52
In an article appearing in the Ta Kung Pao of 18th September, the Ta Kung Pao's Special Correspondent on board the Duke of York describes the Hongkong surrender, which he says was not so impressive as the surrender on the Missouri but much more confused. Only after the ceremony did the correspondent (Daniel Lee) learn from a very reliable source what all the delays in the ceremony has been caused by.
There were two reasons (i) the question of the Chinese signature (ii) the question of the taking over by the Chinese of Japanese armament. The British Imperial General Staff at first invited the Chinese and Americans to send representatives to sign the surrender, and after long discussions between the Chinese and Americans in Chungking they decided that their supporting signatures were not appropriate. However, it was only on the 17th, that the Chinese took the final decision, and only today that P'an Hua-kuo informed the British that he had received instructions not to sign. General P'an personally thoroughly approved of the Chinese decision; in fact, it was his proposal.
The Chinese decision seems odd at first, but when one looks closer into the matter it is entirely appropriate; everybody knows that Hongkong and Kowloon are post-war international questions, and until the questions are settled it would not be suitable for China to make, on an agreement, direct or indirect expression of views (
regarding the legal position of Hongkong or Kowloon. P'an was present as an observer only, like the American and Canadian representatives.
The main reason for the delay was the Japanese armament. China Britain and the U.S.A. had agreed at a meeting in Chungking that all Japanese armanent should be handed over to the Chinese, but that the British could, for the early restoration of communications, borrow from the Chinese certain Japanese armament, shipping and vehicles. Such was the principle; the application was very confused, because human nature is to look after oneself first. In other theatres the country accepting the surrender took over Japanese armament from the Japanese themselves, but here the armanent went through a middleman, which naturally made things more confused. A joint commission has been set up to deal with this; it was originally to have been set up after the signature, but practical considerations led to it being set up before the signature.
In actual fact there was very little Japanese armament.
In today's scene the most noticeable thing was that the instrument of surrender did not state the location of the Japanese troops surrendering; in other words, it did not say whether it was the Japanese forces in Hongkong or the Japanese forces in Kowloon and Hongkong; it simply named the Japanese commanders and the forces under their orders. The instrument was drawn up by the British.
At noon today the Chinese Government gave Admiral Harcourt a memorandum explaining that in the opinion of the Chinese Government today's surrender did not include the Japanese forces in Kowloon; in other words, that the Japanese forces in Kowloon did not surrender to Admiral Harcourt.
Admiral Harcourt signed not only on behalf of Gt. Britain but also for the Generalissimo (? Supreme Commander of" omitted) Allied Armies in the China theatre; this signifies (1) Hongkong
is/
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.