“The use of the atomic bomb has shown how incalculable can the power ratio be among nations in an age where scientific advancement is so rapid. In the light of this development the whole basis of a security organisation centred on force needs drastic reconsideration; the stress should rather be on disarmament, of which little was heard at San Francisco. One of the saddest features of the present day, compared to 1918, is the reign of pseudo-realism. At least Wilson and others talked of the ‘war to end war’ and disarmament of nations. Today the Allies believe in gathering greater force which can only result in a greater conflagration.”
AUGUST 15, 1945
The Japanese surrender
JAPAN HAS BOWED TO THE INEVITABLE. FACED WITH THE threat of annihilation in a hopeless struggle against a combination of the major Powers of the world, she has wisely decided that a surrender now will give her people a better chance of survival than a prolongation of a desperate and unequal contest. Thus ends the most brutal and nerve-racking war in history, but our feelings of gratitude and thankfulness are tempered by anxiety for the future. It was logical that this mechanised war should be brought to a dramatic halt by the deadly application of modern scientific research. But this raises new problems endangering world security. If the atomic bomb hastened Japanese surrender and thus brought general peace, its manufacture and use have become one of the cardinal problems facing the future security organisation. Fervid nationalists in Britain and America are already talking as if the balance of power vis-a-vis the Soviet Union has been altered in their favour because they have now exclusive possession of the secret. That way lies the suicide of the human race; for it is apparent that very soon every nation, small and big, will find means to manufacture atomic bombs and compete with one another in the production of weapons dealing mass destruction. The use of the atomic bomb has shown how incalculable can the power ratio be among nations in an age where scientific advancement is so rapid. In the light of this development the whole basis of a security organisation centred on force needs drastic reconsideration; the stress should rather be on disarmament, of which little was heard at San Francisco. One of the saddest features of the present day, compared to 1918, is the reign of pseudo-realism. At least Wilson and others talked of the war to end War” and disarmament of nations. To-day, the Allies believe in gathering greater force to meet force which can only result in a greater conflagration.
Japan’s surrender raises many problems, in fact, the main developments shaping the future of the Far East are yet to take place. One of the questions will be the position of Soviet Russia, whose intervention in the war has lasted only a few days. She has many scores to settle with Japan, having eaten humble pie on many occasions in the days of her Republic’s infancy. It is certain that she will recover Port Arthur and Dairen which the Czars lost in 1905. She will also occupy Sakhalin Islands and take over the Chinese Eastern Railway. As a world Power driving to the Pacific, she will also be anxious to increase her growing influence. She is bound to insist on friendly governments in Manchuria and Korea, while it is almost certain that her ally, Outer Mongolia, will lay claim to the Chinese provinces of Chahar, Jehol and Suiyan to form a Greater Mongolian Republic. Russia’s attitude to the Chinese Communists will depend on the course of the talks with Dr. T. V. Soong, but already Yenan is giving an indication of its policy which is to improve its position in the neighbouring areas. The dramatic end of the war and the intervention of Russia are bound to profoundly affect the course of events inside China, which may end in civil war or forge a democratic already Yenan is giving an indication of its policy which is to improve its position in the neighbouring areas. The dramatic end of the war and the intervention of Russia are bound to profoundly affect the course of events inside China, which may end in civil war or forge a democratic unity between the two factions which will enhance the prestige and power of the nation. The fact that Soviet Russia took a lead in mediation is bound to increase her influence on Japan. If the Soviet is anxious to see that a powerful militarist Japan does not continue to threaten her security, she may be equally anxious to prevent the contingency when Japan becomes a puppet in the hands of the Anglo-American Powers.
More important for the future than the alteration in the balance of power is the resurgency of the subject peoples of the Far East. There is no mistaking the trend of mass opinion in these parts. While there is welcome relief that Japan’s career of conquest is at an end, Tokyo’s clarion call “Asia for Asiatics” has made a profound impression. Very soon the Western Powers will be occupying their former colonies. We dare say they will have little difficulty in disarming those colonials who took up arms against them, but it will not be so easy to disarm colonial nationalism, which has taken a deep root. The white man has lost prestige, at any rate millions of dependent races realise that he is not so powerful as they imagined and that mechanised efficiency is not his monopoly. The events of the last three years, and it must be said Tokyo’s broadcasts however mischievous they were at the moment, have created a new awakening and a new confidence. The Annamites in IndoChina will no longer be satisfied with a colonial status: they will revolt if they are not given freedom. The people of Java will hardly accept without protest the small doses of “self-government” doled out by the Royal Dutch Government. India is already on the threshold of nationhood, confident of discharging her duties as a major Power of the East. China, already one of the Big Five by courtesy, will soon rise to her full stature. It is but proper that it is the representatives of these nations speaking for the hundreds of millions of their peoples who should finally decide the future of the Far East. The main problem of the backward races in these areas is to assure self-government and take energetic steps to raise the standard of living. This goal of freedom and prosperity cannot be left to be worked out by the agents of imperialist Powers whose main interest has been to gather profits for investors in Europe. White hegemony in the colonies is incompatible with the future peace and prosperity of the world.
Reference:
The First 100
A Selection of Editorials, 1878-1978, THE HINDU, VOLUME I