Page 169 →Chapter 12 Why the Main War Will Be Fought in Asia—Not Europe An Interview with Hu Shih
Former Chinese Ambassador to U.S.—China’s Leading Philosopher170
Editor’s Note: How strong is the Communist hold on China and the rest of Asia? Can the armies of Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek win back the country he lost to Communist Mao Tse-tung? Will the Russia-China partnership hold together, and where will it strike next?
Answers to these questions are an answer to the bigger question of World War III. To get the views of one of China’s outstanding scholars and statesmen, the editors of U. S. News & World Report invited Dr. Hu Shih to their conference rooms for an interview on the present plight of his native land, and what the U. S. can do about it. That interview follows.
Dr. Hu Shih is a political independent and belongs to none of China’s political parties, though he is a friend of Chiang Kai-shek.
Dr. Hu was China’s Ambassador to the U. S. during much of World War II. He was connected with Peiping University many years, beginning in 1917, and became its president after the war. In 1947 he was given credit for averting student riots through his prestige with the student body. He later defended campus demonstrators against charges of Communism. In 1948 he declined appointment as Foreign Minister. He left China in April, 1949, before the Communist victory, and now is at Princeton University.
Page 170 →Q: How much popular support is there for the Communists in China, Dr. Hu?
A: As far as I know, there is very little popular support today.
Q: On what do they rest their power, then?
A: Force. The story of the conquest of China by the strategy of Stalin covers 25 years, from 1924 to 1949. China is the best place to see this strategy slowly unfolding in detail. Nowhere else do you have this chance of watching the unfolding of a continuous, persistent, wicked conspiracy.
Q: What is that strategy?
A: Stalin’s strategy consists of three main conditions. The first is what is called “the subjective condition of the success of the Revolution”: You must have a strong Communist Party, preferably a Red Army supporting the party.
Secondly, there must be an objective condition for the success of the Revolution—that is war: You must have a big war—the bigger, the better—a world war. It was a world war that made the Bolshevik Revolution possible. And it was the Second World War that made Russia the greatest military power in the world. So you must have war—a condition which Stalin and the Kremlin have sought to perpetuate ever since 1945.
And the third condition, which is equally important, is the consolidation of Soviet Russia as the base from which to support the revolutions in other parts of the world. But the Second World War made it possible for Russia to conquer North Korea and Manchuria, and made Korea and Manchuria contiguous bases to Russia—strong bases from which to give effective military aid to the Chinese Communist Army.
Q: What is the relation between the Communist Party and the Army?
A: In China we had the unique experience of being the first country where the Communist Party had, almost from the early years of its founding, a formidable Red Army. No country will permit the Communist Party to have an army, or to carry on conspiracy in the army and in the navy, which is one of the 21 conditions for admission into the Third International, the Comintern.
China had an extraordinary experience. Dr. Sun Yat-sen, founder of the Republic, father of the Chinese Revolution, in his desire to have a successful second revolution, voluntarily asked the Third InternationalPage 171 → in 1924 to send experts to help reorganize his party and to send military experts to train a revolutionary army for him. The head of the Russian military mission to China was General Galen, whose real name was General Blucher, one of the greatest generals in the Soviet Union.
So, 25 or 26 years ago, there was a Russian-sent military mission of considerable size to train an army intended, no doubt, by the Comintern to be a Red Army. During the 25 years Stalin’s policy was to preserve that Army and nurture it to full strength. During the first 20 years this Army was defeated many times, smashed to pieces, by the Government armies, and Stalin had to resort to what is known as the Lenin-Stalin doctrine of the strategy of retreat. The object of this strategy of retreat, says Stalin, “is to gain time, to decompose the enemy, and to assemble forces to take the offensive later.” And the better opportunity came with the Second World War, especially with the Yalta Conference.
Q: You think, then, that the whole Red Army marching into the interior of China was part of Moscow’s strategy?
A: There is no doubt.
Q: Then Russian support of Chiang Kai-shek during the war was a form of hypocrisy?
A: Surely—there is no doubt of it.
Q: What is Stalin’s strategy now—having conquered China? Where does it lead from this point?
A: The next thing is to prevent any possibility of a Chinese Tito. What is happening today in Manchuria and Korea is the most conclusive evidence that Mao Tse-tung can never become a Chinese Tito. Soviet Russia has made Communist China go to the extreme of fighting the Americans. That is to make Mao Tse-tung burn bridges with the West—that’s the way to prevent a Tito. Mao has been saying that Communist China must “lean to one side”—that is, lean to the side of Soviet Russia. To make war on the U. S. and the U. N. is the best way for Mao Tse-tung to demonstrate that he really leans to one side and will never waver.
Page 172 →China’s Dependence on Russia
Q: Do you think there will be any Tito in China?
A: No, impossible—because Stalin wouldn’t permit a second Tito to come up.
Q: How would he avoid it?
A: It’s very easy. It’s now being done effectively. Stalin is making Communist China burn all bridges—all approaches to the West. But the important thing is to make Communist China completely dependent upon the military and industrial strength of Soviet Russia.
For instance, this Red Army celebrated its 23rd anniversary on the 1st of August, 1950—the independent Red Army, apart from the earlier army that had been part of the National Revolution Army under Chiang Kai-shek. A year earlier they claimed that this Army had 1 million men. And on Aug. 1, 1950, they claimed to have 5 million. Who is going to supply and equip, and continue to supply and equip an Army of 5 million? Certainly the United States is not going to supply this huge Chinese Red Army. Certainly the British Commonwealth isn’t going to do that.
Q: Who will do it—the Chinese?
A: To do it, the Chinese have had to rely on the industry of Manchuria. But Russia is absolutely in control of Manchuria, which is the most highly industrialized area in the whole of Asia.
Q: Why?
A: The Russian Army is on the border, and in Manchuria, too, and on the Korean border. And, if you look at a map, the control of Port Arthur, the best naval base, is in their hands. Now, in addition to Port Arthur, the Russians control Chefoo [in Shantung], the other naval base. Russia controls the two best naval ports in North China. So, in any war, Peiping and Tientsin will be at the mercy of the Russian Navy and Air Force.
Page 173 →Q: Will the Chinese Communists like that?
A: They may not like it, but the Chinese Communists today are entirely dependent upon Russia’s military and industrial strength for existence, and cannot do otherwise.
Q: What about the Yugoslav theory that the Chinese Communists really are going ahead in Korea contrary to Soviet wishes?
A: That’s nonsense. Months ago I predicted that Communist China would come into the war. I was asked “Why?” I said: For two main reasons. In the first place, the Korean Communists and Chinese Communists, the Korean Red Army and the Chinese Red Army, are more than blood relations—they have for years fought together as brothers in distress. As you know, the Russians had five years of complete control of North Korea. In the first part of those five years, Russians didn’t have a free hand in Manchuria because they still had some regard for world opinion—for American opinion. They didn’t have a free hand in training the Red Army in Manchuria, but they had a completely free hand in training this effectively trained and equipped Army in Korea. That Korean Army fought more successfully in Manchuria than the Chinese Communist Army and they helped the Communists to conquer Manchuria and to conquer North China and to conquer Central China and this Korean Army went as far as Hainan Island.
But now the process is reversed. The Chinese Communist armies went back to help Communist Korea. They had to. Because the Korean Red Army and the Chinese Red Army are blood brothers in need.
But there is a second and more important reason: If the Communist state in North Korea should be permitted to be conquered by the U. N. Army, MacArthur’s Army, while Soviet Russia on the northeastern border stands by without helping, and the Chinese Communists on the northwestern border stand by without helping—if that were to happen, the prestige of world Communism would fall to pieces, and this would affect the Communist movement in Japan, in China, in Korea, in India and in Eastern and Western Europe. So Soviet Russia cannot permit it. Hence Communist China must come in.
Page 174 →Forced Service in Army
Q: You say there is not much public support or good will for the Communists. How can they maintain an Army of 5 million, then? Is that a conscript Army?
A: It’s a conscript Army. The Communists go into every village—and villages are the source of food supply and man-power supply. Now, when the Communist agents come to a village, first they requisition all the grain and foodstuffs and then they take a census of the able-bodied men and women for the Army. By controlling all food supply, they control all man-power. It’s really forced conscription—much more effective than any other form.
Q: Wasn’t that true under Chiang Kai-shek too?
A: No. Under the Nationalists, conscription was never effective. That’s the trouble with a constituted government—there are many things you can’t do. They asked the villages to deliver men and the villages delivered their most undesirable people—the invalids, the people that they wanted to get rid of.
On the other hand, when the Communists went into the villages they controlled the source of food supply, and, by controlling the food supply, they controlled the life and death of the people they wanted for the Army.
Q: Do you think we should undertake a war on the mainland of China in order to rectify the situation?
A: All those things are beyond anybody’s planning or wishes. Events may force you to do it. Seven months ago nobody would have dared to say that in less than six months the President of the United States would declare a state of national emergency.
Nobody in America or in Europe wants to fight a war on the Asiatic continent. Everybody is afraid that military involvement in Asia might greatly weaken the Western powers on the European front. But let me say that Europe is safe—the war is going to be fought in Asia, and Stalin being a shrewd strategist will not lightly open a second front in Europe.
Page 175 →Why Europe Is “Safe”
Europe is relatively safe for four reasons: First, Europe is protected by the North Atlantic Pact, which is not really appreciated by your own people. But, to outsiders, this North Atlantic Pact is really the most radical departure from your 160 years of foreign policy. For the first time you have signed an offensive and defensive alliance with 11 countries—and some of the countries are the weakest, for example, Luxembourg and Iceland. Article 5 of the Treaty says that an armed attack against any one of the signatories shall be regarded as attack against all of them, and they will undertake necessary measures, including the use of armed forces, to assist the attacked party to restore peace and maintain the security of the Atlantic area. The gangsters understand the significance of this Treaty and will not lightly subject it to a test.
And, secondly, Stalin has said that Hitler destroyed himself by opening up a second front. Stalin is not going to destroy himself by opening up a second front in Europe.
And, thirdly, if there should be a second front, it will not be in Europe, because Stalin doesn’t feel he has a sufficient hold over his satellites. Poland would be the first to revolt, Czechoslovakia, the second. Bulgaria, Hungary and Rumania would be the next. Stalin doesn’t want these satellites to take advantage of a European war.
And fourthly, and most important of all, is this question of equipment and supply—the industrial ability of the U.S.S.R. to maintain the huge armies in Asia and in Europe. MacArthur has said there are over 1 million Chinese and North Korean Communist troops in Korea. And it has been said that there are over 175 divisions ready to be mobilized in Europe, if Stalin wants it. But who is going to equip and keep on supplying these 175 divisions plus the 1 million or 2 million of Chinese troops? The industrial power of Soviet Russia is backward compared with the democratic countries. That should be an important determining factor in this problem.
So I maintain this war is going to be fought in Asia. Don’t call it a Third World War. It is just the unfinished business of World War II.
Page 176 →Q: How strong is Mao in his hold on the people? I mean, could we chisel in there in any way?
A: Of all the peoples conquered by world Communism up to date, China is the most civilized. It has the highest civilization of all these Communist-dominated countries—including the fatherland of world Communism. If civilization means anything, I would predict that China, the last to be conquered, may be the first to revolt.
Q: Do you expect a palace revolt, or a mass, guerrilla revolt?
A: You can never expect the unarmed masses to succeed in any revolt. There are still many armed Nationalist forces scattered in various parts of the mainland that make hundreds of thousands of guerrillas. I read the papers of Hong Kong—it is still a British colony where the British tradition of permitting all kinds of newspapers to be published prevails—and I see that not only in the Canton area there are everyday reports of guerrilla activity, but also in Southeastern China, West China and Northwestern China. I read these reports, which somehow get through to be printed in Hong Kong.
So as to what you can do really—
Q: Somebody has to decide whether to give the Chinese people arms or not—
A: That’s right—but, being a democracy, you do not often “decide” until you are forced by events.
Q: How much influence has Chiang with the Chinese people?
A: He still has a great deal. One of the things to remember is that continental China has been living and suffering under Communist rule for a year, two years, or longer—and the people who have had a real taste of Communist rule are beginning to have a much better opinion of Chiang Kai-shek and his Government of more than 20 years.
Mao’s Student Days
Q: What about the use of Mao? Wasn’t he a student of yours?
A: He was an “auditor,” a special student at the National University of Peiping. He couldn’t take the entrance examinations, which are usually quite stiff, but he was allowed to attend classes without credit.
Page 177 →In those days, 1918 and 1919, our University was regarded as the center of new intellectual life. So these students, like Mao, came long distances to be under the inspiration of these new professors. He was poor, so we gave him a job in the library to give him some financial support. He was an eager student, and in those days idealistic. The Communist Party was founded in China in 1921 by 12 men, mostly from the University, on whose faculty I was.
Q: Is this Communist Army a good army, a loyal army?
A: It is hard to say. This army that is fighting MacArthur is mostly from the Fourth Field Army.
Q: Is that the best one?
A: It is the best equipped. It contains from 20 to 30 per cent Korean troops from North Korea. That’s really the strongest army.
In the East there is a great poverty due to inflation. And food is always a problem. People in the Army live better, have better food and therefore they can supply some form of fighting spirit.
Q: Do you expect they will move into Indo-China?
A: There is no doubt of it. There is a fairly large Communist army on the Chinese border of Indo-China.
Good Fortune of Japan
Q: What about Japan?
A: Japan is different, because Japan, after all, is better protected and has the good fortune of being occupied by one occupying power and that means that Japan has had five years of recuperation, compared with Germany, Austria and Korea.
Q: China would oppose any army in Japan, though, probably?
A: I don’t think so. That problem is one of detail. The real problem is not a question of the arming of Japan or the arming of Germany.
Page 178 →Q: What if we should bomb Manchuria?
A: Your Ambassador to China, Dr. [J. Leighton] Stuart, said to me that when Nationalist planes were bombing Nanking, he thought the people would be hating these Nationalists, but to his great surprise when he talked to the people in Nanking, he found them rejoicing that the Nationalists were able to come back at all.
Q: You think the goal of the Communists is to embrace all the rest of Asia—India, for example, as well?
A: Oh, surely—the revolution never stops.
Q: That is Mao’s idea?
A: That is Stalin’s idea.
Q: Don’t you think, though, that lines have been drawn as to where Chinese interests end and Moscow’s begin? For instance, would India fall into China’s sphere or Russia’s sphere?
A: Russia’s, of course.
Q: Does Russia always expect to be dominant?
A: Oh, yes.
Q: How do you think this war is going to end?
A: Nobody knows. I have a feeling that collapse of the Communist gangsters may come sooner than you and I would dare to expect.
Q: You think it would come within China?
A: Within China, within Eastern Europe, and even within Russia.
. 170. This interview was published by U. S. News and World Report on January 19, 1951. An editor’s note was provided in the magazine before the main text of the interview.
