Victory in the Pacific

By Alexantler Kiralfy

THERE is agreement in the United States that Japan must be defeated. There is disagreement as to the means, now that it has become evident that the Japanese navy will not be sunk between breakfast and dinner, and that systematic bombing of Japan’s large cities is not feasible at the present time. Some strategic counselors favor an attack on Micronesia, on Japan’s far-flung network of mandated islands in the South Pacific, Others build hopes on a continental approach, making the utmost use of the facilities which China affords. Mr. Kiralfy, a specialized student of military and naval strategy, is a northerner in his recommendations. He wants to see the United States, in coöperation with Russia, not only bomb Japan from Eastern Siberian bases but carry out an actual invasion of the Island Empire through its northern backdoor: through the Kuriles, Sakhalin, and Honshu, the Japanese main island. The invasion plan is nothing if not daring, and would pose some formidable transportation problems, especially while Russia’s main strength is employed against Hitler in Europe. Apart from presenting the case for his plan (one argument for it is that Japan would be at a vast disadvantage in an air duel with Russia and the United States in this part of the world), the author ranges over the whole field of Far Eastern war. He makes the sound observation that, to Japan’s military and naval leaders, “the unorthodox is the rule, and traditional practice the exception,” and warns that “Japan can continue marching so long as she has soldiers and the means to supply them.”There are some valuable observations on Far Eastern geography and communications. The political side of the Far Eastern struggle is underdeveloped, W. H. C.