The Charlotte News

Friday, February 14, 1941

TWO EDITORIALS

Site Ed. Note: Perhaps truer and clearer words were never spoken in the times than these from the editorial below: "Yet one thing is clear. The decision [on where to position the U. S. Navy] ought to be taken coolly and promptly. If it is taken after Hitler and Japan have struck, it will be taken in an atmosphere of hysteria which will make that of last Summer look like bovine placidity. Moreover, if the Navy is to fight Japan, it ought not to be kept cooped up at Pearl Harbor until the Japanese are already in action."

The editorial also serves to provide insight to why the Japanese followed the strategy they ultimately did, first hitting Pearl Harbor before hitting the Dutch East Indies, Malaysia, and the Philippines.

This editorial appeared as a rare feature editorial with a two-column width headline.

Crisis Is Shaping Up Which Requires Us To Make Up Our Minds What Our Course Will Be

What the Axis is carrying on at present is undoubtedly the standard war of nerves.

One obvious purpose is to scare Greece into surrendering. Another is to scare Turkey into acquiescence to the invasion of Greece and the seizure of the Dardanelles, the elimination of the British from any foothold on the Continent.

Then there is the purpose of dispersing British forces as widely as possible, and to get in as weakened a condition as possible the concentrations at the point Hitler really means to strike.

And finally there is the purpose to paralyze the United States with the threat of Japan and to appeal to defeatist and appeasement sentiment among us with the theory that it is now too late for us really to do anything--too dangerous to ourselves for it yet to be undertaken.

But behind all this, a genuine campaign is obviously shaping up, also. Somewhere Hitler will strike soon with all his power, and the evidence grows that Japan will act simultaneously to seize the Dutch East Indies and the key to British power in the East, Singapore.

It has gone almost unnoticed because of the uproars in Europe and in Washington, that Japan has established herself in Saigon, as a result of her "mediation" between Thailand and Indo-China, and is now within 500 miles of Singapore, with approaches both by land and sea open to her forces.

Question is whether we will fight to halt the Japanese. Secretary Hull has all but pledged as much. We are legally and morally bound to defend the Philippines--something which will become very difficult or impossible if Japan is allowed to establish herself at Singapore and in the Dutch Indies. It is plainly against our interest to allow Japan to set up an empire of half the people of the world to dominate the Pacific.

On the other hand, and leaving aside the kind of isolationist who believes that we can be saved by imitating the tortoise's method of defense, there is some good argument for the idea that the crucial fight now is in the Atlantic and that the Navy ought to be kept available for action there--either in company with England or alone after and if England falls.

The decision plainly is not one for laymen--either for Congress or the President--but for the Navy in consultation with the State Department.

Yet one thing is clear. The decision ought to be taken coolly and promptly. If it is taken after Hitler and Japan have struck, it will be taken in an atmosphere of hysteria which will make that of last Summer look like bovine placidity. Moreover, if the Navy is to fight Japan, it ought not to be kept cooped up at Pearl Harbor until the Japanese are already in action.

Manila is of dubious use as a base; Singapore will be badly needed. And if the Japanese are allowed first to invest it, the Navy will have to fight its way in under great handicap because of the shortness of fuel. Unless, indeed, it approaches by way of Australia--which means an enormous further extension of supply lines.

However, the chances that the decision will actually be taken in coolness and foresight is slight. The isolationists and partisans in Congress will see to that.

Laws Forbidding Strikes Are Best Way To Get Disunity

In the Indiana Legislature a bill has been introduced which would virtually outlaw all kinds of strikes and picketing. The Maryland Legislature has a bill to make a strike in any national defense industry--and nearly all industry can be made to fit under that classification--a felony, punishable by five years' imprisonment. The Georgia Legislature is considering a bill to make it a felony for a person to solicit money from any person seeking work or already employed on any project financed in any part by tax money.

A dozen other legislatures are considering similar measures.

All of which is an unhappy symptom. If there is anything which is guaranteed to destroy national unity and to split the country wide open in this time of crisis, it is the attempt to use the national defense as an excuse to coerce labor. Or even anything which would give labor ground for suspicion on the score.

Labor has its responsibilities in the emergency. And a better method of settling labor disputes is plainly needed--something, say, on the order of the railroad labor laws, with a fact-finding board and period of compulsory delay before a strike is resorted to. But the thing ought to be done by act of Congress rather than by the legislatures, to avoid confusion and insure restraint.

In any case, the attempt to outlaw strikes altogether won't work and is certain to breed bitterness and division. Let us hope the legislatures have the sense to recognize the fact and kill all these bills.