Hsia-hui better than this man. How can we say a man is wise, unless he can imitate the best man of his ideal?"
—Confucian Family Analects.
Translated by Edward Y. K. Kwong
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This article was contributed simultaneously to the Free China Review and the New Leader by the Author.