Chapter 11 10. Changes in Japan and China and their impact

Japan's entry into the European civilization system has fully demonstrated its excellent qualities.For the general good, China must be kept open to European and American ways of life and thinking, by force if necessary. Since the above text was written, analytical forecasts as long-term perceptions of political issues have gradually been replaced by perceptions of a more concrete image of the current situation as it changes from time to time.The common danger of a colossal catastrophe that would lead to great destruction forced European countries to recognize their alignment of interests in Asia.So far, European nations' perception of their interests in Asia has been at odds with the standards of behavior that we have agreed upon in an era of progress, because of stale conservative notions.

As the direct successors of their blood and ideas, the American people are undoubtedly closely connected with the European family.More meaningfully, the same is true of Japan, whose entry into the European civilization system has fully demonstrated its excellent qualities, because carrying out such a transformation in good faith is actually a difficult thing to do and requires a lot of determination.Japan did not ignore or denigrate its own ethnic characteristics and historical traditions, but at the same time it wisely saw the merits of foreign things and incorporated them into its own operating system and ideology.The ingenuity that Japan has shown can only be disconcerting if only apparent material progress constituted the whole of Japan's development.It is good to recognize that Japan has gradually evolved to show an openness to the ideas that permeate our rationality and morality.We can think about whether we don't see soil suitable for wasabi seeds to take root, germinate and grow into big trees in Japan.Seeing Japan change, the nations of the Asian continent will seek to renew themselves by relying on the same forces of change.

The transformation of Japan is a repetition of the experience of our Teutonic ancestors, influenced by Roman polity and Christianity.The benefits which European civilization has brought to Japan and to us today make it reasonable to assume that it has not entered into a state of political and moral decay.This kind of decay had happened to Rome, and Christianity, which had begun to spread at that time, could not obviously restrain it.Therefore, the vitality of European countries and the United States has not weakened, but is developing in a positive direction. This is very good for us and Japan to play a role in Asia.However, compared with the great changes in Japan's material appearance, the penetration of Christendom's ideas in Japan was not long, and therefore it has not yet reached the point of perfection, so that it can exert its own influence.Therefore, Japan still needs to promote and encourage the absorption of foreign ideas with the help of visible material success.These ideas lie just beneath the surface of matter, and it takes effort to recognize and understand them; but only through long practice and the transformative power of new ideas can I truly own them.For this reason, Japan must be open-minded, not forced by external pressure, but willing from the bottom of its heart.If Japan does, it will be treated kindly by European governments.The latter do not want to see a copy of themselves in Japan, which will be a false imitation, but hope that the same forces that have benefited us so much can also rejuvenate an Asian nation from the inside out.What exactly makes one country different from another?The continuous and steady development of European countries indicates two factors: first, domestic progress and personal perfection; second, a positive response to external influences, the absence of which portends, if not the beginning of, its imminent decline. arrival.

In Japan, and only in Japan at the moment, we see the welcome of European culture in Asia.If a tree may be judged by the fruit it bears, then in this welcoming attitude we also see the great hope of the Japanese people in realizing the conditions which will most enhance their happiness.This condition is individual freedom, which, combined with appropriate legal constraints, can meet the needs of promoting general welfare.In the characteristics of Japan that made its receptivity very different from that of Asians on the mainland, we may detect the influence of the insular environment that facilitated the evolution of a strong national identity.In the same environment there is also an exhilarating force to be found.With this force, the new political system that Japan has adopted and benefited from can be extended in other Asian countries, and Japan, which has learned a lot from European developments, can also serve as a model for Asia.Only the security and isolation brought about by island status can give a country a strong personality, and this affects a country more than other qualities.A strong personality should not be equated with stagnation, let alone determination and paranoia.But the deep-rooted social conservatism in Asian countries is negative and harmful.Although stone can be extremely hard, weathering can make it weaker.Stones do not live or die or blossom and bear fruit, but erosion keeps them in a state of self-transformation.

While the urgency of the situation is clear and constrains the powers to act toward a common goal with equal focus on China in all European powers, as well as in the United States and Japan, it remains clear that the policies that have been pursued for nations are only On the surface it looks a bit off.In essence, the situation has not changed decisively.The brutality of the Beijing government and the misfortune suffered by Christian missionaries in China refers to the Boxer Rebellion.It's just that the well-known possibilities lurking beneath the surface are revealed in surprising ways.What is even more indisputable is that little has changed in the East, both nationally and personally.What happened in China this year could have happened in the East a thousand years ago because the East has been standing still.The same thing can happen to us, revealing the hidden cruelty in all of us.However, such things are much less likely to happen here than they were five hundred years ago, and are much less condoned, and less likely to be the behavior of the government and the more rational parts of our society .They are more the product of a fear concealed in an indifference not entirely uncommon even in the most backward parts of civilized Christianity; The distribution of regions is much narrower, and it does not become the general atmosphere of the whole society from the government down.

Despite the recent events in China that have temporarily affected the behavior of states, the fundamental situation that determines the policies of states has not changed because it is largely determined outside of China on a global scale from east to west status.The shared injustice now compels nations to honor China's crimes with tangible, concerted action and demand assurances of never repeating them.In taking these actions, countries have suspended competing interests and masked political differences with common guidelines in order to achieve common goals in this emergency through the imposition of just punishment.However, once these things are in the past, countries will certainly not turn a blind eye to the fact that those things that were replaced by more urgent situations continue to exist.Nonetheless, countries can benefit from not forgetting the past, which clearly teaches us powerfully that mutual antagonism and conflicting interests are only part of the story.Under the current situation, European countries have realized that their interests in Asia are both consistent and conflicting.This consistency is reflected in the need for countries to integrate Asian countries into the family of Christian countries, and not resort to external chains, but through internal progress.From both ideological and practical perspectives, this idea is fully meaningful in protecting the interests of all countries.It is aimed at the distant future, and its goal is not a dream, but is consistent with a general process that is constantly adjusted to specific events.

The U.S. government has not only realized, but has recently expressed in writing the following two complementary, but seemingly contradictory, understandings: one is the need to emphasize our rights and protect our interests from infringement; It is to respect the Chinese government and China's independence.This is completely consistent with the view that we have a duty to assist the Chinese government and people to transform and redefine their country's living conditions with our full sympathy and necessary active assistance, rather than unreasonable interference.The U.S. government’s statement to this effect is significant because, while it undoubtedly addresses recent events, its main intent is to demonstrate non-interference in China.This attitude is an emphasis on the general tendency of our people for a long time, but according to the recent new situation, it has made specific responsibilities and policy regulations.A good mix of idealism and pragmatic flair for transcending past and present rationality can be seen in the American position.The latter enables the former to fully take into account the imperatives and be modified by them.It is like a sailor turning the rudder around an unmarked shoal ahead; waiting until he sees deep water and then resuming course in the direction he wants to go.

All of the above demonstrate the ingenuity of America's leadership, so that we can have confidence in the future.Still, the events of recent turbulent times warrant special attention for the general public, who are in fact the ultimate judges of the actions of leaders.By examining the signs of the present age we can at once know what opportunities and consequently tasks they give us.We need to live up to these responsibilities, not only for ourselves, but for future generations, with whom we have a trustee-client relationship.Our leaders cannot act in disregard of the general will of the people; and if these wills are closely related to reality, leaders must strive to understand reality as it is; and estimate trends based on manifestations.This is a double process: one is to observe reality, and the other is to draw reasonable inferences.It is the knowledge and practical conclusions derived from this process that define the general direction of national decision-making.With these, the actions of the state are secured, and the government can be safely left to deal with its daily affairs, and a government with the unwavering support of the people will be stronger in this world.The general public, including us, is often complained of capriciousness, not because we are inherently fickle, but because reality often takes on different appearances, resulting in ever-changing perceptions and moods.The solution to this can only be through hard thinking to actually recognize reality.

So what are these realities in sum?At the close of the present century, events have taken place in such a way that world commerce has become the competition of all the great nations.Some countries may not dare to dream of becoming a commercial hegemony, but each country wants to increase or at least maintain its share of commercial income, and this depends not only on the domestic production capacity of a country, but also on the widest possible world. ability to exchange freely.In commercial competition, most countries are dissatisfied with their natural resources, while some countries have obvious advantages in this respect, such as the United States, which has abundant raw materials and the ability to use them.In this way, from a purely commercial point of view, countries start out with clear advantages and disadvantages.The differences determined by the state of natural resources are relatively difficult to eliminate, and will not be changed by people's urgency.As a result, many countries try to promote prosperity by expanding their territories and establishing their own commercial advantages in the areas they control.Doing so would require either outright annexation or the development of overwhelming political power; both of which would imply the use of coercive power, which would provoke resistance because other countries would not want their rights taken away by force .In this way, competition is transformed into conflict, not a commercial competition, but military power on land or sea becomes a means of struggle.

Within the European and American regions, territorial tenure is generally well-established and assured, and any possible border changes would not significantly alter global business dynamics.The mainland of Australia has also been occupied, and the political affiliation of the islands in the surrounding seas has been determined by arrangements among civilized nations.The same is true with very few exceptions on the continent of Africa, where commercial relations are manipulated by countries that already have secure and unchallenged rights there.Commercially, though, the sparseness and backwardness of its inhabitants made Africa irrelevant.

So now only Asia is left.The previous article has discussed the situation in Asia from the perspective of world politics. The results of the discussions contained in the different conclusions should be summarized here, so as to better promote our investigation, especially the investigation around the US policy.As mentioned above, the region of Asia is currently in political turmoil, and thus susceptible to profound changes by external influences; geographically, it lies roughly between 30 and 40 degrees north In China, there are Asian Turkey, Persia, Afghanistan and most of the Chinese Empire including most of the Yangtze River Valley.In the north and south of the above two latitudes, Britain and Russia hold dominant and stable political power respectively.Because of the nature of the military power over which commercial control predominates, the one is based mainly on land, the other on sea.It has also been pointed out that the fundamental question of seeking commercial control in the Far East by means of political infiltration rather than purely commercial competition as opposed to it was swaying the rivalry between sea power and land power.Within the Asian continent, as far as Asian problems are concerned, the role of military power is typically reflected in Russia and Britain.These two countries respectively have the largest army and navy in the world, and their methods of developing commerce are also in sharp contrast. One advocates free trade, and the other advocates monopoly by absolutely abolishing the rights of other countries or obtaining extraordinary privileges. . It was also mentioned that some of the other powers outside the Asian continent, including the United States, had territorial conditions that made them naval states in terms of military power, and were aligned with Britain in a general policy rather than a formal alliance sense.They are very similar to the British in both their goals and the means to achieve them; and, like the British, they lack the capability to use military power adequately in the interior of China due to their geographical remoteness and key interests in other parts of the world.This shortcoming, although it has existed for a long time, has now been confirmed more convincingly.But the United States is less affected than Europe: because it is closer to East Asia by the shortest sea routes; Huge and growing; also because we have a base in Asia, the Philippines, which is at sea, as far away as China from Europe, and has significance for our defense.However, the breadth of the Pacific Ocean, which is as long as the distance between South Africa and Great Britain, makes it difficult for us to conduct military operations in East Asia, and must prompt us to avoid it as much as possible.Although Japan is very close to the Asian continent, its limited size, population and wealth will inevitably limit its power for a long time. For the reasons stated above, all maritime powers, if they are to achieve their commercial ends, must make full use of their advantages, not by a show of force, though more or less violent.The most obvious and convincing manifestation of this advantage is in business and the benefits derived from it.With the help of commerce, we can hope that morality and spirituality can be spread; and once a person has these, he will despise material pleasures and believe that people do not live only for bread, and from this we must see the signs of the Asian revival. hope.At present, with the exception of Russia and its allied France, other countries competing for dominance in Asia, especially China, are basically backed by sea power in a broad sense.On the one hand, sea power is reflected in maritime commerce.Maritime states expect to benefit from commerce and influence China through mutual benefits; on the other hand, sea power also manifests itself in naval military operations on the sea and navigable waterways.The maritime powers rely on these to maintain their position and rights in trade with China, and to guard against attempts to drive them out of China, in whole or in part, by gradual encroachment or outright use of force, and to limit their freedom of trade.In view of this attempt, the military and political features of the general situation have been discussed above and will not be repeated here, with one exception. The only exception to this is the Yangtze River Basin.In the author's opinion, the Yangtze River Basin is extremely important politically and commercially, and a few words need to be emphasized for this.The Yangtze River goes deep into the mainland of China, and large ships can go directly up the main section of the Yangtze River from the sea.The vast area of ​​the Yangtze River Basin also relies on the Yangtze River for convenient communication with the outside world.Geographically, the Yangtze River lay between the north and the south of China, thus influencing both the distribution of goods and the conduct of warfare.Therefore, once the influence is established in the Yangtze River Basin, it will have advantages in the mainland of China, and can freely and stably communicate with the sea through the Yangtze River; and the commercial advantages in the Yangtze River area will strengthen other advantageous positions.Taken together, whoever owns the center of the Chinese Empire, the Yangtze River Basin, will have the most considerable political authority.For these reasons, external maritime states should actively and effectively exert influence on the Yangtze River Basin, and the benefits that China obtains from this will be spread to the whole country more widely and in a balanced manner.Drop a seed in the Yangtze River Valley, and it will bear a hundred times the fruit, and thirty times the harvest in other areas. Still, commercial expansion and the benefits that flow from it are only part of what is driving European countries to pressure China today.The contact and mutual influence of Eastern and Western civilizations cannot be ignored forever, nor should communication between them be delayed by disputes over the right to non-interference and the right of so-called independent nations to conduct their own internal affairs.This process of interaction has already begun and can neither be reversed nor stopped.So what we can actively do is steer the process and try to achieve an environment in which the two civilizations are free to exert their respective influences, just as the motive for economic gain drives people unhindered.Countries have insisted that China grant the right to buy and sell freely, and do not deny that the Chinese must trade with us, but they can completely determine their actions by the profit motive that applies to human beings.In this way, we can also demand that our ideas can spread freely in China, and Chinese people have the freedom to exchange ideas.Of course it's not about forcing them to listen or even accept anything.No valid objection can be found against the latter claim, which is indistinguishable from the former trade claim.If the only great benefit we get is the opening of China to commerce, then on the one hand China will be rich and powerful because of the material benefits we provide to it; The lack of an accurate understanding of the spiritual and moral force of social behavior, and its elusive application of the aforementioned benefits, means great danger to us and to China.Of course, our failure to live up to our principles in political and social life does not invalidate them, and it must be acknowledged that sometimes we gain by not following them well; Our mistakes will undoubtedly prevent us from reaching perfection.Looking at history, we may be encouraged that the influence of men who were true to their ideals has been powerfully at work, though much remains to be done. It appears that in dealing with the China question, the primary objectives are: 1) to prevent any external state or group of states from becoming politically dominant; 2) to insist on an open door, and in a broader sense.That is to say, China should be open not only to business, but also to European ideas and European teachers from various fields, but the latter should come to China voluntarily, not as agents of a certain government.In practical terms, exerting ideological influence on China is far better than merely giving it commercial advantages; It is indeed a dangerous thing to be educated by the just and noble ideas above.Therefore, the strong opposition to missionary activities is of course extremely absurd, which completely deviates from the pursuit of peaceful development and progress.In Europe, Christianity and Christian teachings functioned as much in the spiritual and moral spheres as any philosophical or scientific work, and together constituted European civilization.Although opinions differ on the nature and extent of Christian influence in Europe based on both quantitative and qualitative estimates, it is undeniable that the influence did exist.From a purely political point of view, Christian ideas and teachings have the same right to enter China as any other forms of European activities, and some Chinese people's offense to Christianity should not be regarded as a reasonable reason to exclude Christianity from China.The construction of railways is not a Christian activity, but it offends many Chinese people, but they dare not speak out because this behavior has been allowed by their government; All ears to Christians.Every step forward in China's trade opening has been achieved through pressure, and the most important means of pressure is war.Commerce makes its way by violence, direct or indirect, and ideas, whether secular or Christian, claim only to spread by freedom of speech. Since the current world history is at a very critical period, and the long-term trend of change in China is also at a turning point that will determine the future prospects, it is absolutely necessary for the citizens of the United States to seriously consider the role of their country in China. What role to play and how to prepare for it.This preparation is both goal and ability.The preparation of goals is a spiritual and moral process, which makes us first formulate what is just and what is wrong, and then carefully choose a course of action, that is, form a policy, which is rough but clear in purpose.Capability preparation is a material act, including two related elements: first, necessary military preparations; second, reducing obligations according to the actual needs of the political situation.This allows us to save power and replenish it where necessary to increase the intensity. We should give our undivided attention to the two main dimensions of policy and capacity.As far as China is concerned, recent shocking events there have prompted our government to issue a declaration of its aims and principles, stating that we will continue, and will continue, the policies embodied in past actions.For our people, the first thing they need to do now is not to imagine a new policy, but to think about whether our past policies conform to their conscience, whether they conform to their sense of right and wrong, and whether they reflect their expectations for reality.According to my understanding, the current policy of our country can be described as follows: We insist on obtaining equal business rights, and at the same time, we will strive to respect China's territorial integrity and the right to independently choose its own policies and political systems, and we will not interfere in China's internal affairs affairs, unless something intolerable on an international scale occurs. However, when clarifying this policy, we cannot avoid the fact that this policy is not consistent with the policies of other countries expressed through specific actions and basic trends.These differences are nothing to be surprised about, but they must not be taken lightly, and must be considered as factors that affect our policies.This kind of influence is not manifested in shaking our basic principles or specific policies toward China; rather, it manifests in the fact that we need to be fully prepared for these differences and judge which minor foreign issues are not worth taking too seriously.It is self-inflicted trouble to be unnecessarily over-involved in minor issues, and the resulting side effects only get in the way of our interests or that of humanity in general. In short, we have no certainty of gaining the commercial benefits that come with the opening of the door unless we make due efforts to open China; Unless we are willing not only to exert moral leverage, but if necessary, do not hesitate to counter with material resources any arbitrary action that crowds out our commerce and diminishes our influence.We believe, and have reason to believe, that our influence is just, emanating from a nation that respects the right of other peoples to determine their own destiny and to promote their own beliefs as far as possible.However, if we are to play an effective role in China, we must make China's representatives understand that we have both the willingness and the ability to help them resist any request beyond reasonable limits. It is the general interest of the world, from which we cannot separate without loss.These principles can only be embodied in specific situations, but we can first affirm them in a general sense, making them our guide to action and common understanding to others.It is in this spirit that our government recently sent statements to foreign governments. I want to tell those countries that have received the above statement that the US government cannot allow the China issue to run its course.China should be willing to accept correct political views and profound ideas from outside and integrate them into its own, so as to realize the due changes from within.It is impossible for a country to appear or be reborn in one day; it is impossible to make the excellent qualities embodied in an individual possessed by a national organization simply by external pressure.The process of change only begins within and is conditional on its inherent or implanted vitality.However, today's China does not yet have the internal motivation to self-renew, consciously absorb and digest spiritual nutrition from the outside world, while Japan at least roughly possessed this point half a century ago.Of course, external pressure did force Japan to make changes, but the Japanese did not take the initiative to seek the stimulation of pressure.Japan has only once rejected foreign ideas, while China, even after having had a long period of contact with the outside world, continues to oppose the absorption of things that can sweep away its dead breath.Resisting the reactionary wave which is currently intensifying in China, whose aim is to sever contact with the only possible source of vitality, is both legitimate and entirely necessary.In the general interest, China must be opened, by force if necessary, to European and American ways of life and thinking.China doesn't have to drink water, but it should at least allow water to be brought to its doorstep.Even if the United States stands by, the above-mentioned work will still be carried out, but we have not done our part.But can we disregard our responsibilities to God and humanity and deny our support?What's more, our respect for the rights of nations and individuals enables us to provide impartial support and to play a constructive role with full confidence. The urgency of the situation and the magnitude of the task, yet the acquisition of the Philippines has won us such readiness that the most prudent will dare to believe that we are entrusted by God.The sanctity of the mission prevents us from doing it hastily and not noticing the signs of the times.Given the number of relevant possibilities, and the wide range of interests that should be considered or coordinated in calculating the pros and cons of various options, our decisions matter.Decisions are in the service of our ends, that we must travel lightly in order to be able to cope with the game, to be able to fully display our abilities at key points; concerns and prejudices.The necessary condition for success is to focus the eyes on one point, and in Napoleon's words, to exclude any distracting thoughts. If we are determined to maintain our commercial rights and make a difference in China, we can only do so by encouraging and supporting the Chinese to act consciously, not by usurping their power and land.Currently, the Yangtze River Basin appears to be where our interests lie, but events such as the recent events in Beijing may temporarily divert us to actions that are not consistent with established policy.While an open door, both commercially and intellectually, should be our goal in any part of China, it is easiest to achieve in the central region and use it as a solid base from which to push the rest of the world, because Sea power can exist most firmly in the central Yangtze River region.The steamship can sail from the sea to Hankou, which is 600 miles away from the sea, and then load the goods and sail to any major port in the world.This fact speaks forcefully to the significance of the Yangtse valley, where the commerce that powered material civilization could be maximized and supported by the navy, the main force of the Teutonic nation in world politics.In time, the navy will also become the main backstop that the Chinese people rely on to resist foreign control practices that are very different from legitimate foreign influence. Therefore, our attention in the Far East is currently focused on the Yangtze River basin, since the best way to include a particular region under our influence is to first find a center rather than attacking from all sides.Here we find ourselves in the midst of a struggle of interests between several great powers, which threatens to degenerate into confrontation.This does not mean, however, that we need to form formal alliances or expressly oppose a nation which will limit our freedom of action; but on the other hand we cannot push freedom of action to the extreme, as our words often tend to do. Reflects a general psychological state of ours.Every country and every person is free as long as they are capable of acting independently.But there is a limit to this ability, and if this limit is reached and further action is necessary, cooperation is essential.In this case, only the alignment of interests and ways of thinking can become a prerequisite for coordinated actions and maintenance of relationships.Of the nations with which we meet in the East, England and we have the most in common in the nature of our interests, and in our laws and morals.Therefore, there is hope for cooperation between the United Kingdom and the United States, but it should not be mistaken for the necessity of giving up the moral obligation to rest in the ever-present freedom of choice.Independence of action is impossible without this liberty, and a treaty, whether of alliance or arbitration, which is unconditional, may endanger our liberty by asking us to make ensure. In order to ensure the full realization of the goal of opening the door, we need to show our strength, not only in China, but also in the sea line of communication, especially in the shortest route through the Isthmus of Panama.The breadth of the mandate inevitably requires cooperation and division of labor among the countries concerned.In the current confrontation of land and sea power, no single maritime state is capable of formulating and executing a grand plan to counter Russia on its own; countering Russia in even a few key areas would overwhelm any one state. There are two traffic arteries leading to the Far East, one from Europe and the other from America; the former via Suez, the latter via the Pacific Ocean.However, the current distribution of my country's domestic wealth and overseas traffic conditions require the opening of a waterway from my country's Atlantic coast to the Far East via the Central American Isthmus.In this case, the U.S. line of communication to China goes through Nicaragua or Panama, just as the European route goes through Suez; for the European route, the Mediterranean Sea, Egypt, Asia Minor, the Red Sea, and Aden are all key points. The Caribbean Sea, the surrounding areas of the future Mesoamerican Canal, Hawaii, and the Philippines have similar significance, and their importance is of particular concern to us. However, we protect these areas not only because of their special significance to us, but also because of the awareness of international relations and our country's responsibility for the present or the future.Here I am not asserting that we are obliged to serve those powerful countries that can take care of themselves, but I want to say that because we have huge common interests with other countries, especially the United Kingdom, in terms of future Pacific business and China's development, we And they need each other, and should be ashamed of getting more than we give.As our strength has grown steadily, we are more able to support our claims of overwhelming dominance in the Caribbean and the Isthmus; and where we have been boycotted, we have won the acquiescence of Great Britain.Is this just a triumph of our diplomacy that benefits us only, or is it an opportunity for us to take on other responsibilities?Of course it is the latter.這不是因為英國的利益本身就和我們關連，而是因為共同的利益和對於以中國為焦點的世界未來的責任使我們和英國必須相互支持。單單在東方達成協調並不夠，我們雙方還需共同維護從各自海岸延伸而出的極其重要的交通要道，只有這樣，我們在遠方的行動的效能才不會因為對其持續如一必不可少的交通的削弱而下降。 為此，我們必須在太平洋保持有效的海軍力量；同樣也必須在大西洋這樣做，不僅為了防衛我國海岸，也是因為在加勒比海保持我國海軍的主宰地位對於確保地峽運河被用於增進我國的貿易及使我國海軍能迅速進入太平洋意義重大。 簡而言之，我們面臨的任務是在太平洋和加勒比海都發揮決定性的作用。顯而易見，要發揮這樣的作用，並不是總有必要加大我們的份量，也要看天平兩端的相對狀況。不過，目前的這種狀況表明，一支無足輕重的海軍力量並不能使我們那增進我國在世界上地位的設想得以實現，也不能免除我國作為國際大家庭的一員所具備的義務。在這個大家庭中，各國時常相互衝突的利益必須在公正的基礎上進行協調，並且通過顯示實力而得以維護。我們還必須考慮到這個情況，即在巴拿馬運河投入使用之後，我們的太平洋和大西洋兩艦隊只能借助一條人工航道相互支援，而這條通道又極易被切斷。這樣，中美洲運河並不能象一條天然海峽那樣具有一條陸地間通道所應有的軍事價值。而依託這種價值，一支部署於中央的力量可以在兩個方向上有效行動，從而穩定這一方或那一方的形勢。一支部署在馬爾他的強大艦隊就既對直布羅陀，又對蘇伊士施加影響，因為它通往這兩個地點的海上道路是相對暢通的。在這種情況下，唯一的問題可能也就是這支海軍力量的大小了；而從蘇伊士向印度和地中海行使影響就既取決於軍事力量，又取決於運河的開放。不過，蘇伊士運河由於地勢天然平緩，比依賴於船閘的中美洲運河更不容易遭受長期切斷之苦。 為了在東方發揮我們的商業和道義影響，我們迫切需要使我們的大西洋海岸能夠借助地峽運河和東方縮短距離，為此我們還同樣需要在加勒比海鞏固我們的海軍地位以確保運河的使用。不過，由於這是一個軍事問題，在此不妨給一個軍事教科書已經說得不能再清楚了的告誡，即足夠的安全並不意味著絕對的安全。在軍事上沒有什麼絕對的安全，在任何軍事局面中，不管是被動的防禦還是進攻行動，危險都不可能蕩然無存。我想這對任何職業來說都是如此。當然，一種合理的、壓倒性的有利於己方的局面還是可以獲得的，拿破崙有一句至理名言就肯定了這種情況。 我們是否可以因為不可能做到極至，便不努力去儘量爭取安全呢？是否在任何情形中人們都是如此行事？成功的人當然不會這樣。讓我們考慮一下在什麼條件下我們才最有希望確保地峽運河為我們所用。首要的一點是，我們必須有著由一支可隨時應付緊急事態的海軍所體現的強大實力，這不是為了壓倒任何有意和我們作對的海軍力量，我們也無能力這樣做；而是為了使即便對最強大的海軍國家來說，和我們在加勒比海競爭統治地位在政治上也是明顯不划算的。這樣一來，任何國家都不能不重視、顧忌我們。這樣，我們關於加勒比海的立場才會被普遍認可，運河的安全順理成章地也就有了保證。對此，我們首先要做的是建立一支強大艦隊，這個做不到，其他的也不必提了。 迄今為止，只有英國這一個強國曾經試圖對我們在加勒比海的地位進行挑戰。直到最近不久，英國才停止將西印度群島和南美作為其商業和政治考慮的主要目標。英國對該地區的興趣自十八世紀以來就存在了，那時，美洲的糖是英國的主要貿易商品之一，西班牙的殖民地和今天的中國一樣，在英國人看來是令其垂涎三尺的有利可圖之地。所以，在四十或五十年之前，在加勒比海地區，有著世界上最強大的海軍的國家是和我們直接作對的，而我們也確信，我們的門羅主義政策和英國的利益不可調和。不過，過去半個世紀中的事件已經改變了這些，而且更重要的是英國如今也認識到了這些變化。印度在十九世紀初葉曾是英國四分之一的貿易額的來源，而現在它則相對無足輕重了。南美儘管對英國來說還沒有盡失往日的意義，但英國在該地區的進展和在其他地區日益增長的利益相比也相形見絀了。 這樣，在最強大的海軍國家那裡，我們已發現了允許我們在加勒比地區處於海權上的控制地位的政治傾向；而且該傾向會繼續上升，因為決定它的是兩個在遠遠超出一代人的時間內仍長期存在的事實。其一，英國在其他地區有著如此眾多的利益以至於它必須放棄加勒比地區；其二，英國的一些重大的基本利益和我們的極為符合，因而我們雙方只能遵循共同的基本方針，這樣做有利於英國。所以，我們保持強大符合英國的利益，而在加勒比海有著關鍵利益的我們則可以謹慎地指望在任何與其他國家在該地區的政治衝突中得到英國的道義支持，除非我們的立場在道義上站不住腳。 毫無疑問，在最近的美西戰爭中，英國給予了我們這樣的支持。一位我完全信賴的權威人士曾向我保證，對於要英國參加一個旨在限制美國使用力量的國際聯合的建議，英國的答覆不僅是拒絕參加這樣的聯合，還包括堅決地積極反對任何業已開始的此類活動。如果英國人重視行動勝於言詞，上述情況比即使是基於對現實的清晰認識的關於未來諸多可能的連篇累牘說明都更有份量。盡可以把這種態度看成友誼或策略，叫法並不重要，重要的是其本身，它是建立在堅實的利益基礎上的。誠然，不能指望華盛頓的每句話在現在看來都如當初說出時那樣正確，有些還被誤用了；但這一句卻永不可能有錯：根本用不著想像政府會一直按照國家利益之外的其他標準行事。它無理由如此去做，無論是作為服務者還是主人。 基於共同的利益和政治準則、表現為受人歡迎的傾向性的道義支持是一個富有意義的政治因素。它不僅具有輿論的作用。也能使某個對手懷疑道義支持是否就不會轉化為物質的援助。是否一般的朋友就不會很快變為親密的盟友。英國已不再會感覺到和我們在加勒比海有著敵對關係，一些上了年紀的英國人身上依然存在的對我們的傳統敵對情緒由於和現實的反差太大，已經不再是英國的一種普遍心理了。原本以實際的利益對立為根據的英美間敵對正為對在門戶開放上的共同利益的認識、對政治原則的一致性的認識以及關於傳統不合時宜的判定所取代。目前，英國和美國都希望中國保持統一並從本質上發生自由的變化。由此觀之，中國自上而下協力反對外來的控制、兼併或瓜分還只是小小的一步，當然這和門羅主義在精神上是一致的。為實現上述目標，英國和美國要確保進行合作。只要兩國問還有著共同的利益和觀念，合作就有了保障。不過，我們國家在以行動來促進國家目標的實現方面還做得不夠，這種行動應首先表現在軍事力量的準備上。我們不能指望其他友好的或不友好的國家予我們的目標以足夠的重視，除非向它們表明，我們不僅言詞堅定，而且準備扎實。 在英國和我們這裡也都會出現這種情況，即一些人清楚地認識到了兩國自願地採取共同行動的意義，而更多的一些人則對對方還強烈地抱有苛刻的看法。顯然這會妨礙英美兩國在涉及共同利益的對外事務上相互支援。我們可以允許一些人對對方抱有偏見。但絕不能接受他們的看法。情緒的作用是強大的，有時甚至比實際的利益更有支配力，但是只要利益是基於真實、長期的環境，而情緒只是產生於一時的、不符事實的感覺，誰將贏得一向由真理所贏得的勝利是十分清楚的，因為利益是實實在在的東西。門戶開放是對於我們和英國都十分重要的政策，當然對我們更加重要，如果如一些人認真思考的，我們的對華出口貿易額能夠占到最大比重的話。另外，我們和英國之間也確實有著共同的行為規範，我們雙方今天都把瓜分和兼併看成邪惡的東西，無論是就其本身還是結果而言。儘管如今英國在南非的行動更助長了我們中一些人對英國的偏見，但很快我國人民就會認識到英國合併布林共和國實屬不得已而為之，就如我們佔領菲律賓和在一代人以前將南部邦聯納入統一範圍一樣，要知道當時南部邦聯已經有了事實上的政府，大部分當地居民對它也是忠心耿耿。今日美國存在的抵制符合英美兩國共同利益的活動的情緒某種程度上是歷史遺留下來的，就和由於加勒比海問題而在英國出現的針對著我們的情緒一樣。而且，上述情緒還是作為外來移民或其後代的美國公民對其母國的情感不正常地影響到了美國政治的結果。這些情緒都是暫時的，因為它們並不和美國的現實利益相合拍，而一個睿智的政治家也會從這種情況中明明白白地看到這些情緒的最終結局。不過這些情緒在某種程度上也確實會干擾我國建立一支得當力量的努力，尤其是在海軍方面。沒有海軍，我們在緊要關頭所表達的國家意志也就僅僅成了一個泥足巨人所做的笨拙無用的姿態而已。 如果非要具體說明上述力量應該是多大，那麼我就此要麼說上一通我個人堅信不疑的意見，要麼展開一個既不合時宜、也不合本文篇幅的冗長的技術討論。當然，就這支力量的特點和運用說上幾句還是可行的。特性和數量不同，它是由總體考慮決定的；而總體考慮是言簡意賅的東西，可以被很容易地歸納和理解。 與赤道以北的大西洋毗臨的是古老的歐洲文明社會；從我們的觀點看，正是它決定著人類的福祉。在這個社會之內，大體而言，大國之間的邊界狀況已非常確定而且得到承認。不管大國在外部利益方面會發生什麼衝突，領土擁有和隨此而來的政治控制局面不可能發生大的變化。太平洋地區則不同，它才剛剛進入各國利益關係的視野。四個世紀之前，美洲和好望角的發現大大拓寬了人們的眼界，而大西洋也取代了地中海曾經據有的中心地位。而在過去的半個世紀中，亞洲也逐漸為人們所注意，它也象哥倫布面前的美洲那樣，向人們展示了它那久已存在但一直未為人知的狀態。但隨著亞洲的發現而來的也有一種擔心，那不知道當在政治、經濟、社會及道德與精神標準方面有著巨大差異的兩種文明之間的蕃籬被摧毀之際，究竟會出現什麼情景。 在考慮這個問題的時候，無論怎樣強調我們那無與倫比的政治自由、自治的才華以及對於公認的法律的一絲不苟的遵守這些因素的重要性也不為過。這些東西都體現在大致被稱為盎格魯-薩克森的種族身上，它們的生命力和價值業已為它們在其位於北海大陸一側的起源之地以及英國的持續存在與發展，以及隨後在今天已成為美國和英帝國自治的殖民地的海外地區的紮根所證明。過去的幾百代人不斷地將這些傳統應用於自身的活動之中，將它們轉化為具體的行動。這樣，它們也就處於不斷的進步之中，並在今天在原則和應用方法方面都達到了一個新的發展高度，而英國和美國共有的責任就是給它們以不懈的政治支持，使它們對未來發揮健康的影響。美國人民是多種族融合而成的，這是無人否認的；也和同樣是多種族之聚合的英國人民的情況一樣，美國人民正是由於有著共同的政治和法律傳統才得以堅強有力。這些傳統在幾近於島國那樣的孤立狀態中得以保持和發展，同時繼續從盎格魯-薩克森種族的先輩所生息的古老家園不斷地吸取營養。它們以其強大的改造力量，不僅使所有其他與其有著政治聯合關係的社會或種族傳統處於頹勢，而且還將它們消融於自身之中。儘管埃及法老跟前有著不少巫師，但最後還是亞倫聖經中人物，猶太教第一祭司長。的權杖支配了一切。 由於上述政治力量的崇高與活力，美國義不容辭地應對人類做出適當的貢獻，這個貢獻也是人類一個最大的希望之所在。一扇偉大的門正向我們打開，當然不用說我們也會遇到不少敵手。如果克服過時的情感、認識尚未理解的事實、進行不致因基於同盟或仲裁的允諾而犧牲良心的自覺的合作等對於作出上述貢獻必不可少，我們應樂意付出一些代價。 我們對外從事這項事業的區域顯而易見應是太平洋和東方。為此，我們應以一支強大的海軍來確立我們在加勒比海的絕對優勢。由於世界局勢的巨大變化以及我們和英國在涉及將來的重大問題上有著一致的利益，也由於英國基於我們雙方的共同利益給予我們以支持，我們已無太多的理由擔心其他國家會對加勒比海插手。這種情況對我國大為有利，不僅會促進我國的安全，也能減少我國用於必要的軍事準備的開支。因此，我國的每位公民出於對國家的責任就需要考慮對英國持有過時的敵意是否適當；需要思考一下這些偏見所產生的歷史時代是不是已經和哥倫布的航行一樣已完全一去不復返了；或者，是否是本土化的過程將這些偏見很簡單地從歐洲移植到了我國的土壤中。實際上，將來自國外的、和我們的利益或責任不相符的情緒嫁接到我國的政治之中並不是真正的本土化。 以對於共同利益和共同傳統的一致理解為基礎的英美關係所具備的潛力遠不在於它們能締結正式的同盟。相反，由於諸多原因，同盟並不是值得追求的。對於共同利益的認識還要求英國和美國對於其他政治體系固有的那些不僅在形式上、而且在本質上和自己相對立的東西明察秋毫。我們在亞洲會和這些體系發生遭遇甚至是衝突。對於英美利益一致性及另一方的政治方式和我們的對立性的認識十分重要，它決定著我們將如何進行海軍上的準備；不過它也許也會令我擔憂地嚴重影響到我四年前所提出的原則的運用。根據該原則可以決定我國的海軍力量應處於怎樣的規模。這個原則不應受影響，它如果如我認為的在四年前是正確的話，則在今天也不會有錯。當然我無疑相信四年來我國政策已有很大發展，國際關係也有很大變化，所以該原則在新形勢下的應用也必然會有不同的結果。就我們應採取的適當態度而言，我們今天必須拋棄來自最近的過去的成見，它由於離當前並不遙遠，使我們不易找到恰如其分的感覺；我們該關注的是遙遠的過去。制度的淵源以及蘊含於制度之中的國民精神，只有這樣我們才能認識到誰與我們真正地休戚與共，從而才能使我們在暫態將至的將來的行動能得到有益、正確的指導。 談及當前形勢下我們的必要準備，我們希望英國的天下無敵的海軍能在可能的英美間合作和分工中起到重要作用，這對英國來說並不是一個不公平的負擔，除非我們沒有根據共同的利益在發展海洋方面盡到適當的努力，因為目標的共同意味著任何一方的力量大小都關係到對方的利益。對英國來說，它的海軍對於國家安全、對於不列顛群島、對於地域廣泛的英帝國的完整必不可少。不管和其他國家的關係如何，英國都必須一直保有強大的海軍，而對與我國的財富多少至關重要的國內發展來說，這樣一種力量則非迫切之需了。和英國相反，我們毋須擔心與外部的交通會遭到打擊而陷於癱瘓。我們單靠自己就能維護國內安全，在遠方又不曾佔據對我們的生存至關重要的土地。不過，由於政治局勢促使我們兩國必須合作以爭取一個偉大的未來，為了雙方以及世界的利益，任何一方都應為另一方力量的上升而高興。所以，英國不應對我們吹毛求疵，而我們如果和英國相比，只能為實現共同目標貢獻出一支規模不大的海軍，並且必須把主要資源用於最終也會加強共同力量的國內發展，我們也用不著感到羞愧。 不過，考慮到英國因其責任的廣泛不能給予我們無限的支持，我們的海軍必須具有相當的力量。因此，考慮到在東方和加勒比海都存在著可能與我為敵的力量；考慮到由於瀕臨兩大洋，我們必須在太平洋和大西洋都能夠行使海上權力；考慮到未來的中美洲運河儘管可便利於我們的兩支艦隊之間的支援，但易於為武力或陰謀所阻斷，我們必須有一支力量充足的海軍。前面提到的關於我國海軍規模的原則和其他國家並無多少關連，它只隨英國和美國的地位的變化而變化，而這種地位的變化則取決於對於東方的變化和事態的認識。 還要強調另外一個關係著海軍之強大的因素，我們通常十分忽略它以至於有理由認為它是最不受重視的。我們已經建造了不少艦船，並且將不少工藝成果應用於它們身上，這已由它們的速度、火力、裝甲等等所體現。但是我們極少聽見談及我們的操縱各種各樣機器的訓練有素人員的嚴重缺乏。為彌補這個不僅實際而且巨大的缺陷，必須保持一支由服役人員和現役軍官組成的常備力量。一百年以前，風帆就是船隻的動力來源。槍炮簡單而言就是鐵管子而已，而商船水手儼然就是工程師，他們很容易就能學會如何使用槍炮；而大炮又是很少為商船所攜帶的。這樣，實際上很容易就能為海軍招募到大量足以敷用的人員，雖然一些痛苦的經驗表明一個國家的商業可能會因海軍對其水手的大量吸納而受損失。 但現在已不存在這種資源了。或許可以從商船業中找到一些人為海軍操縱機器，但對於決定戰事結果的槍炮使用來說，商船上的人就沒有什麼用處了，他們除了使艦隻前進與後退，在戰事的最關鍵時刻就做不了什麼了。可以穩妥地講，在戰時，一隻船上最多只能有三分之一的人員是這類人。因此，要計算海軍常備力量的大小，必須以戰時情況為依據，估計每艘在役艦隻應有多少固定人員。把所得的多個結果加在一起，其中的三分之二就是海軍在和平時期的常備人員的數量。當戰爭來臨時，另外的三分之一人員可從外徵召。 隨著我國力量的發展，為了更卓有成效地發揮作用，我們應考慮擴大我們的責任。簡單地說，這個意見就是針對這樣一個問題：鑒於太平洋和亞洲的重要性的明顯加強，將維護南美洲頂端國家的獨立、反對歐洲國家對它們的干涉都放在門羅主義的範圍之內是否是一個明智或合理的立場？英帝國的地域廣泛讓英國人忙得幾無喘息之機，可英帝國畢竟是英國人的帝國，而那些亞馬遜河流域以南的和我們沒有共同的血緣和傳統的國家對我們又有什麼自然的或政治上的意義呢？它們並無對我們的太大好感，這是眾人皆知的。可能它們不太喜歡我們是因為我們宣佈要干預歐洲對於它們的侵犯，它們在處於困境時無疑會歡迎我們的立場，但在平時則會對此感到羞辱和不安。當然，系於中美洲地峽的明顯利益，我們不能容忍任何通過直接佔領或間接影響以控制地峽範圍內區域的行為，在今天尤甚。不過，由於美洲南端遠離美國，我們對它予以政治關注實屬浪費精力，就如這種關注也不投對方所好一樣。而亞馬遜河流域則和長江流域一樣對我們有著大得多的實際意義，它的巨大商業價值令人一望可知。通過國際諒解，門戶開放可以在這個地區卓有成效地確立起來，而我國人民也會將這個地區作為門羅主義所適用的地區與不再適用的地區之間一條寬廣有效的紐帶而加以重視。