Couchiching conference; 7

From Geneva park on Lake coaching in Ontario this is the 1959 conference for the past six days we've been discussing the theme changing Asia and you heard our earlier broadcasts of these sessions and now that our topic this evening Asia and Western policy is the natural culmination of these discussions. To introduce the speakers here is tonight's chairman the president of the Canadian Institute of International Affairs at your McKenna's. Ladies and gentleman. Ah previous sessions of this conference. We have moderate things the impact of the West on Asia are not the source of the conflict between Europe and the rest. And tonight in our concluding session we are trying to discuss the young age and wept during policy. What have we done to meet the problems that have been created for the West by this dynamic young revolution that is

underway. What can we do what should we do in an attempt to make our solutions more effective than they have been so far. And how are we going to find that basis upon which both the West and Asia can operate for their mutual benefit. Now in the framing of Western policy. The attitude of the United States is Akbar's critical and so to prevent that attitude. The institute invited a top official of the State Department the assistant secretary of state for Far Eastern affairs and I must say that it was an invitation that Mr. Parsons accepted radical readily and I think perhaps even cordially. And it is a certainly a task for which he is eminently qualified he's had a wide experience in the Far East. He started his diplomatic career in Tokyo. He's been to faraway places with

strings sounding names like Delhi and Mumbai and Nepal. He has recently been an ambassador to a louse where he was appointed in 1956 and where he stayed until his very recent appointment to his present post and only this spring he visited the countries in South and East Asia in which the United States is directly interested and with which it had relations and there were also other reasons why he was a particularly happy choice. Because it's come down to not only with the Far East we are also intimately with Canada. You search for years and out of all the 34 years in the State Department only Canadian deaths. But above all you have the discernment even of the very young man to marry a young lady that he met in Japan who love the turned out. Let me own the Canadian representative in Japan Hon. Mr. Meyer. And

so it is a great pleasure to welcome him back to Canada and to coaching Mr. J. Graham Parsons. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Ladies and gentleman I can certainly confirm. That I did accept that invitation readily. And that I was delighted to have the opportunity to come back to Canada once again a place where I have. So many happy memories. In addition in speaking to you tonight that's an opportunity which the coaching conference has so very kindly afforded to me and to my government. I like to think that I come to you. Having had a great

deal of excellent Canadian advice for the last 23 years. However the views which I am about to express tonight. Are strictly American view. Perhaps this will become even more apparent. As our discussion proceeds. And my friend with the garden and with the. Go to bat again. What I have to say from the American point of view. Now to me. The key fact in Asia with which we have the West is the profound social and political upheaval which has been accelerated there. Since the Second World War. History is repeating itself in Asia. The free people of Asia today. Are struggling to win what we in the West. One only a short century or two ago.

The right to national independence greater freedom for the individual spirit. And better conditions of life. Just as our revolution in America and Europe. Set in motion powerful currents of nationalist feeling. In Asia. The tide of nationalism is washing away many old landmarks and outworn institutions. Free Asian leaders are seeking to build new and abundant societies. And to secure for their people a rightful place among the world's nations. In so doing they are striving to retain and develop the best in their own cultural heritage. It is to the interest of others in the West. To do all in our power to help them succeed. However. In contrast to the American Revolution the

Asian revolution comes at a crucial time in world history. In our twentieth century there has developed a worldwide struggle as a result of the rise of international Communism. Let us at this point remind ourselves of a few basic facts with which all of us Canadian age and American have to contend. The Communists rulers have as their stated objective to extend their system over the world. Louche out to the present titular head of the Chinese Communist regime. One put it this way. The most fundamental and common duty of communist party members. To establish communism and transform the present world. Into a communist world. We know from experience what this communism is which Lou and his

colleagues seek to establish throughout the world. Stripped of the deceitful language with which it cloaked it. It appears as an organized group a dictatorship. Posing as a revolutionary movement. It imposes its will by whatever means persuasion guile or force it deems effective. It denies the existence of moral law. Holding that whatever advances that cause it thereby right whatever it does not is therefore wrong. It is arrogant and uncompromising. Toward free nations not only of the West but also of the because by definition. It expects the inevitable triumph of its cause. On the other side. Are we who believe in freedom and who inherit the great liberal democratic tradition of the 18th the 19th century.

Whatever we call our system. All of us hold their certain beliefs which are the very antithesis of communism. We believe in men's right to believe in and worship God. We believe in man's right to the greatest degree of individual freedom. Compatible with the welfare of society. We believe in man's right to participate in his government and in his right to share in the fruits of his labor. These are not Western ideals. They are the ideals of free men everywhere. Unfortunately in their dealings with Asia the nations of the West were not always true to their beliefs. While advancing the liberal revolution at home they were at the same time bringing much of Asia under colonial rule under their colonial administration unhappy abuses inevitably arose suppression of nationalism

denial of political rights racial discrimination. And economic exploitation. It is not surprising then that Asian people. While inspired by the ideal of the west liberal democratic revolution have shown deep suspicion even hatred of the West itself. This legacy of colonial days has been a most serious handicap for Western nations in their relations with Asia. It was exploited to our disadvantage during the Pacific War. The Communists today take advantage of it in a said to us they cultivating the image of themselves as liberators and champions of the freedom of Asian people. And in this way distracting attention from their own design. It is a hard statement but we should remember that neither the Tibetans. Now those who live in the communes in China.

Are in a position to tell us how they really feel about being liberated. American policymakers believe that it is only prudent to take communist statements to their own party at their face value. We remember how many people who took lightly the threats in Hitler's mind kept later learned to their sorrow that he meant what he wrote. We are determined not to repeat their mistake. In 1938 Mao Zedong called on all communists to quote grasp the truth that political power. Grows out of the barrel of a gun. The struggle for power required for it he said. And. In this sense we can even say that the whole world can be remolded with the gun. It was in 1949 that Mao flatly warned that the people of the world had no choice but to be either for communism or against

it. Neutrality is a camouflage he said. And a third road does not exist. United States policy is to promote the independence of the free nations in Asia and to help them build a strong and free society. We have a kindred feeling for the young nation and because of our own history we recall in 1787 at the Constitutional Convention. The founding fathers of our own republic were beset by grave problems. We can therefore in these days take a sympathetic view of the propensities facing new Asian countries which like Indonesia for example are working out their constitutional and other problems in a far more complex and dangerous world context. We have learned that every member of the society of free nations is the pendent on the other. And we in the West need the friendship and

support of Free Asia as much as Free Asia needs arms. We therefore try to be responsive when we are asked to help as indeed we have been in many lands. A growing with the projects completed schools Rodin technical assistance testified to the variety of needs that we have tried bit by bit to meet and to meet with resources which for us too are not unlimited. It may come as a surprise to Asians to learn that we whose father took part in the great liberal revolution which began in the West. Should now find our fate so closely linked to its descendant in Asia our civilizations are widely different and our forms of government vary but we cherish the same ideals and values the fundamental aim of us all whether in Asia or in the West is to promote the

advancement of our people through political forms in which the state is the servant of the people not the people of the state. It may seem paradoxical that I should portray the West most of which but a short time ago was a dandified with a colonial system in Asia as in sympathy with the Asian revolution which worked to liquidate that. But it seems to me that this is no more paradoxical than the historical experiences of my own country. The first colonial area to win independence in modern times. The ideals which inspired our American Revolution were not alien but were from the mother country itself. And it is the same idea of which having been the cause of our Division are now the closest bond between Britain and the United States. The record of the West in Asia since the beginning of World War 2 speaks for

itself. Altogether in Asia and Africa. Twenty one countries having an aggregate population of 700 and 13 million people have since then written from colonial or dependent status to nationhood. In many cases with help from the colonial nations to which they had been bound. Compare this with the record of communism. During that same period communism extended its rule over 14 countries or parts of countries. Having a total population of some eight hundred nine million. In each case this was accomplished. By the use or threat of force not through free democratic prophecies. Of the Western nations. The United States has a particularly heavy responsibility in the Far East. There is such a wide gap between the power of communist China backed up by a Soviet ally. And that of the free

nations of the area that the strength of some outside power is needed to redress the balance. If the area is not to pass under control of international Communism This is the ROE of the United States did not seek but has had to play. Particularly since the communist attempt to conquer Korea in 1950 to 53. Our system of mutual defense arrangement and our own presence in the Far East now constitute the most important deterrent to renewed communist aggression. Through this deterrent. We provided Sheo behind which the Asian revolution can continue to gain strength and viability. As you know by no means all of the countries of the area. Believe in the value to them of membership in a collective security arrangement. But nevertheless such arrangements are of value to the other countries too. In helping to keep the peace I should

add that we respect the decisions of these other countries and we do not bring pressure upon them. The Chinese communists of course recognize that we stand in the way of communist imperialist. And they have focused their particular ire on the United States from the day they came to power in 1949. The pay thing people daily express it. Frankly this way in 1953 Asian national independence and world peace can be achieved only when the American aggressors are beaten and driven away. All Asian nations must unite for the task. Remembering the words of Lu shout and other communist leaders. Should we not ask whether the People's Daily was really interested in Asian national independence or the establishment of a communist world. The Communists claim to be revolutionaries and champions of the Asian revolution. Is this claim really true.

To many it seems that their primary interest in the Asian revolution. Is as a vehicle on which to ride to power. And once in power. Their first step is to neutralize or eliminate all possible rivals. In fact their actions as distinct from their propaganda. Suggests that the Communists share the successes of the Asian revolution and worked to prevent them. They foster tension uncertainty and strife. Since they have harassed and a doubt and denied to the newly independent countries. The tranquillity which they need and ardently desire to bail out of their own national life. At the moment the crisis which they have provoked in the harmless little kingdom of Laos is a perfect case in point. One is tempted to conclude that the communists are themselves the true counter revolutionary. The counter-revolutionary nature of communist

policies. Is perhaps more clearly exposed in areas where they have seized control. Let us look at their order of priority. They destroy political rights. Suppress nationalistic movement and impose conformity. Once firmly in power. Their primary attention goes to the building up of a strong military machine. Economically they attach highest priority to heavy industry and to improve the life of the people not to improve the lives of the people but to enhance the military and political power of the state. Everything else takes second place to these objectives including a rising standard of living which is a prime objective of free societies. Finally freedom of the human spirit is not there to talk. As the example of communist China shows the cost in human values of the

Communist system is staggering. The talented and brave Chinese people have to turn their back these days on much that they hold there in their rich cultural tradition. During the war in Korea during the commune program and during the many other communist drives in China the Chinese farmer and worker has been forced to endure incredible privation. When I visited the Far East earlier this year. I was struck with the evolution of Asian opinion in regard to the Chinese economy. A great stimulant of course. Has been the actions of the communists themselves. Actions which proceed from the compulsion of their system. A little over a year ago the people of Japan were shocked at tapings abrupt suspension of all trade with Japan. In a crude attempt to extort political concessions from the Japanese government this maneuver boomerang.

A year ago this month the world was troubled by the attack of the Chinese communists on the come on the island. Only the free Chinese defend it and the firmness of the United States in supporting them. Prevented this from developing into a far more dangerous conflict. We believe that this recent demonstration of the determination and ability of the United States to live up to its commitments was salutary. And that its significance was not lost on the free countries of Asia. We regret as well that neither here nor elsewhere have the communist leaders been willing to renounce the use of force. And to this day they continue to show they offshore islands on alternate days. A procedure heedless of human life. With their defense minister called and I quote no trick but a normal thing. This is a standard of normality which is hard indeed to understand.

Even while their guns were pounding the Chinese Communists were engaged in an unprecedented attempt to squeeze more production from the manpower of rural China. People were forced wholesale into so-called communes and they worked incredibly long hours without reward. All this of course is officially a voluntary. Communist propaganda painted these communes as happy experiments in group living. But the word soon see out that they were little better than forced labor camps throughout Asia. The communes have dramatized what a fearful price must be paid for production in a communist society. The suppression of Tibetan freedoms has perhaps made the deepest impression of all. The manner in which the communists sought to put down Tibet and revote and attempted to destroy the distinctive Tibetan religion and culture. May have done more than

anything else to disillusion Asians at the communist China's pose a peaceful coexistence. In the long run it will be up to Asians to deliver the verdict. But I venture the thought that already in 1959. Increasing numbers in the free agent countries identified the hope of the Asian revolution left with the profits of communism and more with the west of today. If this process is to continue it means that we in the West have a responsibility that goes beyond assuring the security of the free nations of Asia against communist encroachments we must also rededicate ourselves to assisting them in their struggle for political and social progress. We have indeed given much needed economic assistance to Free Asia in past years. That is vital and must be continued not only by my country but by. Those who

share our view of the interdependent of the modern world and a friendly interest in Asian peoples. Furthermore in extending aid we must maintain flexibility and perspective with all the success we have enjoyed through the Marshall Plan. In addressing the dangerously deteriorating post-war situation in Europe. We must remember that the problems in Asia. The Near East and Africa are different in the sense that we must adjust our sights and methods to the varying backgrounds and circumstances. These great areas of the world are contact with Free Asia are wider than at any time in the past. Our representatives meet with theirs in the United Nations and other international about it. Our citizens travel study and work in Asian countries in a larger number than ever before our age in art and culture are understood and admired by increasing numbers

of people in the West. An excellent beginning has been made but it is still only a beginning. We must make every effort to expand these contacts and to build even closer and more comradely relations between ourselves and the peoples of Asia. It is up to us to wipe out the vestiges of the unhappy heritage of colonial days and to make the word equality a warm reality in our dealings with them. I should like to leave with you the thought with which I began. The key fact on the Asian scene today is the continuing Asian revolution a revolution which is drawn much of it into inspiration from our own liberal revolution in the West. Its success or failure will have an important perhaps decisive bearing on the fate of all three nations. It

should therefore be the first purpose of Western policy in Asia to see that it does not fail for a lack of understanding and support. Thank you. I arrived I. Thank you Mr. Barak. Now it is my privilege to reintroduce as our first commentator on the address we have just heard Mr. Wylder well-guarded one of Canada's top businessman and one who has shown a continue with an active interest in public affairs. He is of course most widely known as gem of all the recent royal commission on account of the economic prospects his report rightly bears his name. He is held quite a variety of offices including membership of the Board of Governors of the University of

Toronto chairman of its Finance Committee and chairman of the national executive of the Canadian Institute of International Affairs. He visited on an extended tour in 1954 and only this spring visited China at the invitation of one of their official trade organizations. Mr. Gaut. Before I proceed to disagree with Mr. Parsons I should like to say that he will be even more welcome on his next visit to Canada if he brings his wife along. He picked her from a Toronto cradle at a very tender age and I can assure you he's quite a picker. Our chairman Mr. McKenna and I visited the Ferrari together at the Fed five years ago. Then as now it was apparent that Western policy in

Asia. Depends primarily or at least to a very considerable degree upon United States policy towards China. And the underlining lying premise of U.S. policy toward China in 1954. Seemed to be that the communist regime was a trend one which in due course would be supplanted. I came back from that visit with the firm conviction that this premise was quite unrealistic that the communist regime in China would probably be in power for a long time. And that sooner or later the United States would have to accept it or be prepared to fight it. After spending some weeks in China this spring I feel more certain than ever that the communists are there to stay. And that U.S. policy toward China should be re-examined. It's shown that the arguments in support of U.S. policy have changed in the last

five years. We hear less now about the Chinese Communist regime being weakened transitory. And no one any more seriously suggests. The juncos check is ever likely to retake the mainland. Now. The arguments one usually hears in support of U.S. policy think that boil down to this. First we must have no truck or trade with the Communists because everything they stand for is evil. And secondly the United States and her allies would be faced with all sorts of difficulties strategic as well as political. If the present policy were changed the fact is that no matter how one may dislike communism its ruthlessness and its evil it is a faith or a way of life that is followed by or has been imposed upon one third of the people of the world. It simply cannot be ignored.

And judging by the much publicized visits of many prominent Americans to the Soviet Union recently. There is no not a person with a president still in the offing ignoring Russian Communists. In this small world it would be practical to suggest that we should not speak to or have any dealings with Russians or Poles or Czech. Because other countries have come into government. And if we are prepared to have dealing with the right dealings with the Russians in the polls. Then why not with the Chinese. The second line of argument. In my opinion has of course much more validity. A change of U.S. policy in the Far East is clumsily handled might have serious implications both to American prestige in that area. And on the attitudes of certain Asian countries who now are neutral or our allies.

But surely. No policy can ever be completely fixed and inflexible. Policies are always changing however imperceptibly. Policies in other areas in the past have been changed successfully to meet new conditions. I fail to see why a change in this case is skillfully worked out should be quite so disastrous. Some people have suggested. But in any event. The dangers of pursuing the present policy without some modification may be more serious still. Think about this. China is making real progress with their plans to become industrialized. Some of our heavy industry is as well equipped as anything we have in Canada. She has reorganized our education system with a bill to greatly reducing illiteracy in a relatively short time providing the scientific and technical personnel

required by an industrial state. She has reorganized director culture. And increased the total food production of the country quite considerably. Living conditions while still desperately poor by Western standards. Have a have improved appreciably in the last 10 years. No longer are people starving to death in large numbers annually. Corruption has been eliminated. The implications of these effects should not be underestimated in any assessment of China's growing strength. About one out of every four people in the world is Chinese. Within a generation China may have a population of one billion people. These go out of our elementary speculate on our small planet to which we cannot shut our eyes indefinitely. Above all our Red China has a

powerful competent government which seems to know where it is going and how to get there. The government is of course communist in authoritarian. But apparently it has control over. And perhaps the backing of the great bulk of the population. No longer can it be suggested seriously that the rigid that the regime is weak or ineffective. On the country it seems to be getting stronger all the time. So I won or promoter on the other hand has a population of somewhere about 10 million people made up of perhaps 8 million for most and perhaps 2 million Chinese. It's government under check also Tarion. But it can survive only with the active support and assistance of the United States. The fiction that this government of Chiang Kosik is entitle to represent the Chinese people is beginning to

wear a little thin. Many people thought the United States and China were on the brink of war last August over the defense of Camilla and Matt so. This episode could have led to World War Three. A war in which presumably nuclear weapons would have been used. And in that case almost certainly. Nearly all of us would have been involved. Our Western allies probably brought pressure upon the United States a year ago to modify the position she was taking about. Come on. It seems credible that Khrushchev. Exerted similar pressure on the Chinese to slow up their efforts to capture the two islands. Whatever the reasons there was an easing of the tensions before it was too late. But what might happen next time. The present uneasy status quo is not likely to last indefinitely. We came close to war in 1955 and again in one thousand fifty eight.

The situation is still highly explosive and could blow up at any time. If this should mean war to defend the offshore islands the United States could not expect your Western allies to support her with too great enthusiasm and surely the preservation of the alliance should be the primary aim and policy of all western nations. The United States included. If the assertions I have just made have any validity as I believe they do have particularly the importance of maintaining the alliance of the Western nations. Then it can be argued that present US policy in the Far East is illogical as well as dangerous. I believe that if persisted in the present policy of the United States will be defeated or the United States will have to go to war in order to preserve it. In these circumstances I suggest your whole policy toward China

should be re-examined and modified considerably. I am. Like Mr. Gardner. Our next commentator bears a name that is well-known to Canadians. As their Peter 30 Rock was born in chief and was brought up in China during the period of the war lords which may account for as I'm watching dashing and even unpredictable trait in his character. But it's a large part of those like them are sobering atmosphere of Canada. Yeah then among other things a war correspondent for the CBC and later after the war the CBC correspondent at the United Nations where he became one of Canada's best known radio commentators at present he is in

Ottawa as a freelance correspondent. And at a very perceptive analyst Mr. Burt. First of all Matt same as the chairman how honored we are to have Mr. Parsons here. It's also a sign of the high regard in which the conferences held that a top official of the United States State Department should attend. And may I add to that I think he is a very brave man to come here and to take part in the sort of free for all discussion we have here. Now I know it is a strange and significant a mission in Mr. Pozen speech and that is that while he devoted a great deal of attention to communist China he made no mention of the question of Chinese representation. Now I would have thought that this was the main issue in any consideration of Western

policy in Asia. I can only judge that the American attitude have not changed. That if anything it has become more I'm yielding more rigid. You know the last climb I was that was in 1951 and I spoke then on the question of Chinese recognition which shows how much progress we make. My own view and as I say I've been expressing it publicly for nine years now is that it's only common sense to recognize communist China and its foolish and dangerous not to do so. I mean really we're pretty far out on cloud 7. When we go on pretending that a country of 600 million people doesn't exist. And that's what we're really doing. However my view I realize doesn't count. I don't say that sadly I don't think any individual Canadian view on this matter counts. I don't suppose that there if there were

a public opinion poll which showed that the majority of Canadians were in favor of recognizing communist China that it would have any effect. You see I don't think elections change foreign policy. I never did see any difference between the policy of the British Labor government at the United Nations and that of the British Conservative government. That's why I'm sure that a Liberal government or a CTF government if that were possible would behave in the same way as the Conservative government on this issue. There are factors involved which go deeper than ballot boxes. For one thing the integration of our defenses and we must remember too that the Americans are our great friends and good neighbors and we're not going to kick them in the teeth over the question of communist China. And then if we did recognize the Peking regime we might get snubbed

for our trouble. That's why I should doubt very much if a Canadian Government could recognize communist China before the Peking regime were admitted to the United Nations. Now that doesn't mean to say that we should sit on our hands and do nothing. We should try to find some way around this issue. We should try to divide the sum formula which would get the Americans off the hook because that's the real problem. At the same time we should remember our place and not take an insufferable that have them Doua attitude on this matter. I lived in the United States for six years and I know how deeply the American feel about this issue. It's an emotional issue with them. We're a very small boy on the world stage but sometimes even a small boy can

help big brother when he's in a mess especially when he's waist deep. And I think we have done that. The example which comes to my mind is the Canadian Initiative at the 10th General Assembly which opened the doors of the United Nations. Now I don't blame the Americans entirely for the logjam on U.N. membership. It was one of the byproducts of the Cold War. It came about because the Americans or the Western powers wanted to admit only their friends to the United Nations and exclude all the Soviet satellites. So naturally the Russians simply vetoed every weapon sponsored applicant in the Security Council for five years. The United Nations remained an exclusive organization of 16 member states and some of the most important countries of Europe and Asia were kept up. It was a ridiculous situation almost as ridiculous as the situation over the recognition of communist China.

At any rate the Canadians came along after the so called a package deal on membership which satisfied both sides. There was nothing new in the package deal. A seminar had been made by both the Americans and the Russians a different time and rejected by both of them in turn. Now I can't really explain the diplomatic success of Canada. I suppose it's because where we weren't suspect and then we're not really big enough to be disliked by anybody and we have the great advantage of being pissing of the Americans that I think is really our diplomatic secret that we are closer to the Americans than anyone else and that we can persuade them sometimes to do something different. Now what are we going to do over this issue of communist China. We've got to find some method whereby the Americans can withdraw gracefully. I can get off this limb. As I see it. The question of Chinese recognition is not an Asian problem it's

an American problem. The basis of the all package deal was that all the applicants for membership in the United Nations should be admitted. There were 80 18 in the original package deal but two of them got lost in the shuffle except the divided states. All the applicants except the divided stay. Now it seems to me that a possible approach to the solution of this issue would be a proposal to admit the divided states the only ones that have applied are North and South Korea and North and South Vietnam. And they should be members of the United Nations. Such a pro proposal might be a wedge. And as a corollary to this. But of course it would have to be handled in a different manner. China might be treated as a divided state and we could get the admission of mainland China and Formosa. I don't know whether such a formula would work. A lot would depend on the political climate

at the time. But it seems to me that Western policy in Asia hinges on the admission of communist China to the United Nations. The person who is fully realizes by now his vigor of the things all the American position has produced equally vigorous somewhat contentious counter proposals do not entirely agree with me. It seems to me that it is only fair that for all the folks that are whirling around in his mind slip out or perhaps fall into too devastating a pattern. And Mr. Parton should have an opportunity now not only to him but to the radio audience who have heard the recent

criticisms from the two commentators would you like what's up with that they're gonna. I appreciate the opportunity Mr. Chairman I wish I had more time to utter some counter-counter contentious statements. But at least I can correct one impression with. The omission from my speech of the issue of recognition of communist China. It's not significant at all. This issue was discussed at the last two previous major speeches here by my predecessor that I thought that it would be a little bit repetitive where I had to go into that matter. However I see repetition is desirable. We have about two or three minutes. In which to repeat some of the very difficult and important aspects of this matter. If it is taken with the third bag and others of us 8 or 9 years to get this far with the issue it's perfectly clear we can't wind it up in the three or four minutes remaining to us.

However I should like to say that if Mr garden. Or any other Canadian or anyone of any nationality can find some skillfully worked out policy which would somehow deprive the world of the menace which it faces today. Now we're talking about world aggression we're not talking about something else. The statements of the Communist leaders prove that. If we could find some way to deal with that business without rewarding aggression. And without accommodating those who remain unyielding and inflexible saying that it is we the West that must change. Certainly we Americans would like to know what the answer is and we'd only be grateful. Now. The first major reason why. We would think it undesirable. To change our policy and recognize Communist China is the very fact of a major reversal of U.S. policy. What would the effect be.

On all the countries of the Far East and Asia. If the United States. On whom they depend to such great degree for protection should suddenly say we are not going to maintain our treaty under which we protect you any longer. We are going to make an arrangement with a country that threatens you. So narrowly. Certainly. That would have a catastrophic effect on them and people would start thinking in terms of how best could they make terms with someone far more powerful and someone very ruthless. Secondly the effect on the Chinese minorities over 30. Varied. The effect on the Republic of China. To be sure only 9 or 10 million people on the island of Formosa but the repository of all that is great and the ages of Chinese culture. And a symbol of hope. To many Chinese

who perhaps don't appreciate. Too much what has happened to them. Now with the change in the. In the global balance of power which would be entailed by our accommodating ourselves. To the inflexible Chinese Communist demand we would also be abandoning our principles. We would be sacrificing our friends. We would be abdicating US leadership. It would be a cheap triumph for the Communists. I think we would be doing this in the face of threat. We would be doing it in the threat of aggression. We would confirm the communists and their belief that all I have to do is to stand firm and be uncompromising. And in the end it is the west which will accommodate them appear them. Now what is the experience

of others. In relation to communist China. Last night there was a good statement to the British experience. I won't elaborate on it. But you might be interested in this little item from the Tokyo authority of August 12. Mr Peachey the prime minister had just returned to Japan. He was that. What about your talk about communist China with Mr. McMellon in England that said that. The British prime minister has said that they had wrecked the Communist Chinese. But they didn't have any political negotiations with them. According to their expressed he expressed the view that it was not wise for other nations to have political relations because of the China Chinese Communist attitude at the time. Mr Key she added I learned Britain's view almost agrees with that of Japan. Now in

this particular year at the moment of the Tibetan crisis. We have seen more clearly than ever than ever that the Chinese Communists take an outwardly menacing attitude if they want to other great nation nations. You remember the things that were said to Mr Nehru at that time and the accusations that were made of interference in Chinese Communist affairs merely because refugees came across his border. So the attitude of arrogance suggests that. If there is accommodation it will merely convince the Chinese Communist that they are right in being tough. And we will learn that we are wrong in being weak and that the situation is progressive way to our disadvantage. Now legally we could say that. They do control the mainland. That is one of the criteria for recognition. However recognition is a privilege not a right.

In our view. And one of the criteria which we use in judging whether recognition should take place. Is the ability and willingness to live up to international obligations. The Chinese communists repudiated all the international obligations of China when they came into power. They have violated every agreement that they have ever entered into with us. We don't ignore the kind of Chinese Communists incidentally. We negotiated with them upon a common John. We negotiated with them and should neva. We have had over 90 meetings at the ambassadorial level with them at Warsaw. And every agreement that has resulted from these efforts to negotiate. Has been repudiated. I born in Warsaw at the present time. They're adamant they refuse to give up the use of force in settling the threatening situation in the Taiwan Strait. So we don't feel that on the

basis of the criteria applied for recognition namely a billing ability and willingness to live up to international obligations that they really qualify. Now there is the argument also. That inevitably we will have to recognize the Chinese communists some day because they are there to day. We agree they are in power. And they will probably be there for a long time to come. But we also are a Tarion regime. While they look awfully strong and powerful on the outside. May not necessarily remain on the inside. Over the longer period. A regime which depends on conformity and on force is a brutal regime. A nation which depends. On the very today and on freedom of discussion. On an ABBA adaptation to the views of the majority. Has

flexibility in the possibilities of adjusting. And a much longer life expectancy. So I would not say that. The Chinese communist regime will be there for all time and I think it is also because I don't think that the communist system which denies so many human values. And which operates in a way that drove the Hungarians after years of repression to revote. And which drove the Tibetans and so on. I don't think a regime. Which depends on those methods. Is necessarily going to be able to maintain this situation. Communism is contrary to human nature. But it is stubborn and it is strong at the present time. There is no doubt that now.

If it is strong and if it is stubborn. Instead of seeking to accommodate by giving way and by making things easier for them and harder for us. Let us remember and said. What our late. Secretary of State said on one occasion a year or so ago. If communism is governed for the wrong. Let us be that fast for the right. And of the discussion continues among the participants in the final session of this year's quitting conference we withdraw from the debate to close the broadcast with a restatement from the president of the Canadian Institute on Public Affairs Dr. Marie Ross. With this broadcast we terminate a week of discussion and coo teaching on changing Asia. I'm not certain how you have the radio audience were affected by the parts of the discussion which you heard. But I can tell you for it for

most of us attending the conference it was in many respects a painful experience pain for all because we have been forced to look at new facts and new attitudes painful because we have had to re-examine many strongly held prejudices. And painful because we have had to struggle to formulate new answers to age old problems. Let me illustrate. More than one speaker from Asia has suggested that communism far from being the evil movement many Westerners consider it to be represent and support many of the aspirations of people in the Far East. Many of us into judging were inclined to say that this this is sheer nonsense. But we have been forced to recognize the fact that many Asians feel this way and therefore to attempt to understand why they feel this way. What in their situation and in and in forces that shape their attitudes make them feel this way. It has

not been an easy task but it has been a valuable week. One of the things that pleased though was the recognition of many of our Asian guests that the conferences provide the kind of free forum for discussion which would be permitted or which would not be permitted or be possible in many Asian countries. It made them enough as well realize what valuable traditions and practices we have in Canada what in fact a free country is like. I closed the conference by suggesting that if the institutions and traditions of a free country are to be kept alive we must do our share to keep them in this this way. One such institution is the Canadian Institute in public affairs co-sponsored with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation the COO teaching conference. I invite you if you find yourself in sympathy with the aims and practices of

this organization to affiliate yourself with it. Thank you Dr Ron copies of the speeches and discussions which have taken place here will be available within a week or two from public affairs 244 St. George Street Toronto. These broadcasts have been arranged by Arthur Stinson and produced by Christina McDougal. Technical operation with by John Dillinger. My name is Bob Wilson. And now goodnight and goodbye from the good Eugene conference. 959. This is CBC Radio the Trans Canada network. From Hollywood. The voice of Hedda Hopper. You'd be amazed to know how many

insecure people there are here. Even the top people. This is Hollywood 1959 and that was one of the many famous voices you will hear in the next hour as we visit this capital of the motion picture industry and hear of its nostalgic past.