Wairarapa Times-Age SATURDAY, APRIL 10, 1943. PACIFIC WAR POLICY.

Wairarapa Times-Age, 10 April 1943, Page 2

Wairarapa Times-Age SATURDAY, APRIL 10, 1943. PACIFIC WAR POLICY.

QOME observations made not long- ago by the Australian Prime Minister (Mr. Curtin) might have been read as implying that he accepted, though regretfully, the limitations meantime placed on Allied action against Japan in the Pacific. An impression entirely different is conveyed by what is described in a cablegram from Canberra as a special statement by Mr. Curtin supplementing that of General MacArthur on the occasion of the first anniversary of the fall of Bataan. As it is summarised in the cablegram, the federal Piime Minister’s statement appears to be described fairly as . virtually a strong denunciation of the United Nations plan of a holding war in the Pacific.” Mr. Curtin is reported as saying: “Let us hope the Pacific will not become the front where the United Nations lost the war,” as speaking of golden opportunities that have been missed'to deal the Japanese some heavy blows, with the result that “they have been allowed to consolidate and their defeat will now be a longer and harder task” and finally as declaring that: — Australia has shown ready willingness to co-operate in other war theatres, at considerable risk to her own security. Others have decreed that Germany must be beaten first. We must, therefoie, exert every endeavour to ensure that the Pacific does noi. become the lost front. . . . These statements are hardly open to any other interpretation than that Mr. Curtin believes that the Allies, in order to achieve the greatest possible concentration of fighting power against Germany and her satellites in Europe, are refraining from action that might reasonably and wisely be taken against Japan. Whatever the actual facts may be —the ordinary citizen evidently is not in a position to assess them—it is an unhappy and disturbing state of affairs that such a charge should be made, or at all events plainly implied, by one occupying, as Mr. Curtin does, a position of high responsibility. A great many people may feel that the matter should not be allowed to stand at the point to which it has been carried — that it should either be shown that Mr. Curtin is wrong, or the case for increased Allied action against Japan stated in still more explicit terms. It may be observed meantime that the opinions stated by the Federal Prime Minister contrast remarkably with those expressed by the New Zealand Minister to Washington (Mr. Nash) on his return to this country from the United States a few days ago. Mr. Nash declared that: “Merely tp hold what we have in the Pacific and to wage little more than a defensive war against Japan is not part of the strategy of the United Nations,” and added that he was satisfied that the Japanese would get a terrible shock when everything that was being built up was unleashed against them. If Mr. Curtin is right, Mr. Nash is wrong, and vice versa. It is most desirable that some authoritative indication should be given to the extent to which the imperative demands of the war in the Pacific are being met by the Allies. These demands of course have their vital bearing, not only on the security of Australia and New Zealand, but on the total course of the world conflict.