THE NOME NUGGET
Published Monday, Wednesday and Friday by The
NOME PUBLISHING CO.
Nome, Alaska
Telephone: Main 125 P O. Box 618
W A. and EMILY BOUCHER . Editors
$1.50 PER MONTH $16.00 A YEAR
Entered as second class matter October 14. 1943, at the postoffice
at Nome. Alaska, under the Act of March 3, 1879.
Monday March 22, 1948
Prelude To Chaos
(By Dorothy Thompson)
BARELY TWO MONTHS from now—on Mav 15—a I
frightful condition will exist in one of the most critical
areas in the world: Palestine. On that day the British
will pull out, and thereafter there will be no govern
ment in Palestine. That is a definition of anarchy. It has
been said that the partition of Palestine is the first great
“test” of the United Nations. If so. God help the U. N.
For absolutely nothing has been done to prepare for
the conclusion of the British mandate, which will occur
in the midst of bitter communal strife. Two weeks be
fore it ends, the Palestine commission—a Czech, a Bo
livian, a Dane, a Filipino and a Panamanian—are to
move into and take over an area whose disorders have
baffled and defeated the British.
People ask: Who will “enforce” the partition deci
sions of the commission? The prior question even to that
is: Who will govern? Two Palestines are envisaged—a
Jawish and an Arab—but, at the same time, the country
is to remain an economic unit temporarily under an eco
nomic board. Who will constitute this board? It is de
signedly mixed Jewish and Arabian. But the Arabs have
given notice that they will not co-operate or participate.
Then how will common services be administered?
Who, for instance, will take over the railroads, civilian
aviation, postoffices, customs?
Sixty-two per cent of all native Palestine government
staffs are Arab. They have warned that when the Brit
ish go, they will quit.' Has the Palestine commission any
staff to take over?
Why are the British insisting qn pulling out within
two weeks after the commission arrives? Unquestion
ably because, being completely stymied of a solution in
their own minds, they want to jump clear before all hell
breaks loose.
Who is going to police Palestine? It is all very well to
say: Send a U. N. force. There isn’t any. If any force
goes, it will have to be the force of one nation of several.
But does any nation have the foggiest notion of what
policing a condition of anarchy means? Any force must
carry out the instructions of a government. Where will
be the government? The five unfortunate fish-out-of
water commissioners?
It is impossible to fill administrative positions wholly
with Jews. Those now Arab will have to operate in
Arab territory. Would a Jew like to be a postmaster in
an Arab village? Or at the ticket office of an 'Arab
depot?
The truth is that the U. N. assembly, having passed a
resolution and appointed a commission, has started
something that neither it nor anybody else knows how
to finish.
The British have 60,000 to 70,000 troops in Palestine,
and a picked force of 3,500 men—almost all of whom
speak Hebrew, Arab, or both. Britain is an old imperial
power, accustomed to deal with disorderly colonial sit
uations, and to train men for the purpose. Has anyone
else such police?
The native Palestinian police is a mixed force. On
May 15 the latter alone will remain. Who, then, will
guard Christians and Christian properties in the Holy
City, including sacred treasures, which are enormous?
The electricity of Palestine is supplied by a private
company largely Je wish-owned. Its main power station
is in the north, at the Syrian and Trans-Jordan fron
tiers, wide open to attack and sabotage.
In Jewish Paestine itself (with officially 600,000 Jews
and conceivably 800,000, including the “illegals”) there
are 400,000 Arabs—a mighty fifth column. Some Jewish
colonies, such as those in the Huleh area, are islands in
an Arab sea. Nothing whatever separates Arab Pales
I IN THE PRIMARY STAGE
^tr-Tfu'-' >* ra ana. iGt.iiiir nar.
I
tine from Arab Syria, Trans-Jordan, Egypt and Leban
on, which are as close as New Hampshire to Vermont.
The theory right along has been that the Arabs would
not “dare” to defy the U. N. Why not? I should say that
it was a long sight easier to defy the United Nations than
.to defy the British, or, for that matter, the state of Pan
ama. These are sovereign realities, with genuine pow
ers, while the U. N. is a mere phrase. Anyone can defy
the U. N. You or I could stand up in Time Square tomor
row and demand its dissolution and abolition, and be
perfectly safe.
Any nation can wash its hands of terrorist bands and
call them the “enraged soul of the peope.” But if anyone
thinks dealing with them can be accomplished by a divi
sion of G. I .Joes, he has another think. Armies can fight
armies, but when it comes to hunting down innocent
looking kids with nitroglycerin in their school bags and
humble-appearing gentry with knives in their sleeves,
it’s another matter—as the British have found out.
Don’t ask me what to do. I don’t know. I’m like the
British in that. But the people who started this presum
ably have known how to finish it.
They have precious little time.
Words Without Power Won’t Stop Stalin
(By Lawrence Martin)
- WHO WANTS A WAR?
Nobody does, least of all ourselves, who know better
than any other people (except perhaps the Japanese,
with their burning memory of Hiroshima and Nagasaki)
what the horror of the next war will be.
Neither do the Russians want a war. The scars of the
last conflict are still too raw. Russia needs years to re
build her strength.
But, when you come right down to it, neither did Hit
ler want a war—not if he could gain his ends without it.
Hitler was willing to risk war because he thought he
could win. Would Stalin take that chance? The answer
is that the Russians have been given little reason to be
lieve they are taking a chance either of war or of losing.
In Greece we have taken a strong position. We have
fortified that country’s resistance with arms. Moreover,
we have strongly indicated that if more is necessary to
insure Greek freedom we’ll supply it. Greece still is free
because, there, we backed up a warning with local force.
But Greece is a lone example.
Elsewhere, as in Czechoslovakia, our only action has
been to protest. Words. Russia doesn’t mind words. She
has them herself—all the twisting language of the Com
munist lexicon with which to defend her conquests.
Words won’t stop the Russians.
The only warning the Russians will respect is one
backed by the prospect of a war they will lose. We have
never jpade any such prospect clear to the Kremlin. On
the contrary, except in Greece, our hesitation and
wordy indecisiveness have even served to encourage
Communist aggression.
Furthermore, the state of American military power_
but for our blessed possession of
the atomic bomb—is not such as to
inspire sober concern in the Rus
sians.
We call the United Nations the
keystone of our foreign policy, yet
submit to Russian obstruction
which makes U. N. no more th n •
an international soapbox .
We thrill the free world with
the hope of American help for eco
nomic revival, yet lost crucial
weeks while the penny pinchers
and isolationists seek to destroy
the Marshall plan.
We listen to the sober advice of
national leaders that universal
training—approved by 70 per cent
of our people—is vital to our se
curity, yet allow a Congressional
rules committee to sit on it.
We learn on the authority of our
ablest military strategists that the
United States must have air power
second to none, yet are only begin
ning the concrete steps toward
creating such a force.
In short ou ractions are too slow
or too small to suit our words.
Time is running out. Our words
have only served to speed the Rus
sian timetable of aggression. We
need decisiveness, boldness and a
full sense of our own potentials.
We can stop the Russians, but
to do so we need a policy of firm
ness beyond anything we have
shown thus far. We must be able
to say flatly and solemnly, “Thus
far—and no farther!” And we
must have the power to back it up.
Only then will Stalin stop.
i
That’s That
By BRUCE GUSTIN
To most people, the $39,669,000,
000 total of President Truman’s
budget proposal for the 1949 fiscal
year is only an astronomical fig
ure. Senator Bridges, chairman of
• the joint budget committee of Con
gress, has prepared a table show
I ing how much federal government
would cost each state, under the
: Truman budget, on the basis of
1947 federal income tax collec
i tions, and comparing this with the
cost of state government. In Colo
, rado, for example, the cost of state
government is shown to be $61,
000,000 while Colorado’s share of
federal government cost would be
$270,000,000.
Appropriating more hundreds of
millions of dollars for Chinese aid
would be like pouring sand down
a rat hole. Ordinary common sense
requires that American resources
for foreign rehabilitation and re
lief be concentrated on the Euro
pean recovery program. There is a
chance that something can be ac
complished there. But pouring
| more American dollars into China
now would be wanton waste.
There is one glaring inconsist
ency in all the agitation from the
White House' and in Congress for
national legislation to outlaw state
poll taxes. In a few states in the
south, payment of a poll tax is a
prerequisite to voting. The effect
of this, it is contended is to bar
many Negroes from the polls. So
state poll taxes are under fire as
examples of racial discrimination.
If the President and Congressional
supporters of anti-*poll tax legis
lation are concerned about pro
tecting civil rights of Negroes in
the south, rather than getting Ne
groe votes in other parts of the
country, why don’t they do some
thing about protecting civil rights
of all American citizens, both
black and white, in the nation’s
capital?
The ballot is one of the most
precious civil rights of free people
everywhere. Negroes are allowed
to vote in the south. But in Wash
ington, D. C., neither White nor
Negro citizens can vote. Washing