论文部分内容阅读
九一八事变发生后,国联即应南京国民政府的要求,开始了长达一年半之久的调停中日争端的历程。国联的调停,引起了中国知识界的不同反应。胡适始终信任国联,坚持国联外交;罗隆基的态度有一个变化的过程,从认识国联的局限性,进而怀疑《报告书》的法律效力,最终发出“信任国联者,醒矣!”的呼声;胡愈之从一开始即对国联持批评和不信任的态度。分析知识界对国联处理九一八事变的反应,大致不外这三种状况。胡适、罗隆基、胡愈之三人之所以对国联处理九一八事变的反应不同,其原因就在于他们与国民党的关系不同,对国联及国际法的认识不同,以及对中日实力的认识不同。
After the Incident of 18 September, the League of Nations started the process of mediating the dispute between China and Japan for a year and a half as requested by the Nanjing National Government. The mediation of the League of Nations has aroused different reactions from the Chinese intellectual community. Hu Shih always trusted the League of nations and insisted on the diplomatic ties of the National League. Luo Longji’s attitude has a process of change. From understanding the limitations of the League of Nations, he suspects the legal validity of the report and eventually sends out “trusting the United States.” Voice; Hu Yu from the very beginning that the United held a critical attitude and no confidence. Analysis of the response of the intelligentsia to the NUP’s handling of the Incident of September 18 is generally nothing more than these three conditions. The reason why Hu Shi, Luo Longji and Hu Yuzhi reacted differently to the Kuomintang’s handling of the Incident of September 18 was that they had different relations with the Kuomintang, different understanding of the League of Nations and international law, and different understanding of the strength of China and Japan .