If the Kwangtung provincial government persists in its reported refusal to establish a neutral zone outside the city of Canton, for the reasons reported by Reuter, in a cable printed in another column, it will lose much of the sympathy at present felt for the people of that city which has been so ruthlessly bombed during the past few days. Official sources are quoted as saying that the creation of such a zone "would not prevent Japanese aeroplanes from machine-gunning or dropping bombs on refugees within the zone, as the Japanese forces failed to discriminate between safety and non-safety zones while conducting military operations in Nanking and Shanghai." It is a great pity that the word "propaganda" originally created for the purpose of describing the committee of Roman Catholic cardinals: in charge of foreign missions, should by recently past and present usage have come -to mean something which is almost despicable. Thus while the Japanese are guilty of much for which they are severely criticized, and rightly so, allegations that their forces failed to discriminate between safety and non-safety zones in Shanghai and Nanking are so widely divergent from the truth that they deserve to be swiftly branded for what they are. The establishment of the Jacquinot zone in Shanghai was the means of saving thousands of Chinese refugees from either immediate death in the course of warfare, or from slower extinction by means of starvation. There was some difficulty in persuading both the Japanese and the Chinese to agree to the establishment of such a zone, but it speaks well for both sides that, once the possibilities of such a scheme were brought home to them, they agreed to permit this work of mercy to be put in hand, and a sanctuary was afforded for those many thousands who could not be accommodated in either the French Concession or the International Settlement. It should be placed on record that once the Jacquinot zone was brought into being the" Japanese authorities scrupulously observed its existence, and apart from some very minor incidents the area set aside in the Native City was kept inviolate.
To a lesser degree this is also true of Nanking. There were, it is true, some infringements of the neutrality of the zone there, but if blame is to be apportioned for what happened there during the heat of the fighting the Chinese themselves would not escape scatheless. When the Japanese were in command of the city there were even then infringements of the zone's neutrality whi gave ground for very grave comment, but it is clear that these incidents did not occur with the consent, or at the wish of the Japanese authorities, and again it is urged that they kept to the letter of their engagement as far as conditions permitted. In the main it is not true to state that the Japanese failed to discriminate between safety and non-safety zones in these two cities, and most certainly so far as the Native City of Shanghai is concerned there is the evidence of those thousands still remaining in the area to prove that the Japanese acted with propriety. When the proposal for the creation of a similar safety zone was mooted in the south, it was reported that the Japanese spokesman in Hongkong said he believed that the Japanese Government would give such a suggestion sympathetic consideration. There is no reason whatever to believe that he formed a wrong estimate of what would have been his Government's attitude, and the question ought to have been explored in the interests of those hundreds of thousands of Chinese, who even, now run daily risks from the repeated aerial bombardment of the City of Rams. When such ruthless bombing as that which has been carried out on Canton is in operation it is the duty of the authorities responsible to take such steps as will ensure the greatest possible safety for the civilians thus exposed to risk. That this is the case is evident from what is happening in Great Britain, where schemes for the evacuation of the non-essential civ lion population from big cities liable to air attack are under consideration.
The Chinese authorities do not fulfil their responsibility to their own people merely by insisting that the Japanese are doing something wrong, and yet making no effort to save their own people from all the disaster which is being inflicted. It is not sufficient to allege that the Japanese are offending all sense of humanity, and do nothing to mitigate the evils which are being visited upon the unfortunate Chinese civilians. If it is at all possible to establish zones, wherein the civilian population of Canton can expect to be reasonably safe, it is the paramount duty of the Chinese authorities to do so. Failure to take such precautions involves the Chinese officials responsible if a certain degree of bloodguiltiness, and to endeavour to excuse that failure by alleging that if such precautions were taken they would be useless anyhow, because of what the Japanese are wrongly alleged to have done elsewhere, will in no way reduce the stigma which such failure necessarily involves. Chinese propaganda has been so clever in the past, and so successful that there appears to be a danger that those in control of it will overreach themselves.
That appears to be the case in this instance. To neglect obvious measures because of an assumed conviction that owing to an alleged inherent vice in the Japanese they would be of no avail is merely to evade a very imperative duty. If there is any. method whereby the Chinese authorffies can minimize the death and suffering which is being inflicted upon the people of Canton the obligation is definitely upon them to adopt it. Half-truths, untruths or even prevarication cannot justify any other course, and if there are any means whatever whereby a great degree of safety can be provided for non-combatants in and around Canton it will be a lasting reproach upon the authorities in charge if steps are not taken accordingly. The question of the establishment of a safety zone for Canton should be investigated. It was solved successfully in Shanghai and more or less successfully in Nanking, and there is no reason, given the same amount of goodwill, which prevailed in these areas, in the south, why much of the present tragic suffering should not be mitigated.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.