Ipswich High School - Tiger Yearbook (Ipswich, MA)

Page 18 text:

TIGER ‘43 would not be a handicap, for wc would be able to land at international airports in Africa and Europe. There ■would be no privileged countries at these airports; and so everyone would have an equal chance for trade. With the airways extending into globe-girdling corporations, there would be a tendency for government subsidation because of the huge oper- ating expense of such a project. No individual or groups of individuals would be able to pay for even half of it. This would lead to subsidy iwars and monopolies. We could, as some European countries do, allocate different areas to different lines so that expenses for each wouldn’t be so great. We would, in any case, try to make them as self-sufficient as pos- sible. Since the United States would be competing with Europe, the com- petition would be very .stiff; but since when has an American shrunk from competition? If the other coun- tries wished to start a subsidy war, we could play the same game but with the chips stacked higher on our side of the table. “Sovereignty of the air’’ also has its advantages. In a recent speech, Vice-President Henry Wallace said in part, “Freedom of the air will be to the future as freedom of the seas was to the past.’’ The United States, however, did not fare so well with this “freedom of the seas’’. Our ports were choked with sleek liners from Britain and France and ugly tramp steamers from Japan and Germany. Our merchant marine languished and almost died. Before the first World War, over sixty-two per cent of our freight was carried in foreign ships. After the war, in the late twenties and thirties, our tonnage had reached second place, although still only half as large as England’s. Labor from these foreign coun- tries worked for lower wages than American sailors and so they were able to underbid us. The same thing could happen again in the construc- tion of airports and other facilities and in the manufacture of the planes themselves, although a higher tech- nical skill is needed in the construc- tion of planes than in the building of ships. If the sovereignty of the air doctrine were observed, each country would have an equal chance of re- ceiving concessions from another country whose cities presented pos- sibilities for bases. Again, we would have competition, although not as intense as the one previously men- tioned. It is evident, then, that we do not want either extreme freedom or sovereignty of the skies. The assump- tion should be that the air shall be a reasonably free ocean of commerce in w ' hich all nations shall participate according to their responsibilities and technical skills. Toward this end, it 16

Page 17 text:

TIGER ‘43 been counted against our enemies. American planes are demonstrating their superiority over their oppon- cn ' s. The spectacular feats of these fighter planes and bombers make the headlines every day. But behind this front, a quietly operating branch of the Air Forces is working without rest. It has built a great transporta- tion system from the United States, across Africa, to Asia; there is an air route to almost every country of the United Nations. It was an undertak- ing of great magnitude, but American skill and American ingenuity made it possible. The success of this great system has awakened people to the realiza- tion that airplanes can be used for more than transporting passengers and mail. Bulky articles of machinery and food are now being carried. As the size of planes increases, so will the load. This realization has made people wonder about the world after this war. Who v ill control the air? Will it be the United States and Great Britain, or will all countries control it equally? This question is already attracting the attention of rich and poor alike. It has led to harsh words in Parliament and Congress. For the average person in America, the pre- sent task is to learn the difference be- tween the two main ideas, their ad- vantages and limitations. Basically, there are two extreme concepts of the post-war air world. First is the freedom of the air theory. In this theory, planes of every country would have the right to land and trade at airports anywhere, with only indiscriminatory customs pro- cedure to delay them. This is very much like the freedom of the seas doctrine. Countries, such as England, whose technical skill and outlying bases would make an air transporta- tion system feasible, would suffer be- cause her bases would be used by everyone. On the other hand, coun- tries also possessing the technical skill but lacking outlying bases would benefit. Directly opposed to the theory of “freedom of the air’’ is that of sovereignty of the air. Every nation would have unlimited authority in the air over its territories and terri- torial waters. No other nation would be allowed to cross this three dimen- sional sphere of influence without being accused of trespassing. Now, let us investigate the pos- sibilities of each of these systems. A careful study of a globe will show that with the present practical range of airplanes two thousand miles, the United States would need many more outlying bases. Our lines of commun- ication extend out into the Pacific as far as Manila: into the Atlantic, as far as Porto Rico. This would leave a gap of half the world to be flown in one hop, a feat which is impossible at present. If the air were free, this 15

Page 19 text:

TIGER ‘43 seems that there are five conditions which must be written into the peace. They are: 1 . Post-war air map must be drawn according to geographical principles, and not according to the Wilsonian principles of self deter- mination. 2. Except in cases of national security, all nations should be entitled to access to the air above other nations. Certain restricted areas may have to be set aside. It would be pos- sible to have certain channels set off for traffic over a country. 3. One or several powers should have control over certain areas such as Greenland, Iceland, and some of the Pacific islands. 4. Eor reasons of military security, the world’s air traffic should be divided among the United Nations.. That would mean tempor- arily excluding Germany and Japan to rule out the possibility of their using commercial lines to build up a military machine. 5. The United States should encourage competition with the var- ious countries. One of these three systems — freedom of the sea, freedom of the air, or a combination of both — will determine the future of aviation. It will take serious thinking on the part of airmen and statesmen alike. Should the wrong system be chosen, aviation could be a failure. Should the right one be chosen, a world unknown to the present past will be opened. Be- cause of the rapid transportation af- forded by the airplane, the peoples of other countries will be brought closer to the United States. They will begin to understand each other better, and one of the primary causes of war will disappear. The airplane has been a terrible instrument of destruction: but it can be and will be, we fervent- ly hope, an instrument of great good in the future. NEW HORIZONS ‘Peace bath her victories no less re- nowned than war” Milton There are two possible outcomes to this war: either we win it or the Axis does. If the latter triumphs, there is but one alternative: the pre- scription for world order, or rather disorder, as conceived by Herr Hitler and his associates, wherein there is one master race presiding over cor- ruptible (so they believe) , inferior peoples. On the other hand, if the United Nations are victorious, there are two alter natives: either pre-war conditions will be reinaugurated after slightly revising the relations between the nation states: or an effort will be made to work out some solution to the problems of obtaining political 17