Couchiching conference; 6

If you were listening to last night's broadcast of this 28 annual conference when we discussed communist influence on Asia you would certainly have noticed a certain amount of conflict between our Asian and our Western speakers. The Decline of Western influence in Asia is causing a special kind of tension. Tonight we explore some of the sources of this conflict between east and west. Here to introduce tonight's speakers of the Chairman Frank Pearce supervisor of CBC talks and Public Affairs. Conflict between east and west. Last night one speaker referred to having a bee in their bonnet about colonialism. About all the fad that Westerners have a bee in their bonnet if not about colonialism about other things. And the evidence was I think graphically be Fara that the same words they only lead them. Can mean different things to people in the ether and to those of us in the West. Yet all of the stars of conflict are mainly misunderstandings

lack of appreciation for the other man's point of view. I wonder if there aren't real issues that divide us a real clash of interests between the leading Western powers. And even the more friendly countries of Asia. And if so what are the consequences. Tonight we look at these questions and others with speakers whose experience in every case has banned east and west. First we welcome again Dr. Edwin Reischauer of Harvard University one of America's foremost authorities on the ferry and on Western policy toward the ferry. Dock to rush hour in addition to having held important academic posts spent several years in the United States Foreign Service and in the State Department. He will lead off tonight with an analysis of the source of conflict between East and West Dr. Russia. I want to come to the subject of sources of conflict between east and west we have in a sense come

to the core of what interests us most. Only its stated negatively. We are really interested in what are the possibilities for cooperation between east and west but we obviously will not have affective cooperation until we identify the sources of conflict and get rid of them as much as possible. Now I feel a little bit anti-climactic about all this because I think weve already identified. Our source of conflict. Mr. Pierce suggested there are some real issues. I think he means by that is use. Other than this one of a lack of mutual understanding. But to me that is the big problem. It is a very real issue. Psychological problems of that sort can be just as important maybe more important than clashes of economic interest which are more easily understood more easily identified and therefore often more easily cleared up. I think we have established particularly last night

quite clearly that it is this great gap in understanding between east and west that is our largest problem. We saw Asians trying to explain their point of view to a Western audience an audience not being able quite to grasp it. And coming back and trying to point out other things that they speakers could not see. This is a very valuable lesson to us. I think last night. Meeting I think was the most valuable that could have been held on a subject of that sort I think we've gone even beyond that already in our analysis. I think we've seen that this lack of understanding is primarily a product of the preceding century of colonialism is left deep resentments deep scar on the Asian So it is perhaps established very unfortunate attitudes on our part. This perhaps is the main reason why we cannot easily come together and see each other's point of view. I think we've even established another point beyond that a very valuable

point that the colonial relationship of this past century was a very unnatural one coming out of an accident of history the accident that modernization in terms of modern technology in the kind of society and government that goes with it happened to come to Europe first and came to Asia late in making for a time a great and rather dangerous imbalance in the world that produced colonialism which in turn produced this great a lack of understanding both ways. Now I think we in the West must make an effort to try to understand this problem we must remember. That colonialism is not entirely gone. Some of our speakers were a bit glib about it last night I thought we you know in our hot. That we do not want to see colonialism restored or continued we've written it off. We see history wiping it away. Quite clearly though I must point out that some of our Western friends do not see it as clearly as some of us do in the North

American continent. The French very obviously don't. Neither do the Portuguese and some others. There's very good reason why the Asians say colonialism is not entirely dead and there are very obvious examples of it still. Most of Africa is still Colonial. There are go in India there are Hong Kong there various other examples of that sort. Asians going to extend this and say there is economic imperialism. This I think is basically a misconception. It is not based on economic reality but it is a reality in terms of attitude. These are all there. So let us not be too glib about saying that colonialism is already wrong. Then we have to understand that even when it does go there will be this psychological residue for a very long time on both sides. Undoubtedly a long period of resentments and suspicion. This is all very

understandable it's been made quite clear to us I think we should see that this is natural. That is the only situation that could actually exist. I remember the United States had resentments and suspicions of that sort after it achieved its independence for more than a century. Of course things move faster now we hope it's not going to take a century but I think we must understand that for at least a generation this sort of attitude will survive to some extent in Asia. They've been very tragic consequences from this lack of mutual understanding. The greatest one is that we have really been able to give as much aid to Asia and it's modernization in its time of trouble as we would like to do and what aid we have given has not been as effective as it should be. There are some rather terrible examples. China is the worst. China has adopted this theory. That we are the so-called capitalist world are so predatory that it is safest for China to

have no relationship with us at all. Any relationship would be dangerous this is a tragic situation in the world. Other countries have not taken as extreme a view as that but I do think that the Indonesians for example have had a very deep mistrust of the whole Western world have been very cautious in accepting aid and except being advice. The result is that what has gone from the Western world to Indonesia over the last decade has been really a rather pitiful trickle compared to what it might have been and even that trickle has been much less effective than it should have been even in the case of India I believe a great deal more could have been done. When you think of what India needs are and really what the willingness of the Western world is perhaps to contribute I think it is much greater than the Asians realize and often more than we realize. They've been great and tragic consequences of all this. Now it seems as I'm putting all the blame on the

Asians for not understanding I don't mean to do that at all the greater blame is perhaps on our side. First of all there are these survival of the colonial attitude. These are long entrenched in western thinking that we often don't spot them. But there's a great deal of unconscious arrogance still in the Western relationship with Asia. And when it is an arrogance I think it often turns into something that is almost worse. Well-meaning condescension. These are attitudes that we must eradicate if we want to have really friendly relations between ourselves and Asians. Then there's a much bigger problem the problem that's been coming up before us all week the inability of the West to understand and to sympathize with what are really very natural Asian points of view. I shan't go into this in detail but let me just take one outstanding and tragic example of the attitude of the United States government towards

neutral ism in Asia not neutral ism is the most natural thing for Asia to want. This is what the United States itself want it for well over a century after its Jeeves its independence and when it fell itself rather weak and insecure. It is absolutely natural that Asians should have this attitude. Moreover it is an expression. Of strong desire for independence independence of everyone. And this is an expression of nationalism and has been as has been brought out very well already. Nationalism is a large part of the driving force in Asia that will modernize Asia and bring it up to date. It is a good thing and yet America thinking in very short terms has decided that neutral ism is a bad mistake and a very unsympathetic attitude toward it. Now one of the results of this lack of understanding. The first is that progress has been much slower in Asia than it need be. Modernization could have gone much

faster if we were able to do the things we should have done if Asians had been in a position to welcome our aid more easily. There's been a rather creeping modernization in more most areas rather than the rapid modernization which would have been him possible. The result is that perhaps Asia is not modernizing fast enough even to keep its present position. Of inferiority to the west. Remember we're going ahead all the time. And it's perfectly possible that as we go zooming ahead this imbalance between east and west technological imbalance will grow worse and then want to have an even more unsound world than we have today. This is a great danger. There's also been the danger of that. Because of the slowness of modernization great dangers in the process of modernization Now we've heard a lot about the need for guidance and I have great sympathy. I think we've been quite wrong in our criticism

of Indonesia Pakistan and Burma. Countries like that are not having full fledged democracies under conditions in which full fledged democracies are really impossible or have to be a considerable amount of guidance in many of these countries. But we realize that guidance could in time grow into a dictatorship. Dictatorship as the country becomes more modernized could grow into full fledged totalitarianism because the regimes then would face the problem of controlling educated men rather than an educated path much of Asia could go to a totalitarian in that way or else. Some of the younger people becoming impatient because of the slowness of the motion could voluntarily choose communism as a seeming shortcut to modernization there is this great danger because of the slowness and the ineffectiveness of the aid that the Western world has been giving

to Asia. Now you might say is this bad. Is there anything to fear in a totalitarian A.J. this is sort of a problem that lurk on the edges of our conversation several times we've never gone into it. Unfortunately I don't really have the time now to go into it fully but I think the answer is yes we have valid reasons for fearing a totalitarian Asia as being something much more upset ing to the world than even the present situation. There are reasons to believe that a fundamentally democratic Asia will make a much larger contribution to the stability the prosperity the well-being of the world as a whole. We have rather accept that and I've been distressed at this. The assumption. That Communism or so some totalitarian system is obviously the quickest way to modernization. Now there's no doubt about it that one gets off the ground faster under

certain conditions through totalitarian control. This problem of capital accumulation is handled much more easily in a totalitarian way than it is in a free society such as India. But in the long run I do not think it is the quickest way towards modernization. If we look at the experience of Europe it certainly was not because of controlled from the top. Many people say that Japan the most modernized of all the Asian countries only fully modernized one did it through controls from the top that is a great misreading of Japanese history. There was a lot of guidance a lot of control a lot of compulsion that is true but the real secret to the success of Japan was this welling up of free individuals from below who responded to new situations and modernized Japan. That is what made the control the more higher elements of the economy in Japan that were being built up by the government succeed.

And after all totalitarianism robs a nation I think of its greatest resource the greatest resource of any nation is the free mind of an individual citizen the enterprise of individuals and you create a system that pushes these down. Well there you have robbed yourself of your greatest power of growth I don't think we should accept this assumption that communism or any totalitarian regime is the fastest way to modernization and that I do think that totalitarian regimes for various reasons are more likely to disturb the peace of the world than democratic regimes I think we of the West have a valid interest in the development of democracies in Asia rather than totalitarian regimes. But this great lack of understanding has made it seem almost probable that a large part of Asia if not most of it might go totalitarian. Well now let's come to the reconstructed part of it. What can we do about all this isn't there. Can't we

do better than we have been doing. Isn't there some way to overcome this lack of understanding of course there is our lack of understanding. And sympathy with Asian feelings is really a sign of immaturity on our part. I think we've often been quite petty and very immature in our irritation with Asian attitude our inability to accept them and understand them. It's quite natural that we're immature because this is a field in which we are babes. Have we as a people as big as the people of North America really seriously studied and thought about Asian. No we are immature in this problem and it is only reasonable therefore that we should act immaturely and therefore unwisely. The answer to this of course is obvious. It was brought out in this morning session very ably by Mr Ross McLean I'm sorry that was not on the air because it's something I think all Canadians should have heard. Education is the answer.

Education in the formal sense in the lower grades in high schools in our universities all the way through education in the sense of mass media communication. This is extremely important and I think we in North America have to take this problem very seriously to heart or we face difficult times in the future. May I make an aside to the Asians I don't want to heap all the blames on us. There are also problems their marriage our Asian friends to also try to understand us. I think you're often very impatient with. For Westerners we are very human human beings with all the failings of human beings including ignorance and stupidity. This must be assumed whenever you have a mass of human beings acting. Do not demand perfection of it. I think our hearts are much better than you give us credit for our ignorance is much worse than you think. There's another

problem one that has worried me very much about Asian It may seem peculiar for a Western there to be saying this to Asians but something that worries me very much about the future of Asia is that most Asians are horribly ignorant about other parts of Asia and not only are horribly ignorant they really don't care they're much more interested in knowing about Europe than they are in other parts of Asia. Well this isn't a serious problem today but it could be a very serious problem in the future. The time is coming when the peoples of South Asia the Indian areas must really understand the Chinese a great deal better than they do today and vice versa. This goes for all groups in Asia. This is something Asians must take very seriously to heart also. Now I think was to pull our said something very valuable for all of us Asians and Westerners alike. He summed it all up in a nutshell in a way this might be the basic conclusion we ought to draw from this whole week of conference.

Because that is exactly what it is not bothered to think about these important problems that are facing us in the world. Obviously we have to see better this so that we can better understand the other person's point of view. With that understanding each other and understanding each other we should not have this fruitful cooperation I think we all want. And if we do not have that modernization process with the great. I I. Well for a moment I thought Dr Rush Hour was going to advise us to organize conferences all over the Far East.

I know that that path is beyond us and would be an example of Western arrogance once more. Now we have after two of our coaching speakers Professor Mr. Choudhry to comment on Dr rush hours presentation. Mr Nirmal child rape of the speaker who gave the opening address of the conference. You remember he was born in India and lived there for many years but is now an American citizen. He's a correspondent at the UN for several Asian papers. He lived in both England and France and had the good fortune to return from time to time to visit Asian country with his experience with the child and they have some differences in emphasis from our first bigger job. Thank you very much. I was of course listening fascinated to Dr. Isom speech as all of you had been doing. Now. There are many points

I couldn't agree more. And it may seem rather strange under the circumstances to tick by have if not issue about trying to find out one of two things in his speech. But dignity about the aid program and he mentioned I believe that the nation. Was not only not receiving adequate age but were not the sort of willing to accept these because they have so much misunderstanding and suspicion of the Western countries and particularly of the United States I think that was implied. Now I spent quite a long time in Indian nation last year about nearly three months and I went to the into this question of aid very tightly with Demick an obvious shills and you know Nation officials and I find that. If you go set out a misleading sometimes it all depends on what you mean by being sad. Over a period of last about four or five yeahs in the nation had received a very nearly 300 million dollars of American aid. Apart

from that Indonesia. Had received at least 150 to 200 million dollars. What are the Soviet aid. And recently I saw. The doctors who bombed there the foreign minister. I mean in Asia who is coming to the United States in about let's a two week store two and a half weeks time. Is going to ask fought hard the age of three to four hundred million dollars. Now I don't believe that these figures are very small. At least I don't find them small. Now the danger there is that Indonesia with all due respect to the distinguished ambassador was here this afternoon. He's simply not experienced to absolve this aid or to do something useful with it. I've seen innumerable instances of these when I was in Indonesia factories had been set up beautiful beaming factories and spent lot of

money on them. The president would come make a glowing speech would open the factory. He would retire and so the factory nothing would happen. Now this has happened over and over again in Indonesia. And I for one have great faith. In the foreign aid program of the United States government I'm making. No apologies for it because I don't believe the American aid program needs an air biology. I think it has done tremendous work all over Asia. It has sometimes great mistakes have been made in the name of foreign aid that's true but the motive behind it has always been good. Sometimes the EP will be Asian and the education of the policies haven't been so good. I think improvement can be done but the basic idea. Should be taken into consideration. And one other point and this time I want to talk about is this question of Western immaturity

regarding Asia. Now I don't quite again know what Dr. Ashour means by immaturity. Because I think the relationship between the U.S. and the east if you like to call it growing for over two three hundred years and one particular nation that comes to my mind because I not only grew up there but I was a citizen of that country until last year that they didn't I don't think that the British knowledge of Asian after there shows any immaturity in that country because I think they not only understand but they have done in their history. They have done. Some work for which they can take a great deal of credit and I think the one example of that can be found in India today. But I have the best friend that Goodman has in the whole of Asia for that matter maybe the whole of the world is India

this wonderful relationship has been built because I believe that there is a mature understanding by the beauties of many Asian countries including India Ceylon Pakistan and Muller. And I would like if I get a chance later on because I think this idea and I find it rather difficult to understand there's a sense of I don't think many of the Western countries thought dead him ahead of the Asian countries. Thank you doctor. This is Doctor permission I think to just stop on those two points just for a moment and and give you a chance to come back in. Thank you very much for that very kind of you. I don't think that the children are in

essential disagreement I think in fact these may be illustrated some of the points I wanted to make. I don't think the British were a bit immature. About their relationship with India and other former parts of the British Empire and fact I think the British record on that and also the Indian and Bernie is and so on record on that has been absolutely magnificent and contrasts so sharply with the record in French Indochina Indonesia and so on. Here we have a case of a. Government group of civil servants who for years knew this problem and they were not a tall immature and they handled it very well I think perhaps it was easier for the British because they are more likely to accept the advice of their experts. The American people who want to understand it themselves before they will vote their money out of court I think we also are somewhat in agreement on though I pay taxes to 300 dollars comes out of our pockets I realise that but 300 million dollars does

not seem large to me in terms of the problems the importance of the problems divide 300 million dollars by 90 million people and spread it over several years and you've made an investment of a. What 40 50 cents per person per year. But you aren't going to get too much modernization on that. The fact that most of this was misspent I think illustrates exactly what I was saying. Obviously good enough people experts I mean we're not planning this on a large enough scale. Indonesians without enough knowledge about it. We're doing the main planning and much of it was therefore wrong. Why was that so. Because Indonesians did not want to bring in Westerners on some of these highly complex problems I might just cite the difference in the Japanese case the Japanese back in the 19th century were terribly suspicious and afraid of the Western powers and for much better reasons I think on the whole. Then the Asian countries are afraid of the Western powers today. The

Japanese however hired Western experts with their own money at fantastically high prices and it paid off. They took their advice on very major elements of the early modernization of Japan. Since he was a poor man they had hired themselves perhaps they had greater confidence maybe this would be a sounder way to do it. But actually in that case Western technological knowledge was transmitted to Japan more effectively than we are doing it today. Well we will defer any further discussion just for a moment and I'd like to introduce now Dr. White who was the speaker on this platform the main speaker just two nights ago and Dr. May held a very important university post in China. Up until nine hundred forty nine. And since that time he's lectured in many American universities. He's now professor of Oriental Studies at the State University of Iowa. Your comments please Doctor me.

Thank you. I still. Make you a few moments assigned to me. So make one or two remarks about to our presentation and then by way off with supplementing what he has been discussing. I wish also to register my general agreement and admiration for the presentation made by Professor Rice I think it's very. Significant that a an American professor called Terry a specialist. I have such great sympathy for the life and difficulty and problems of that area. Seems to me to be bending backwards trying to be straight but that much better than a toehold that the condescension or pity or any of that other

kind of attitude towards the Far East has certainly had the first qualification to be a good teacher of the area. But after all this is evening the question of important issues rather than mutual admiration society. So I have to seek and find and piece out something that I could agree with prefer to write upon. He mentioned in his broad sympathy how neutral is on the part of certain nations in the Far East. Yet in their foreign policy should be understood and should be even sympathized with and even guided democracy. I'll take up this point of neutrally to me I think. Well Professor Reich how are referred to the early chapter of the founding of the independent country

United States of America. It is certainly true. The founding fathers laid a golden rule for the day the nine you involvement or neutralise them with the European politics by this young nation. But I must say that I feel there is a distinct difference about the world. The world has changed so rapidly the world of 1959 definitely not the world of six. I submit that now that particularly practically all nations practically all nations and let's hope very soon all nations will have won their independence. We might all proceed to learning the next lesson which I think should be the lesson we didn't heard dependence among the nations. By that I mean not by falling back on the reviving of the old

colonial rule again but entirely on different bases. Every nation on equal footing every nation voluntary choice making friendships and for mutual exchange for mutual and Richmond. But after all in this world you just cannot get away from passing judgment on your neighbor no matter how hard you try to co-exist. Sooner or later you might be forced to make a declaration. They are sounding a warning as Mr narrow has been forced to do this evening. We read in the new headline newspapers. But by way of extending and supplementing Professor Wright Howard the discussion I might add to the point up one. Very deep growing and fundamental difference in the attitude on the part of the end of the way which might

be an admission or source of conflict. Professor rush hour begins with the idea of colonization engendered a good deal of ill will and bad feeling and misunderstanding. But the colonisation of one country by another involving two countries which looked at things pretty much the same way had pretty much the same values same religion same customs. It wouldn't be have been so difficult. The difficulty it seems to me to have arrived from the fact that country A and country B or are regional a very different now Country B trying to superimpose the country B systems and customs and outlook and attitude onto country A. That's how they say and it means understanding the pain and the futile feeling really seem to me to have a reason. Now in the east.

Well let's take religion as a concrete example that there is a definite and understandable. Religion you India of course the dominating religion you can do it it is a rather sort of a catch all blanket religion really include many many factors as you all know religion in China is said to consist of Confucianism Buddhism and Taoism. But we work pretty much in collaboration and even in the eclectic arrangement. Often it's a joke told to that religious Chinese where confusion cross roll and a Taoist. Every individual seek the good from all religions. He thinks there are some in each. And therefore the shall we say they often are a people. They they almost also have a way of playing

safe. If one religion doesn't do it for you maybe they are the one my. Altogether they have been bred and a spirit of tolerance and a catalyst in such matters and that is a dominant note not only about religion but also it's a hallmark of that culture that civilization overall altogether. There then upon the scene came in. Very well intentioned missionaries of Christian churches and Christian religion which claims it self to be unique and it has the truth. Now you have a situation like that. You are not likely to have harmony worked out easily or readily are within a short time. I imagine it is little things that really go very deep in

the conflict. Or as a source when we are trying to locate or identify the source for conflict. I think that we might look in there. The way it started very early in Greek time. Aristotle told us and which is repeated in logic textbooks every time. It is either A or not A. The eastern attitude is they could be both A and not-A their own which is far to the Western mind just couldn't be muddleheaded but the A. Just pipes off approach to reality living in general. Of course I must realize that I'm not in the east

as the Arab world and you have to be relegated with exclusive religion. I thank you. For the one question myself. The first year I think made a wonderful point. It's one of these things I think we ought to learn from the east this different view of things and not all things that are clearly plus or minus A or B. I've often felt that our Western civilization is too much a mathematical civilization we're so sure that two and two equal four that a number have to be either a positive number or a negative number and so on. Well as soon as you get into human beings things aren't like that we never really find to it's a number that looks something like To another thing that

might be near to and they add up to something that might be near four but it isn't a nice precise thing like two and two equals four. We never know whether the thing is really positive or negative it in some ways positive but also in some ways negative. This is the way reality is. And the Chinese can teach us this. Unfortunately the Chinese are getting even more mathematical more positivistic than we are today. This is one of the things that I'm afraid they're going to live under communism and something that we need very badly to chatter. I just want to point out one or two small things about this aid program again and how I'm glad to know that 300 million dollars is not very much to Dr. Rice. I didn't realize that janitors went anywhere that is now where the total foreign aid for the United States is a little more than 300 million over three and a quarter billion dollars has been appropriated.

Now that I'm not saying that that is an hour but the point is that is what the Congress had appropriated and has to be divided into many countries but the other point I made about Dr. Rice I wanted the Japanese hired these experts and paid a great deal of money for their services and they did a wonderful job. And Indonesia by implication hadn't done so but I can assure Dr. Rice are that Indonesia is saturated with foreign experts. Did you have an expert in every kind of expert you can think of only find you that these experts are left by themselves they don't have very much to do to begin with and they do not produce the future experts in you know nature that they should be doing. They're about 200 Indian doctors hired by Indonesia. They are doing practically nothing. No facilities have been given to them and that is not the way to modernize the country. Now the question I want to put to Dr.. Rush hour is rather like the one that I think raised by Professor

Mae and then it ends not on the business of the religion being superior and exclusive but I was rather surprised in. Dr. rush hours address and referred to the. Notion that Westerners have about what usually called racial superiority is a common thing we commonly hear of. He didn't really mention in those terms and I'm wondering whether you think that that factor is not the importance that is commonly thought to have. Oh I get vast importance and in so far that survives why I think that the terrible thing had a very interesting experience myself just four years ago in Singapore as you know my wife is Japanese we've just been married and went to Singapore and there was a club in Singapore where she was not allowed to enter. I brought it home to me very clearly this problem that racial attitudes the superiority are not dead in this world by any means. I'm assuming that we're trying to overcome this. We all recognize that and that's why I didn't mention it.

Now the first question from the audience over here is of course the passion to use colonialism as a thought of superlative wickedness these day and right use indignation against colonialism is probably one of the sweetest passions to indulge in. But bearing in mind to no fewer than one eighth of all the members of the United Nations are countries which have reached independence under the colonial system and in fact 180 under the British colonial system alone. Is that a record of which the panel think a colonial power need be anything but a cloud. Dr. Mae would you like to be worried about the glare of the fort if there weren't they would never have been anything else but independent. I'd say that I agree with the speaker very much on that

point. Colonialism as a 19th century phenomenon on the whole was a very important contribution to modernization I don't think anybody can say it was necessarily bad at that time. Survival today though I think it is something that we can very justifiably condemn. Actually the tragedy of many Asian countries or other countries is that they didn't have colonialism at certain time Indochina for instance would have had a better start if the French had made a larger investment in Indochina than they did. Indonesia would have had a better start if the Dutch had been as the British in bringing their democratic institutions and so on it's a tragedy there wasn't more colonialism in some of those countries in the 19th century. Here's a question from Hall. Doctor has mentioned about foreign aid three to four hundred million dollars which is not very much and and Mr. Chow they say that is

too much. Now I'm going to apply these figures to India. When India prepared a five year plan they showed two states that showed a bit done to Germany for us to get into do I whether it was sound or not. And second to find out if they had evolved any help available to implement that plan. Now that plant needed only 10 percent foreign investment when India took this plant to countries like USA and other they all said it is sound but to him but you know a country like India having a population is increasing five million a year. They only need ambitious plan and dual mission. In fact as much ambitious as it can be. And India had a great difficulty in trying to get even 10 percent investment from foreign countries and in that time got criticism that it is too impatient. I wonder if that

because on the panel would like to discuss the foreign aid problem to India's second the five year plan and why it was not. It was not met by the fall and I don't think we'll be able to do that in detail but Mr. Choudhry may have something. To say. In brief is the word. Well about the second. A five year plan. It's my very painful duty to say that a former teacher a mine led the country down. Does undermine a vision but worth it. A statistician and he was not an economist. How he sold that plan to the Government of India is something which I personally would never understand. But there was bound to be a big get. Everybody should have known that. Question is that at that time it was very optimistically suggested that about five million or something I forget to figure new jobs would be created during that period. After about three years it was quite obvious that

that could not be done. So the gap was not just a question of 10 percent or 15 percent. There was a need for hard currency over one billion three hundred million dollars and being in the main the middle of this cold world where one liked and needed and not India is in an unfortunate position there. That amount of money could not be forthcoming from any country it just simply didn't exist. So there was a compromise. And the latest information that I have on that is this that a group of countries United States United Kingdom Western Germany and Japan are about to raise roughly 600 million dollars to come to the aid of the second five year plan. I think that is a fairly generous aid. These might have been done sooner but it is being done and I think the planet should realize that

awning hard currency is a pretty difficult job because they have to compete with many other countries in Asia. Namath questioners in the hall the stand up when you put your question makes it easier for it to be heard in the hall in the center over here. Dr. Rice are is it possible that in order to combat the dynamic militant appeal misleading appeal of communism that other countries in Asia may in fact be forced to marshal their counter forces under totalitarian regimes. And if so is this necessarily a bad thing. Could you explore this a little bit further force. It seems to me that in fact it is happening. And I know we're getting in some of these very high theoretical problems. I myself I'm afraid of totalitarianism of any sort. Obviously totalitarianism that is divided up into small national units. It's less

dangerous to the rest of the world than a totalitarianism that believes it's up a single great block. In this way perhaps that would be less dangerous I don't think you will have a healthy future even with a series of totalitarian regimes. I don't think the existence of a Nazi Germany really does much to counteract the existence of a Soviet Russia and so on and certainly Spain and other semi totalitarian nations are no contribution to the future I would hope that most Asian countries will not have to dramatise themselves in that way and can find a middle course that will not go so far in the direction of guidance and control but that they can get back again when the conditions are right for it. Do real democracy we have a hopeful example of the fact that the Japanese got to democracy were never planning to get there. The fact that the Turks got their democracy through very clear dictatorship. This shows there is hope on that side.

No nothing in particular. If you give me an opportunity I like to come back on you a bit. Could I do that. You were suggesting after Professor Rice our statement that to possibly a way where not suggesting that the conference be repeated or scattered all over the Far East. I very much have exactly that kind of crazy idea which might be great for you. I might even go further than that. I'd like to see the conference spread all over the world not only fire because that is where the hopes lie in the resolution of the source of friction between east and west. We hear altogether too much talk about meeting at a summit and it has been so difficult. So I rented one. But meeting at the cellar or in the cellar or at them.

Could we get up to the summit. Is there nothing we could do. Is there nothing we should do. After all we believe in your mind. We have been spending this week. Surely we all the wiser the more thoughtful The more about the problems we must have learned something for the for the debate and all could be repeated. Of course when the kid comes to grassroots it has to be because of the multitude of the population over the world. I really mean. Seriously I think they might bear other names. In the world the world over.

Q. I wish to direct this question to Dr. Reich. How are you. He did indicate earlier that. Part of the. Conflict between East and rest arises from attitudes particularly old ones. And that brings my mind back to the period of time when General MacArthur. Sought to attack China during the Korean conflict. And in view of the fact that he has. This is Dr. Reich Howell has lived in the east and I understand he is or was connected with the official policy of the United States Department. I'm wondering whether he can tell us what the memorable words of General MacArthur have on Asian peoples and as I recall them this follows it is in the psychology of oriental people to respect and to follow dynamic leadership.

I've never regarded General MacArthur in a as an authority on Asian psychology. He happened to be very successful in Japan because he fitted into a very unusual situation in which particular characteristics were needed and he did a great job at that time in Japan I think he was very wrong in that statement it was a very raw feeling. If it was his feeling that it would be wise to extend the war from Korea into Manchuria in order to bring it to an end. I don't do not think that would have been a way to do without a toll it would have expanded beyond that. And so please don't ask me to try to explain or justify his statement. And on the other side of the hall over here. Mr. Chairman I'd like Dr. Rice share I too am afraid to challenge Kerry and him of any sort.

And I greatly admire his very balanced analysis tonight including the references to specific sources. Of conflict such as the continuation of colonialism there being still a number of colonies in Asia too which I think perhaps too little attention has been paid. But if we're going to be specific. Mr. Chairman is it not necessary in the interests of realism to take account of one factor which has not been mentioned tonight or at any other time. Let me put the question in this way. Let us suppose that the greatest and most populous nation in Europe. Had no intercourse with the greatest and most populous nation in America and that a suppose that it was illegal for its citizens

to trade with each other. Let us suppose that the European nation placed an embargo on all trade with the North American nation. And let's suppose that the strongest naval force of the European power regularly patrolled the car the coast of the American nation. Now in that situation would it be possible to discuss the sources of tension or conflict between the two continents and ignore those facts. Well I think you're getting at the problem of the recognition of China the relaxation of tensions which China doesn't take great astuteness to see that behind the question. As I think I've made clear already in earlier talks it would not. I'm not in favor of the present American position on this. I do believe that recognition of China is to the interests of the

United States to the interests of world peace because that would is a necessary first step towards getting understand. I do not think this is a sound position or a sound situation that should be prolonged further. Well actually they know I don't think so because the embargo has been progressively relaxed until it is a very mild embargo. The Rio embargo on trade between China and the Western world the non communist world is Chinese fear are worse. The Chinese are not willing to really trade with the West. During world they are trading at a much lower level than I was already permitted by the embargo. Dr. may want to add a word. I happen to be a Chinese I happened to be on the platform. I understand the question. Recognition of coming from China has come up again and again during the last several days many of which were missed.

But tonight it was brought up again. I definitely have to all the beg to differ with my honorable colleague Professor rush hour on this all together. My eyes that I do not think recognition of the coming of China by either Canada or United States is a very wise step for trading our trading. The goal together. I feel the reasons are very complicated. The other night I thought it gave me two hours out of going to that in two minutes. I shall not. I have been honored by a reporter of The Toronto telegram. We went over the grounds rather literally and the interest it might take a look at that

for tonight. I tell very quickly say what my reason for. And on that note we must leave the participants of this year's conference still arguing about the source of conflict between east and west. Edwin All right sharp director of the Harvard young Institute was tonight's main speaker with comments by a near mile Chowdhry United Nations diplomatic correspondent Singapore's Straits Times. And Dr. wife IIM-A professor of Oriental Studies at the State University of Iowa the chairman was Frank peer's supervisor of CBC talks and Public Affairs. The program was produced by Christina McDougal with technical operations by John Skilling. This year's conference is on the subject of changing Asia and is a joint project of the Canadian Institute on public affairs and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Copies of the report may be obtained in a week or two from public affairs to

44000 George Street Toronto price $1. To morrow we wind up our conference. With a survey of Asia and Western policy. Speaker J Graham Parsons assistant secretary of state for Far Eastern Affairs Washington. So be with us again then. This is Bob Wilson saying good night from the coaching conference. This is CBC Radio the Trans-Canada network.