The Daily Worker Newspaper, February 6, 1926, Page 12

Vite, By James H. Dolsen. HE struggle between England and Germany for control of the Bag- dad railway was one of the most im- portant of those clashes in imperialist policy which led to the world war. Is the struggle for control of the Chinese Eastern railway to play a correspond- ing role—not as between two im- perialist systems, this time, but as between imperialism on one hand and the anti-imperialist Soviet Union—as ‘suggested by the drama of events which in the Far East are so rapidly leading to a new world conflict? The arbitrary arrest of Ivanov,'the Russian general manager of that road, ~ by Chang Tso Lin, the Chinese military dictator of Manchuria, in utter viola- tion of treaties signed by Chang him- self, the despatch of an ultimatum of this subject by the Soviet govern- nrent, and the subsequent release of Ivanov, reveal the existence of such a struggle, and its close connection withthe effort of the great imperialist powers to obtain an advantageous yosition in China from which to launch another attack upon the workers re- “public. “It is well known that the Japanese government owns Chang so Lin, and that in recent months he has received financial assistance from he British also. The former bandit hief would hardly have dared defy the Soviet government unless assured the backing of outside powers. His hasty release of Ivanov does not at all contradict this inference. It mere- ly indicates that the situation from an imperialist standpoint, did not mo- mentarily present favorable condi- tions for a war against the Soviet Union. The crisis, therefore, is only temporarily overcome. The importance of the Chinese Eastern railway in the struggle over China is evident from a reference to the map. This line was originally z'anned as a division of the Trans- Siberian system. In 1896 a conces- sion for its construction was secured from the Chinese government by the Russo-Chinese bank, which then re- presented the interests of Russian and French finance capital in the orient. The first plans for the Trans- Siberian railway provided that it should pass thru Russian territory only. A section of nearly 500 miles had been constructed from Vladivo- stok to Khabarovsk thru the valley of the Ussuri river, which is the east- ern boundary of Manchuria. It was discovered then that the completion of the line to Chita, the terminus of the Trans-Siberian road at that time, would entail enormous expense and most difficult engineering because of the wild mountainous character of part of the route and the stretches of marsh land in other portions. This section of Siberia, moreover, was ‘sparsely populated, with little prospec: ‘ of its ever being thickly settled. So having secured the concession for a line direct to Vladivostok thru the “hinese province of Mechuria, work was rushed on this p*- ect instead. It was completed in 1902 as the Chinese eastern railway. It runs for 222 miles thru Siberian territory and for 1080 miles, thru Chinese. Between the years 1908 and 1916 the Ussuri railway from Vladivostok to Khabarovsk was extended, roughly paralleling the Amur and Shilka riv- ers, and joining the Trans-Siberian line at Chita. A glance at the map will show the superiority of the Chi- nese Eastern railway for all traffic bound for Vladivostok, the great Rus- sian seaport on the Pacific. Less than one-half as long as its rival to the north, it affords an immense saving both in time and expense, It traverses, besides, a country of infinitely greater natural resources with a fast-growing population. If the reader will again look at the map he will see that a railroad runs from Harbin, a junction point on the main line of the Chinese Eastern, southwest thru. Mukden to Port Arthur. This was originally a branch of the Chinese Eastern but, as a result of Russia’s defeat in 1905, Japan was given a lease of that -part of this line which*runs from Chang- chun to Port Arthur. The Japanese renamed their portion, which then totaled 514 miles, “The South Man- Nee ened ‘ a Chinese Eastern Railwa churian Railway.” The section north ‘rom Changchun to Harbin remained part of Chinese Eastern railway sys- tem, Certain facts must be kept in mind in considering the role which rail- ways, such as the Chinese Eastern, play in undeveloped countries like China, Domination of railroads in these lands carries with it control of the economic development of the country traversed. This includes the exploitation of mineral wealth, the erection and maintenance of facto- ries, and the extension of commerce. It necessarily establishes a- semi- political regime over the inhabitants by the concessionaires, thus setting up a “state within..a state.” It was this kind of ‘penetration’ which marked in particular the relationships of the foreign powers to China during the first decade of this century. A na- tural consequence then of the transfer to Japan in 1905 of Russia’s conces- sions in Manchuria, including the control of the railway (South Man- churian), has been to make the Japa-- nese the real. masters of that province. Japan has the right of policing the railway. It has been easy for the im- perialist government of that country to use this privilege as a cloak for the permanent stationing of thou- sands of regular soldiers at the strategic points along the line. This constitutes a formidable army of oc- cupation, tho the sovereignty of China is still nominally recognized. Manchuria has thus come to be vir- tually a province of Japan. In fact, the Japanese have gone so far as to incorporate the South Manchurian railway into the Korean railway sys- tem, putting the line under direct Japanese government control, for Korea is now an integral part of the Japanese empire. Chang Tso Lin, the Chinese military governor, is, as we have stated before, a tool of Japan, and for that reason and because of his extreme cruelty to the workers and the nationalist! adherents; is dit- terly hated by the masses of the Chinese. It thus happens that_a number of the imperialist powers have “claims” effecting the Chinese Eastern railway or have concessions in that part of China adjacent to the country it traverses. For these reasons’ the treaty between China and _ Soviet Russia negotiated by Karakhan in 1924, which specifically excluded all other nations from any voice in the administration of the railway, met with the bitter opposition of the European powers, Japan, and the United States. France objected on the ground that because her financiers owned a ma- ority of the shares of the Ruswo- Asiatic Bank, the successor of the Russo-Chinese Bank, which had ori- sinally secured the concession, they should dictate the policy of the rail- way. The shares on which the French claim was based had been stolen, however, by the former chief of a department of the Rusian State Bank and handed over by the latter to the administration of the Russo-Asiatic Bank in Paris. During the period when Soviet Russia was carrying on the struggle against foreign interven- tion, this bank as the owner of the railroad concluded in 1920 an agree- ment with China by the terms of which it appointed five members of the administrative staff and the bank jointly with the Chinese government managed the line. M. Mikhaylov, writing in the Inter- national Press Correspondence (Oct. 16, 1924) thus characterizes the period from 1920 to 1924 when the railroad was under this French control: “The whole activity of the Russo- Asiatic Bank with regard to the railway was carried on in opposi- tion to the interests of the Soviet Union and China. In 1922 the ad- ministration of the Chinese-Eastern railway concluded an agreement with the (Japanese) South Man- churian railway, according to which all goods traffic was to be sent via Dairen and not via Viadivostok, aithough the Vladivostok route is. considerably shorter (180 kilo- metres) than the Dairen route, The hostility of the administration of the eastern Chinese Eastern rail- way towards the Soviet Union found expression in the fact that the ad- ministration took Into Its service white-guardists such as General ' Gondatti, the former czarist gover nor of the Amur district; Mikhai- lov, the former finance minister to Kolchak; General Aphanassyev ete., while it supported the white guardist press and Inclted Chinese authori- ties_against the citizens-and institu- tions of the Soviet Union. But at the same time the activity of the old administration of the railway was directed against the interests of China. General Gondatti, who ‘Was the head of the~ land depart- ment of the railway, conceded, under very easy terms, to Japanese Goncessionaries plots of land situa- ted at various strategical points of northern China.” In 1924 this administration pre- pared an agreement with the Kokusy- Unso, a Japanese transportation com- pany. If this agreement had been carried out it would have handed all the transportation facilities in Man- churia over to Japan, and linked them up as integral parts of the great steamship lines of that country. Com- bined with the fact that Japan in recent years has made enormous in- vestments in Manchuria it is evident that the proposed arrangement would have made the Japanese the complete masters of northern China. “Simultaneously with these negotia- tions,” :) 1s Mikhaylov, “a large dele- gatioy-of representatives from the Japanese state railways, from the ministry of transport and the war Office, in the course of two weeks made a tour of the whole line, making itself acquainted with the workshops, rolling stock and the work of the administration ete.” Thus were the French and Japanese imperialists working together to de- fraud the Chinese of their rights in the railroad and to alienate from China its northern provinces, £} ThesWagh tig ten 'cohifiienée in 1922 had,’ against “China’s protests, held her. responsible to the foreign bond- holders, stockholders, and creditors of the railway in the event of defaults, This resolution was Passed by the representatives of the United States, Belgium, Great Britain, France, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, and Portugal, hone of which had any real rights in the line. The United States and Japan had each advanced the Chinese Kast- ern railway $5,000,000 during the time their drive to overthrow the Soviets in Siberia. In addition, the Japanese- controlled South Manchurian railway (formerly a part of the Chinese East- ern railway) claims a debt of several millions. In 1924 the American mili- tary attache at Pekin, accompanied by officers of the United States gen- eral staff,-inspected the Chinese East- ern railway which, it will be recalled, had been placed in 1919, during the Siberian, intervention under the ad- ministrative direction of the inter- allied technical commission headed by the American engineer, John W. Stevens. It is no wonder that under these circumstances the imperialist powers put every possible obstacle in the way of carrying out the Provisions of the Chinese treaty with the Soviet Union. The subsequent success of Comrade Karakhan in negotiating an additional treaty ‘covering the same y - By James H. Dolsen points with Chang Tso Lin, whose position as director of Manchuria made him practically independent of the central government, and thru whose territory. most of the road passed, was one of the most notable achievements of Soviet diplomacy, gained as it was in the face of the most unscrupulous .opposition, from the other powers, «- ; Y The Russo-Chinese .treaty | provided not only for the exclusion. of, the representatives of other nations from a voice in the management of the railroad but also made specific ar- rangements for its executive staff. These were included in a, supple- mental agreement which provided that until China should exercise its right to buy back the line with its own money, a stipulation designed to guard against the road’s. passing under the control of a hostile country thru its becoming security for a loan to China, the operation of the rail- road was to be vested in an executive department composed of three Rus- sians and two Chinese, appointed by their respective governments. This committee has charge of the main- tenance of peace and order in the territory traversed; in other words, it has control of the policing of the line. An operating department com- prising a Russian director, with a Chinese and a Russian assistant, superintends the operation of the line. As a matter of fact, the new provi- sions for the management of the road practically confirmed the existing status with the significant exception that the Soviet government’s ap pointees were to replace those Rus- sians who had been originally put in charge by the Russo-Asiatic bank. Ostroumov, Gondatti, and Mikhailov, leading members of the former ad- ministration, were at once removed, together with more than 500 other reactionary refugees who had. been placed on the railroad’s payroll. These three men, .Ostroumov,, Gondat- ti-and Mikhailoy, ;were:-also, arrested for mismanagement and their many crimes against.the workers. Clauses in the treaty, together with this de- ciding voice given the Soviet govern- ment in the administration of the railway, deprived the extensive “white” Russian bands, composed of refugee aristocrats and bourgeois who had fled from Russia after the Bolshe- vik revolution, of a base of operations and thus led to the breakup and dis- persal of these gangs of cutthroats and murderers. The conflict for control of the Chinese Eastern railway is by no means over. Soviet Russia, by- her prompt and decisive action, has won a preliminary skirmish. She won it, however, only for three reasons: The first, because the red army is ready for action and Chang Tso Lin and his allies know it; the second, because the imperialist powers, and particularly Japan, are not yet ready and thoroly enough united to risk a conflict of such proportions; and the third, because of the’ danger of a vast Chinese uprising in support of the Soviet Union and with the object of freeing China completely from its foreign shackles. There is perhaps a fourth reason—the danger of pre- cipitating another world-war under conditions unfavorable to the cap italist nations, —_—— Can a “working stiff’ write? YOU CAN IF YOU TRY ' Much of the best material in Communist newspapers is written by work- ers themselves. The DAILY WORKER is YOUR paper. Make it the megaphone thru which you tell your fellow workers thruout the world what you think and what you experience. Write for the New Magazine Supplement of The DAILY WORKER, Write one one side of the paper only. Put your full address on the manu script. Send it to Robert Minor, Editor Magazine Section, Daily Worker, 1113 W. Washington Bivd., Chicago, III. ; ‘