Challenge to the UN

Title

Challenge to the UN

Creator

Mao-Ian Tuan

Language

English

Year

1961

Rights

In Copyright - Educational Use Permitted

Fulltext

CHALLENGE TO THE UN Mao-Ian Tuan Chinese Ambassador t^the Philippines The most serious challenge which confronts the world to day is the so-called question of China’s representation in the United Nations in New York. To appreciate the si tuation in a lucid perspective, it is necessary to start with a brief resume of the histo rical background. The Chinese communist party, with its nucleus mem bers trained in Russia, was organized, financed and di rected by the Soviet Union. At first it infiltrated into the Nationalist Revolutionary Ar my but very soon it started an open rebellion and occu pied a small stronghold in Kiangsi in Central China. It was about to be entirely li quidated when the war of resistance against Japanese aggression broke out in 1937 and gave it a new lease of life. Throughout the eight years of war, it sought expansion at the expense of government troops. When the long war of resistance was drawing to a victorious conclusion, So viet Russia participated in the war for a few days only to occupy Manchuria, equip the Chinese communist army and convert Manchuria into a huge trap in which the best Chinese armies were annihi lated in complete disregard of the Sino-Soviet treaty of amity solemly signed only a short while before. This fla grant violation of a sacred treaty was condemned by the 6th Session of the General Assembly of the United Na tions. After this treacherous blow, the Chinese commu nists, in making full use of the war weariness and eco nomic exhaustion as a result of the long war, succeeded in gobbling up the mainland in 1949 and the Chinese gov ernment moved its seat to Taipei. For the last twelve years, the Chinese communists have transplanted into the Chinese soil the whole Russian system, with all its accessories: brain DEcember 1961 33 washing, firing-squads, con centration camps together with the alien ideology of class-struggle and dictatorship of the proletariat. The tra ditional Chinese virtues, of which all Chinese should jus tifiably feel proud, such<ps filial piety, family love, free dom of speech, freedom of worship, etc. have been ruth lessly suppressed. The Chi nese communists ltave not on ly the effective control of the mainland but they have suc ceeded in converting the country into a huge prison. They impose upon the people the most tyrannical rule here tofore unknown in China’s long, history and at the same time are subservient to foreign power. They are indeed the most faithful disciples of a foreign ideology and deter mined to carry out its imple mentation without any regard for the appalling suffering of the people. This brief histo rical review should convince any fair-minded observer that the present communist regime on the Chinese mainland is a result of ■ Soviet. Union’s in direct aggression against Chi na. Should the civilized world give recognition to the fruit of aggression, direct or indi rect? This is the question that calls for an immediate answer, as the question of China’s representation in the United Nations implies the argument whether a regime created by a foreign power and for the implementation of a foreign ideology should be internationally recognized. As to diplomatic recognition, there seem to be three schools of thought, namely the Eng lish school, the French school and the American school. The English school bases its argument on a realistic poli cy and therefore favors rer cognition of any regime which exercises effective control over its territory.. In the mind of the English school, recognition does not imply approbation of the regime re cognized. This is wrong as we know a de jure recogni tion will inevitably carry with it a legalized title which ne cessarily connotes approba tion of such regime. The French school insists upon certain conditions be fore recognition is accorded to any regime. These condi tions are: 1) the regime must show evidence that it can achieve stability, 2) the re gime has the support of the nation by holding free elec tions, 3) the regime must ex press its willingnes to abide by international law, and 4) the regime must undertake to respect human rights. Evi dently the present communist 34 Panorama regime is unable to fullfill these conditions, as it simply cannot hold really free elec tions, nor is it willing to abide by international law, nor will it respect human rights. The American school, prompted by a sense of jus tice, champions the doctrine of “non-recognition” of any regime created by force of aggression. Before the Sec ond World War, Secretary Stimson elaborated this doc trine in regard to the puppet state of “Manchukuo” created by the Japanese militarists. After the Second World War, faithful to this doctrine, the United States has consistent ly withheld recognition to the present communist regime that occupies the mainland. At this juncture, it must be pointed out that the defunct League of Nations, impotent and weak as it was, never once countenanced a regime brought into being by force of aggression. Now the Uni ted Nations is essentially a moral forum. Should it give up its dedicated principle in favor of a realistic appease ment? Two popular argu ments are heard in favor of the admission of the Chinese communist regime into the United Nations. First, it has the effective control over the mainland. Second, the 600,000,000 people should not be deprived of their voice in the United Nations . Should effective control be the criterion for recognition, then we might as well give up the rule of law and revert back to the jungle doctrine that might is right. In the past, force of aggression creat ed many puppet regimes which did exercise effective control over the conquered territory, yet no jurist would conscientiously give them the blessing of recognition. It is preposterous to assume that the communist regime can be the spokesman for the oppressed people in their grip. If the people on the mainland could voice their sentiment freely, it would be against the tyrannical regime. The general unrest in the mainland, the great exodus of refugees, the strong anti-com munist aversion manifested by the oversea Chinese living in neutral countries, the over whelming majority of the communist-trained soldiers, who, having been taken pri soners in the Korean war, chose to come to Taiwan for freedom instead of going back to the communist enslave ment — all these are unmis takable indications that the Chinese people hate commu nism. To assume that the com munist regime can speak for the people under its yoke December 19$ 1 35 would be tantamount to say that a Nazi gauleiter is the be nefactor and legal guardian of the inmates he put in a con centration camp. It is adding insult to injury. Before making any move for appeasement, it is prudent to think of the consequence that such move will entail. History shows appeasement has only whetted the appetite of the aggressor. This was the case with Hitler, yet in comparison with the present Soviet bloc, Hitler was really a very modest man who only claimed a “Lebensraum” or “living space” for his Nazis. The J apanese militarists were also comparativey modest, as they only wanted a co-prosperity sphere in East Asia. When regimes of modest pre tensions could be encouraged to start war by appeasement, how much more dangerous to abet the present Soviet block which has time and again avowed to bury the free world? Lenin once said the shortest road from Moscow to Paris would be via Peiping and Calcutta. It means to con quer Europe the Soviets must conquer Asia first. It is evi dent that the Chinese com munist regime has bent every energy to carry out this stra tegical plan laid down by the Russian master. Appeasement in the form of admitting the Chinese communist regime into the United Nations would only reveal the weakness and disunity of the free nations, thus giving tremendous im petus to the communists to accelerate their march of con quest. The Republic of China is one of the founding members of the United Nations and her constitution provides that her foreign policy shall be based on respect for the Charter of the United Nations in order to promote international coo peration, advance internation al justice, and ensure world peace. Throughout the past sixteen years, the Republic of China has given her full sup port to the United Nations Charter and observed all ob ligations required of a mem ber state under the Charter. She has played a significant role and achieved an honor able record. But ever since the removal of the seat of the Chinese government to the province of Taiwan, the So viet block and pro-communist countries have attempted to have the United Nations ad mit the Chinese communist regime in place of the gov ernment of the Republic of China. Their pernicious ef forts have so far been fruit less. However, at present the disunity among the free na tion members coupled with 36 Panorama the rapid increase in member ship in the United Nations provides the communist bloc with a better opportunity. By blackmail and extortion, the Soviet bloc has succeeded in having the puppet Outer Mon golia admitted into the United Nations. Encouraged by this appeasement, the Soviet block’s next step will surely be an intensified campaign to bring the puppet Peiping re gime into that world organi zation. For the sake of the security of the free world, the logical question is whether one can afford to get rid of a loyal front-door guard and admit into his household a gangster with the avowed in tention to destroy it. The fate of the free world is now seriously at stake. Whether the United Nations will still function as an arbit er of justice and guardian of peace, or simply as a broker to portion out appeasement which will eventually lead to world catastrophe depends upon the outcome of the pre sent issue. At this criticaT mo ment, the firm support given us by the Philippine govern ment and its people is espe cially a source of great en couragement in the belief that our closest neighbor is wholeheartedly with us in waging this gigantic struggle against world enslavement. It is this spirit of solidarity which gives me faith that the free world in spite of some ominous portents will yet van quish its foe! HOW OLD IS ANTARTICA? Numerous samples of rock collected from the eastern coastal regions of the Antartic continent have been subjected to radioactivity tests by So viet scientists to find out their approximate age. According to the scientists, rocks from the cen ter of Eastern Antarctica proved to be the oldest among samples tested, having been formed 1,350,000,000 and 1,840,000,000 years ago. Further analysis of rock specimens, the scientists believe, may show that parts of the continent are more than 2,000,000,000 years old. (UNESCO) December 1961 37

Media