THE SITUATION IN VIETNAM

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 24
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: October 7, 2003
• Sequence Number: 6
• Publication Date: January 1, 1965
• Content Type: OPEN

1965
Approved For Release 2001-16P67fl,000300170006-5
Y .nNCTT2R4Si
on the subject. The majority leader has
spoken on the subject. Other distin-
guished voices have been raised. But,
somehow or other, it has not gotten over
to the American people what the policy
of this Government is with respect to
Vietnam. Retaliation is not a policy.
The President made some general re-
marks yesterday. So did the Vice Presi-
dent. I would strongly urge that the
President of the United States lay out
before the American people what is the
policy of the United States in a con-
sidered report to them, over television,
over the radio, in the press, at a set time,
announcing a set policy. If he did that
and espoused the policy which he ex-
pressed-and the Senator from Florida,
the majority leader, the minority leader,
and other Senators feel as we do-he
would obtain the overwhelming support
of the American people.
Among the major questions the Presi-
dent should cover in outlining American
policy are the following:
First, are the majority of the South
Vietnamese people determined to fight
for their country? Without that deter-
mination, we have no support for our
position.
Second, do the South Vietnamese
want us there? This is a very important
question, for, again, our position is un-
tenable unless our help is desired.
Third, are we trying adequately to ob-
tain help from our allies-Australia,
New Zealand, Pakistan, the Philippines,
Taiwan, Thailand, and others?
Fourth, are we willing to negotiate?
Provided we do not sell out the South
Vietnamese, we must show that we are
willing to negotiate. Prime Minister
Sato, of Japan, for example, who has sug-
gested it, might well play a mediating
role.
If the President stated the policy of
the United States along the lines I have
outlined, I think he would have the sup-
port of the American people. Rather
than let the people divine what our policy
is, the President could, and should, do
something to resolve the doubts that
exist, by setting out the bases and ob-
jectives of our actions.
Mr. SMATHERS. I thank the Senator.
I do not agree entirely with everything he
said, but I agree with him more than I
disagree with him. What the President
should do is a matter for the President
himself to decide. He is the final au-
thority for determining foreign policy.
He must decide when the need is great
enough. The Senator has said the people
do not understand the President's posi-
tion. I happen to be one of those who
believe they do. The Gallup poll re-
cently gave the percentage of people who
approved of the policy being followed in
South Vietnam. I think the percentage
was 68 percent. I do not recall the fig-
ures exactly.
I agree that retaliation is no policy,
but the President said, "We will go any-
that whenever we are attacked in South President has
Vietnam we expect to retaliate with appear.
a limited effort, but it is going to be a I should like to speak briefly on one
tough one. phase of the several subjects which have
We do not wish to become involved in been mentioned in the Chamber today.
a war with Hanoi or with any other I have spoken on the question of pull-
country. We are not trying to escalate Ing out of Vietnam. We cannot pull out
the war, but we want them to see clearly of Vietnam without surrendering that
that they are not going to get away with whole area to our enemies. The moment
what they are doing; in the second place, we surrender it, instead of the first line
if they do it, A is going to be expensive of involvement being 8,000 to 10,000
for them. miles away, it will be in Hawaii and on
The President has said he is willing to our continental shores.
talk with honorable people to try to solve I have also spoken on the subject of
these problems. It seems to me his policy coalition governments. If examination
is quite clear, but if the Senator from of experience and history means any-
New York thinks it is not and that the thing, it means that out of history and
President should go on television to ex- experience we learn lessons concerning
plain his position, the Senator from New what to expect under given circum-
York is entitled to his judgment. It may stances.
be that the President will be convinced Coalition governments have been
of what the Senator from New York has created. I therefore ask the question,
said and finally go on television and What has been the experience of the free
clarify the problem with respect to South world with regard to coalition govern-
Vietnam. ments?
Mr. JAVITS. What I have in mind In the Foreign Relations Committee,
really is a white paper on the present I have asked the proponents of coalition
situation, which will lay out the policy, governments to point out a single in-
without telegraphing any of its security stance in which coalition governments
aspects. I believe there are millions of have worked out in the end in conform-
people in this country who are in doubt ity with the anticipation when the pro-
about it. The President could clear up posal was originally made for a coali-
the policy for those millions. The feel- tion government. It cannot be pointed
ing now is that one has to pick up the out.
policy, divine it, by taking this Senator's The last disappointment was in Laos.
statement or that Senator's statement, In 1962, after suffering adversities in
and say, "This is the position of the Laos, it was proposed that we create a
United States." coalition government. This was done
I think it is proper, coming from the with the neutralists in the middle, the
Republican side of the aisle, to make this rightists on the right, and the Com-
suggestion. I hope the President will do munist on the left.
it, and do it promptly. I think it would An agreement was drafted that when
do the country great good. the compact was executed, all outside
Mr. LAUSCHE. Mr. President, I desire forces would depart-that is, the French,
to speak briefly on the subject of Viet- the United States, and the Communists.
nam. I am glad to state that i am in The points of departure were established
substantial agreement with the views ex- so that observations could be made as
pressed thus far today. There is an es- to whether the parties were carrying
pecially heartening aspect to what has their commitment into execution.
been said, and that is the manifestation Two years and more have now passed
by Members of the Senate of a unified by. The French are out. The United
conviction that the course followed by States is out. The Communists are still
the President was imperative and needed in.
to maintain our honor and also to insure Our gravest problem in South Vietnam
the security of the Nation. comes from the fact that Laos is being
During the war, I was mayor of Cleve- used as the point of entry into South
land. For 1 year, I was Governor of Vietnam. On that basis, 2 years ago,
Ohio. Up until the time Russia joined we negotiated. We sat down in good
us as an ally, it was difficult to be mayor faith. We asserted that we wished Laos
because there was a discordant note to control its own government, that Red
which came, I believed, from Communist China was to stay out, that the United
sources, which resulted in the shutting States would stay out, and that Russia
down of important industries. The mo- was to stay out. But we have had the
ment we were on the same side with Rus- same experience in Laos that we have
sia, that disturbing factor came to an had in 52 out of the last 53 important
end. From that point on, my problem agreements that we made with the Com-
of leadership was rather simple, because munists. In every instance the agree-
there was consolidated thinking on the ments were broken.
part of the people and public officials, I come now to the proposal of nego-
with only one objective in mind; namely, tiation now. What are we going to ne-
'to save the Nation. gotiate? Are we going to negotiate a
In the past 10 days or 2 weeks on the pull-out of the United States? Are we
floor of the Senate, there has daily ap- going to negotiate the establishment of
where, arid we will do anything, with peared a fusion of thinking-of coura-
honor and dignity, to improve that area geous thinking-intended to follow a
and the world." There should be added course which will make possible the fu-
to that statement the President's state- ture life of our country. There have been
ment that we are going to retaliate when- some notes not so sonorous, but on the
ever our troops are hit-and the Presi- whole with every hour that goes by, con-
dent has extended that policy' by saying firmation of the correctness of what the
a neutral government in South Vietnam.
Let us take a look at what happened in
what. was once French Indochina.
In 1954, the Geneva accord was exe-
cuted. My recollection is that 14 nations
were signatories to that accord. The
French pulled out, except for small num-
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
 3070
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE February 18
bers of troops merely to maintain peace
and security within. French Indochina
was fragmentized into North Vietnam,
South Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, and
Thailand.
General Eisenhower was President at
that time. It was anticipated in the
world that with the Geneva Accord, all
would become tranquil in the Far East.
The ink was not even dry on the Geneva
Accord when the Communists began
their pushbutton, riot-producing opera-
tions, their infiltration, and subversion
into South Vietnam.
The Geneva Accord still exists. It pro-
vides for the tranquility of that area.
Therefore, my query is, "Under present
conditions, what shall we negotiate?"
The Geneva Accord exists. All we
have to do is abide by it. If North Viet-
nam will discontinue its attacks upon
South Vietnam, its infiltration and sub-
version, its pushbutton, riot-producing
operations, peace will prevail in South
Vietnam.
But, obviously, Red China-is not con-
tent with having peace maintained in
that area. They wish disorder. They
wish to communize the area. Someone
may argue, "Let us give them South
Vietnam."
That poses a question: What then?.
Will that be the end of the problem?
Or, will the Communists proceed to move
on into Thailand, into Malaysia, into the
Philippines, into West and East Guinea,
and finally look toward Australia?
Mr. President, at this point let me
remind Senators that they are looking
toward our shores, although we do not
recognize it. There is more involved
than mere conquest of southeast Asian
territory.
If one could feel confident that by
pulling out, by negotiating, by creating
a neutral government, we would end our
troubles, we would all say, "Amen, let us
do it." But if we look to the past, we
find, instead of acquiring a position of
strength and freedom from losses of body
and property and honor, through retreat
our problem will become greater in the
future than it is now.
There may come a time when North
Vietnam will say, "We will quit the infil-
tration." The moment they say that, all
our troubles will be ended.
I did not intend to speak at this length,
but I am of the belief that it is necessary
to let the American people know the
gravity of the problem that faces them.
I take no exception to what has been
said by the Senator from Idaho and my
other colleagues in the Senate in advo-
cating a different course of action.
They are doing it in the sincere belief
that that is the right course to take.
I wish also to say that Chamberlain
at Munich, Chamberlain with respect to
the Ruhr, andChamberlain with respect
to Mussolini, gave in, thinking that peace
would be assured by giving in. The
price for giving in became so great that
we now realize that it would have been
much better to stand our ground at the
very beginning than to continue to sur-
render.
I would be less than frank, and I would
be violative of my oath of office, when I
said I would defend the Constitution of
the United States and fulfill my duties
to the best of my ability, if I did not take
this position, which, to say the least, is a
difficult one. I commend Senators on
both sides of the aisle for the fearlessness
with which they are standing up and
asserting that our country's future is at
stake, and that we cannot become weak,
and thus allow ourselves to be engulfed
by an enemy that is intent upon destroy-
ing us.
ADDRESS BY THE NATIONAL COM-
MANDER OF THE AMERICAN LE-
GION AT COLUMBUS, NEBR.
Mr. CURTIS. Mr. President, on Feb-
ruary 14 I was invited to speak briefly to
the American Legion in Nebraska, at
their midwinter meeting, held in Colum-
bus, Nebr. This was because of my in-
terest in the veterans' hospital situation
in Lincoln, Nebr. On that occasion, the
national commander, Mr. Donald E.
Johnson, of the American Legion, made
an address. I ask unanimous consent
that it may be printed in the RECORD at
this point.
There being no objection, the address
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
ADDRESS BY DONALD E. JOHNSON
Commander Keriakedes, National Execu-
tive Committeeman Galbraith, Alternate Na-
tional Executive Committeeman Lowry, dis-
tinguished guests, ladies of the auxiliary, my
fellow legionnaires, ladies and gentlemen,
I'm delighted to be back in the great Depart-
ment of Nebraska, a next door neighbor to
my home Department of Iowa.
It is with much pleasure than I note the
progress of Nebraska's 1965 American Legion
membership enrollment which, at the b tgin-
ning of this month showed you were slightly
ahead of the pace of a year ago. I am fur-
ther pleased to report that at the national
level we were running about 50,000 members
ahead of that same time a year ago, and
that our two millionth 1965 membership
was recorded a full week earlier than a year
ago.
Let's keep up the good work. We need
every eligible veteran who will join ranks
with us in what may well prove to be the
most historic battle the American Legion
has waged since that which led to the pass-
age of the GI bill of rights.
I refer, of course, to the fight to have the
Veterans' Administration rescind its infa-
mous order of January 13 which calls for
the closing of 31 VA installations including
16 regional offices, 11 hopsitals, and 4
domiciliaries.
The American Legion was in this battle
from the very outset. I was, in fact, en route
to Washington for briefings by the Veterans'
Administration at the very moment this
news was prematurely released. Your Na-
tional Rehabilitation Commission Chairman,
Bob McCurdy, also was on his way to Wash-
ington for those meetings.
This was good, for we were able to map
our strategy quickly and to put our plan of
action into effect almost immediately.
Our first move was to conduct a news con-
ference in the Washington offices the very
next morning, at which time I Issued a
strong statement of protest on behalf of the
American Legion, and called upon the Vet-
erans' Administration to reconsider its order.
The following Monday, January 18, we ar-
ranged for conference telephone calls with
all department headquarters, calling for a
total mobilization of the effort and resources
of the American Legion to prevent any
diminution of services by the Veterans'
Administration.
That call was followed up the next clay
by written memorandum to all national of-
ficers and department commanders and ad-
jutants, outlining the action to be taken
by departments, posts, and individual legion-
naires. Such action includes the registering
of your protests, in writing, to Members of
your congressional delegation, to Senator
YARBOROUGH, chairman of the Senate Sub-
committee on Veterans' Affairs; to Repre-
sentative OLIN TEAGUE, chairman of the
House Committee on Veterans' Affairs; to
William E. Driver, Administrator of Veterans'
Affairs, and to President Johnson.
Further, we have asked that department
service officers and rehabilitation chairmen
furnish us with examples of the hardships
that will be worked on individual veterans
as the result of proposed closings and con-
solidations of VA Installations.
In the meantime, all this material is being
given total internal distribution through
the media of our own communications such
as American Legion News Service, the ad-
jutant's letter, and all other contacts which
national headquarters has with posts and
departments.
Also, I plan to carry this message person-
ally into every department which I will visit
while the Issue still Is in doubt, and believe
me it is far from settled right now.
On January 28, I was privileged to present
American Legion testimony before the Sen-
ate Subcommittee on Veterans' Affairs, and
I came away with the impression that our
position has the sympathetic (and in many
instances very enthusiastic) support of a
goodly number of our most influential and
highly respected lawmakers.
The text of my testimony was made the
subject of a special rehabilitation bulletin
which, with a covering memorandum from
me, again was mailed to national officers and
to department commanders and adjutants,
and was summarized in American Legion
News Service.
On February 2, I sent ?a telegram to
every Member of the U.S. Senate urging their
support of an amendment offered by Senator
KARL MUNDT to House Joint Resolution 234.
This amendment, in effect, prohibits the Vet-
erans' Administration from using any funds
to implement its proposed closings.
The following day, by standing vote, the
Senate approved that amendment. Now the
war is not won, but I'm delighted to report
to you that the action by the Senate consti-
tutes a major victory for our cause. Since
a standing vote is not recorded, we do not
know precisely who voted in our favor, but
to all those who did, the American Legion
expresses its sincere appreciation and thanks.
Several States are reporting that their
State legislatures have adopted resolutions
in opposition to the closings proposed by the
VA. The Department of Pennsylvania sent
a 50-member delegation to Washington to
confer with the Keystone State's congres-
sional delegation. Twenty-four of Pennsyl-
vania's 27 Congressmen attended the session
and at the conclusion of the meeting they
went on record with a resolution protesting
the closing of the Wilkes-Barre regional
office.
At this moment, I am tremendously en-
couraged with the progress of this battle,
but we haven't won it yet and I shall con-
tinue to call upon all legionnaires everywhere
to keep up the good fight until the final
decision Is in.
Don't ever discount, or underestimate, the
value of individual effort in a campaign such
as which we now are engaged. Every letter,
every personal contact, and every bit of fact-
ual evidence which we can produce to prove
just how wrong the Veterans' Administra-
tion and the Bureau of the Budget are will
be helpful to our cause.
The House Committee on Veterans' Affairs
is scheduled to open hearings on this matter
on February 18, which is 2 days later than
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
 196.5.. Approved For 1 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
bIRECORD -.SLNA,TE 3067
lican. leader, and all the, other, par- minority leader and that of the two able tions as to the course this Nation should
ticipants. That, in itself, is' a display of Democratic senators who participated pursue in southeast Asia. These recom-
the wisdom of . the Senate and its high in the debate there was but a single com- mendations are pouring into the White
sense of national responsibility, mon desire-to provide advice which House and onto the President's desk,
And yet, if that were all, it would not might serve the President and the Na- where he, and he alone, as Commander
be enough. The President does xlot. seek tion and so facilitate an intelligent sub- in Chief must make the final decisions.
and we-want no Pavlovian unity in this sequent consent to whatever course the Many loyal and dedicated leaders have
Nation. We do not crush, in the name President, in his primary responsibility, come to diametrically opposite conclu-
of unity and in the fashion o f . Pei- might find it necessary to pursue in the sions as to the approach that the Presi-
ping, the 100 flowers as soon as they days and weeks ahead. dent should take. No one can, or would
begin to bloom. We, seek; the, unity of Out of that kind of discussion, feared want to, impugn the motivations or the
genuine national understanding, reached only by those who fear to think, I am patriotism of those citizens, irrespective
.by reason freely pursued and .Sensibly convinced will come great assistance to of the conclusions they advance.
expressed. And so the. debate did not the President in the discharge of his pri- The February 22, 1965, issue of News-
stop withdgeply felt expressions of unity mary responsibilities with respect to po1- week magazine outlines four alterna-
in support pf the President nor should icy on Vietnam. Out of that kind. of dis- tives that America might take. The
it have stopped there. cussion will come a most useful illumina- article suggested that outright with-
The Senate, majority and minority, tion for the people of the United States drawal "would be a devastating blow to
has more to contribute than, assurance as to the course which offers the best U.S. prestige, which would probably re-
of support for the President, and the Na- assurance for safeguarding of the gen- suit in eventual Chinese domination in
tion requires more,of the Senate, The ulne interests of the nation in the region the entire mainland of southeast Asia
Senate has the experience, the knowl- of southeast Asia. and loss of U.S. influence in the Philip
edge, and the courage to look,ahead-to So I commend once again the partici- pines and Japan."
consider paths which lie beyond the point pants in this debate-all of the partici- I agree with that conclusion. Obvi-
of any immediate decision in foreign re- pants. They have performed, all of ously, if we should take any position that
lations. Let no one doubt the impor- them, a most helpful service which re- indicates that we have been forced into
tance of such a consideration. The Sen- fleets great credit upon the Senate of the total withdrawal, it would be a great
ate has the, duty to ask itself, even as United States.
the people ofWe the Nation ask themselves: Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, will the detriment not only to the nations around
"Where do , go from here?" And it the Senator from Montana yield? globe to whom we are now com-
has the duty to set forth its best Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield. mto . We
? muted, but noothinngex excecept to to enc urage
e
thoughts, its most constructive and pene- Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, it is Communists nothing
trating wisdom in a public considera- more than 20 years the t step up ei other areas of the world
world
tion of the response. to that question, guished majority leader and I first be- they tstep u their pressure against us, io
So it has been in this debate. So it came acquainted in the House of Repre- thought they might force us to
was when the joint Republican leader- sentatives. He quickly d.
Y gained for him- Seconwond, the article suggests that it
ship not only concurred in the Presi- self a reputation as a hard, indefatigable should be noted that continued concen-
dent's recent decisions with respect to worker, a man of deep conviction, a man tration on the guerrilla war in South
military action in North Vietnam but of resolute courage, who spoke that con- Vietnam has not worked very well.
did not stop there. The Republican viction no matter how unpopular or un-
joint leadership went beyond that: and pleasant it might be. All of those at- Again, I should have to agree with
suggested in effect, that this military tributes have not only remained with that statement, ascabeen use it is obvious that
.action should be expanded and that him through the years; they have be- the plan year has not in per particularly
negotiations should be shunned at this come intensified. the past year has not been particularly
time. The Republican leadership was At the joint leadership meetings we successful. We hope, however, that it
looking ahead. It. was not telling the have had with the President of the will do better.
President to enlarge and intensify the United States, the senior Senator from Third, the article states that an ail-
American involvement in the conflict in Montana has always spoken his piece, out assault on North Vietnam "raises so many words. It was, in effect, saying even if there were some gathered around the possibility of Red Chinese interven-
merely that this course should be con- the table who did no concur or who did tion." Such intervention might per-
sidered. It was entirely proper for the not like it. haps consist of as many as 30 divisions.
Republican leadership to urge the Presi- I have nothing but admiration for his These are possibilities which might re-
dent to'consider taking that course, even courage, his patriotism, and his spirit quire the President to make a momen-
as to many of its leaders have for so long of unity of purpose-that spirit that, tour decision at any time.
advocated. So far as I am aware, the when the chips are down and all the al- The article continues:
only major exception to this advocated ternatives and substitutes have been ex- Washington officialdom argues that such
course for many years has been former amined, we march in a solid phalanx, intervention is unlikely and that the United
President, Eisenhower, who first rejected That he has always done. States and its allies could handle it if it oc-
it in 1954. Mr. MANSFIELD. I thank my distin- purred, but the kind of casualties that would
The able Senators from Idaho and guished friend for his most gracious Asiai wouldaalmost certa certainly raise a public
South Dakota, no less than the Republi- remarks. outcry in the United States for the use of
cans, were. also performing a basic serv- Mr. SMATHERS. Mr. President, I nuclear weapons-which would make the
ice in their statements on Vietnam, join the distinguished minority leader danger of nuclear war between the United
They left no doubt as to their support of in congratulating) the distinguished States and Russia acute.
the President's military decisions to date, majority leader on the statement he has Obviously, that is a fact. If it were to
with respect to North. Vietnam but they just concluded. No greater patriot is develop that the Red Chinese decided to
also argued that we should not hesitate to be found anywhere than the distin- move into this area with their troops, I
to explore the path of.negotiation which guished senior Senator from Montana. cannot help but feel that the President
might lead to' a prompt end to the blood- Certainly there is no man who deals with and his advisers would have to decide
shed in Indochina and, at the same time, complex subjects with a deeper under- how far they would go, including the
preserve an opportunity for that region standing or a greater objectivity than consideration of the use of nuclear weap-
to remain, outside the suffocating mill- he. I associate myself with the remarks ons in order to stop the movement of
tary embrace of Peiping. They were not of the distinguished Senator from Illinois Red Chinese troops into South Vietnam.
telling the President , to negotiate but with respect to the distinguished major-
were saying, in effect, that this course ity leader. The final alternative, according to ng
should be seriously considered. It was Mr. President, President Johnson is North article, just enough eonfeien e bring
entirely proper for that suggestion to being deluged from all sides-newspaper he article Vietnam to the conference table.
be made,, supported .as. it was by a most articles, reporters and columnists, the The astates:
restrained, and penetrating dis- Pentagon, the State Department, and the The hope here would which to ldieve a ow
Ctission. the, approach gotiated settlement which would somehow
In both the of the Halls of Congress-with recommends- Insure that the United States; North Viet-
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
 Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5 'I8
3068 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE February
nam, Red China, and Russia kept hands oat To do so would be to compromise the Thus far, however, in the southeast
South Vietnam. freedom of the South Vietnamese and Asian crisis, the Vietcong, the Hanoi re-
It would seem to me from last week's the freedom of the entire subcontinent gime, the communist Chinese, and So-
r of southeast Asia. viet Russia have demonstrated, not the
events that clearly this the ruin, e I have heard it stated recently by those usefulness, but the futility of conducting
which to are now actually pursuing; who would seem to know best, that the another Geneva-like conference at the
seeking to make a clear that he Chinese South Vietnamese have not fought bet- present time. The United States did not
expensive Nortoberh Vietnamese ththis is an ter than they might have, up to this start the aggressions in Vietnam. Short
it will neor that we will et 1not o that point, partly because of their concern of capitulation, we cannot dictate when
t, that we would eventually negotiate away they will stop.
t willhrown not o out, easy,
that asy, we will not be driven be
out, but that we will live up to our com- their freedom, that we would suddenly We can, however, pursue every possible
mitment. When they have a complete withdraw, and that the South Vietnam- alternative to convince the Vietcong of
understanding that itVll not be easy, ese people would then be left, helpless the expense and the futility of their pres-
but will be very costly to them, it would and hopeless, in the face of the onrush- ent course. And this we are doing.
seem that we would then be in a much ing hordes of Communists from North The United States became embroiled
better position to talk about some kind Vietnam and Red China. Up to this in South Vietnam in 1954. As has just
of negotiation. point, the South Vietnamese have not been stated, the policy was established
It would obviously appear that they been totally convinced that we were go- at that time by the then Secretary of
ing to stay there. State, John Foster Dulles, subscribed to
bate with much more ose con it nano- In recent weeks, they have been more by the very able President Dwight D.
we stus under those hem that encouraged to stand up and fight be- Eisenhower, and reaffirmed by the very
to our commitments. tht that wd cause of the very strong retaliatory able President John F. Kennedy. It ha.,;
shall first demonstrate
shall live t to our e hibland measures which the President directed once again been reaffirmed by President
slue second for that it them to would continue the horribly action action our military to take in response to Viet- Lyndon Baines Johnson. It is still. in
t
which they now pursue. Then we would tong attacks on our forces at Pleiku. effect.
not be negotiating from a position of Some critics have indicated that Presi- Thus far, President Johnson has acted
weakness and our chances for a settle- dent Johnson has not indicated with decisively in responding to the Commu-
ment favorable to us would certainly sufficient clarity the willingness of this nist attacks on our troops in South
country to go to every reasonable length Vietnam.
have improved tremendously. in seeking a peace with honor and jus- I am sure that no one is more anxious
Mr. has time each of been sag- tice. It seems to me that the proper to see this problem settled peacefully,
gives to President and time again been sung response to this criticism is that America with honor, and justice, than is the Pres-
histed to rs, he Johnson. In making today has more military power at her ident of the United States. Surely we
hs decisions, has wisely hhe
counsel el o of former hPresident nt Eisenhower, enodisposal than any nation or any tempi- would all like to settle this problem.
and, while he lived, he obtained the ad- nation of nations on the face of the Perhaps we can. But, Mr. President, we
vice and recommendations of Gen. Doug- earth. America's restraint, in the face of can only do that when we have convinced
las MacArthur, who cautioned against this overwhelming military advantage, the Communists that they will have to
this Nation's ever being involved in a should convince friend and foe alike that pay very dearly if they continue to act
major land war on the Asian Continent. the United States seeks no expanded war. as they have been acting, and that we
As President Truman put it a few days We seek no domination. We seek noth- do not intend to be forced out nor corn-
ago, and I am paraphrasing his re- ing for ourselves but the assurance that promised out of South Vietnam.
marks, "I have complete confidence in the South Vietnamese people, to whom We shall live up to our commitments
the day-to-day decisions being made by we have made a commitment, will be left there and elsewhere around the globe.,
our Commander in Chief." By virtue of alone, free from Communist tyranny, to We shall and we must continue though it
his position, he is better informed on pursue their own destiny in their own will co and even go deal of energy and
the situation in South Vietnam than any manner. Aeff merican a ethe Much preci o asked for,
other man in America. Mr. SALTONSTALL. Mr. President,
I cannot help but feel the same way will the Senator yield? much is at stake. I am one who has a
Mr. SMATHERS. I yield. particular concern about this matter,
knout i I am encoura by the Mr. SALTONSTALL. Mr. President, because my own son happens to be on a
owledge that more than three de e cade- what the Senator means by saying that destroyer operating at this particular
experience th decision i- we do not seek these things is that what time in the Gulf of Tonkin.
of experien making pr ce enters into
mes that wpat which hi s. he g he we do seek is greater opportunity for our President Johnson will, I feel, consider
eludes he gained, when he
in
was a Senator, in serving as chairman wOwn surity and for that of a, orld. That is what we are working for,r, wa ill negotiated America's tvit lninthat terests course
of the Military Preparedness Subcom and that is why we want to help our ad- southeast Asia and promote the true
mittee.
As we all know, President Johnson is ministration determine at the present cause
Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, will the
now giving to this particular problem time when to confer and what to do in Senator yield?
all of his talents, all of his energy, and order to reach that end.
all of his thinking in determining the Mr. SMATHERS. Mr. President, I Mr. SMATHERS. I yield.
best course for the United States of thank the Senator for his statement. Mr. JAVITS. First, I should like to
America to pursue in the southeast Asian That seems to be exactly what we are c mecca entthe Senator from Florida on
crisis. endeavoring to do. satemet.
I fully concur with the statement once Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, I hope The responsibility of the Senate is par-
made by Sir Winston Churchill: the Senator will yield when he is through. titularly heavy. The Senator from
We don't increase our own security by Mr. SMATHERS. I shall be happy to Florida spoke about his son. I think I
throwing little nations to the wolves. do so. speak for every Senator enator out th when ere I than that
We did not do this in Greece or in President Johnson has not rested his we would about be e o u tth matter. be
Turkey. We did not do this in the Mid- case on our obvious military restraint. votin g oulld easy or say ingre have h be casualties.
wh East. Assuredly, we did. not do it one who would abundantly clear to any- is to to e
including the So- The question is, When and where?
when we adopted the Marshall plan to viet Foreign Minister in personal conver- I agree with the Senator from Illinois
Europe. did not do it in Korea, our commi tment to Western , cations, that the United States seeks no and the Senator from Florida that it is
when it became when painfully expensive to broader war but, on the contrary, stands a calculated risk when the Chinese Com-
stay there. We have not done it in ready to cooperate in peaceful efforts at mhunists are over there and we are over
Africa. I believe and I hope that we any time.
shall not do it in southeast Asia. He has said that he would go any- Much as I admire my colleague, I think
The cause of our own freedom and where, at any time, and talk with any- I would not merely say "amen" to what
the cause of peace cannot be served by one about the prospects for peace, with heon has The but
inI a pea tic as sugges-
negotiating from a position of weakness. justice and honor. ti. m leader
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
 Approved For Release 2003/10/15 -CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -.SENATE
neighbors. We foresee a day when this bor- Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, it was
der will unite more than, it divides. a strange experience to listen to the sen-
As Speaker Sam Rayburn often said, "The for Senator from Idaho and the junior
way to have a friend is to be a friend." We Senator from South Dakota in this
hope that we, can be worthy of that admoni- Chamber yesterday.
r
I confess that I listened with mixed
Mr. SMATBERS. Mr. President, I emotions.
sugi;'est the absence of a quorum. I was confused because I thought, as
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The. I listened, that the calendar-showing
clerk will call the roll. 1965-was in error. For as I heard their
The legislative clerk proceeded to call high hopes of doing business with the
the roll. cruel and evil aggressors, it seemed that
Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. KEN-
NEDY of New York in the chair). With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
DECEPTIVI- METHODS OF PACKAG-
ING OR LABELING OF CERTAIN
CONSUMER COMMODITIES
Mr. HART. Mr. President-'
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. HAR-
Ris in the chair) The Senator from
-Michigan,
Mr. HAR'T'. I have consulted with, the
distinguished minority leader, in order
that the schedule which is burdened, to-
day mad be eased. I ask unanimous con-
sent that consideration of the reference
of Senate 995 which is now on the table,
and which by an earlier agreement was
to be considered today, be deferred until
tomorrow.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is the
'senator from Michigan asking that the
bill lie on the table for .another day?
Mr: HART. The Chair is correct-
through today.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered; and the bill
will lie on the table for' another day.
Mr.,HAR'T, It is understood that the
bill may be called up tomorrow.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. DIRKSEN. 1Vfr, President, a par-
liamentary inquiry.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from Illinois will state it.
Mr. DIRKSEN. Yesterday, as I un-
derstand, the Pastore ruling with respect
to germaneness was waived, and I there-
fore assume.. that it still stands as of
today.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator is correct.
Mr. DIRKSEN. 'The so-called gold
bill, as I understand it, is also the pend-
ing order of business.
The PRESIDING OFFICE The
Senator is correct. V
THE SITUATION IN VIETNAM
Mr.. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, I ask
for recognition to make a few remarks
--.bout a subject on which there was a
good deal of discussion in the Senate yes-
terday.
The 1?REStDINC OFFICER. The
Senator from Illinois is recognized.
No. 32-25
year of the hopeful, but alas, unrealistic
negotiations with the Communists for
the peaceful division of North and South
Vietnam.
Or perhaps we were back in 1962 when
a peaceful settlement was once again
sought-this time in Laos-with the Red
aggressors. We negotiated. We acted
in good faith. The Communists took
our good faith for weakness, and free
men ever since have been paying the
price in blood for our naivete,
But then I realized it was February
17 of 1965. As I translated, as best I
could, the Senators' words into thoughts,
I realized that our Nation was being
urged to conduct another experiment to
determine if the Communists have
stopped lying and will now, like good
men, keep their promises.
'Mr. President, you know, and, I know,
that the Communists will not do any
such thing.
I say to my distinguished colleagues
who are advocating negotiation: Before
ydu try to entice freemen back into the
Red bear trap of negotiation, tell the
aggressors to show some evidence of
good faith. This they can do by simply
complying with their Geneva agreements
of 1954 and 1962.
But, again, you and I know that the
Communists will not do this. They
would have to give up the dividends of
their deceit. They want more of those
kinds of profits. They want them the
same way-by negotiation.
Another round of negotiations like
1954 and 1962 and we shall find our-
selves negotiated right out of Asia and
right into a really big war.
If we do not man the ramparts of free-
dom on our outer defense line from
Korea to South Vietnam, we shall inev-
itably be facing the enemy on the inner
line from Alaska to Hawaii.
And I was sad, too, as I listened to
their strategic appraisal of our position
in southeast Asia: They spoke at dif-
ferent times, but it was more like a
chorus-a chorus of despair sung to the
tune of a dirge of defeat. I was truly
sad to hear, in this Chamber, which
echoes with the courageous words of
"brave men now gone, the opinion that
we cannot win,' that in effect we must
break our word to the South Vietnamese.
Who, then, Mr. President, will ever again
accept our word?
All this is nothing but an unnecessary
confession of defeat. However such
proposals for negotiation under pressure
may be explained or .camouflaged by in-
tricate rationals, it is simply a proposal
to run up the white flag before the world
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
3065
and start running away from commu-
nism. Of course, we will eventually have
no more room to run.
I was also glad when I heard those
speeches of despair yesterday in this
Chamber. I was glad that they were
made here-now-at this time-that
they were not made to the freezing Con-
tinentals at Valley Forge-to John Paul
Jones on the leaky Bon Homme Rich-
ard-to our embattled GI's at Bastogne-
or to our Marines at the Chosen Reser-
voir.
I suspect that the urgings of the "you-
can't-win" exponents would have been
viewed less tolerantly then than now.
And now, Mr. President, I would like
to address my remarks to a few of the
strategic conceptions expressed in the
course of yesterday's debate.
In the course of his remarks the Sen-
ator from South Dakota told this Senate
that Japan, the Philippines, India, Paki-
stan, Australia, and New Zealand "plus
the. Russians and our European allies
have an interest in joining with us to
stabilize southeast Asia."
This is really adding fable to myth.
Russia. Does not the Senator know of
Mr. Kosygin and his recent travels; his
conferences with Mao in Peiping; his
consultations in North Korea; his stay in
Hanoi; his promises of military assist-
ance to the North Vietnamese aggres-
sors; the delivery, already, of some of
those weapons; his arrogant denuncia-
tions of the United States; and Russia's
demands for our withdrawal from south-
east Asia?
Anyone who believes that the Kremlin
will join with us to bring peace and free=
dom to southeast Asia can also, it ap-
pears, believe that Communists do not
lie.
The senior Senator from Idaho has,
also, made some interesting but puzzling
statements. _ For instance, he proposes
an "international agreement for the neu-
tralization of the whole region that used
to be "French Indochina." Now, if that
is what he wants there is no need for
new negotiations. All that is needed is
for the Communist aggressors to back
up and live up to their agreements of
1954 and 1962.
The only thing to negotiate in a new
conference would be how much the Reds
could keep of what they have gained by
breaking their previous agreements.
And that will not settle anything.
His suggestion that the United States
pledge "our armed might" in defense of
Asian governments against Chinese at-
tack raises an interesting point. Would
such a pledge apply only to what the
Senator terms "overt" attacks? If so, it
is meaningless in view of the Communist
preference for subversive "wars of liber-
ation." But, if it does include indirect
and subversive aggression, then the Sen-
ator is really proposing that we start
moving not only into South Vietnam, but
also into Thailand because Red China
has called for the overthrow of that pro-
American government and has already
begun a propaganda, subversion and
guerrilla campaign against the Thais.
And Laos, too,,. is under Red attack. And
 3066
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
CONGRESSIONAL 'RECORD - SENATE February 18
to the south, Malaysia is fighting off Su-
karno, who is openly supported by Pei-
ping and Moscow.
Thus, if it is proposed that we pledge
to defend our friends In southeast Asia
against aggression by subversion and in-
filtration-which are the typical Com-
munist tactics-then, according to the
Senator, we should be moving U.S. forces
into most of southeast Asia right now.
But, at the same time, the Senator is pro-
posing we negotiate ourselves out of
South Vietnam.
11 This is, it seems, a strategy of moving
in all directions at the same time. It
might confuse the enemy, but it would
certainly confuse everyone on our side
from Joint Chiefs of Staff to the hum-
blest squad-leader.
In all seriousness, Mr. Presidents there
are some fundamentals that have been
sidestepped in all this impassioned plead-
ing for us to default on our promise to
South Vietnam.
There is some vague idea that what is
going on in South Vietnam can be neatly
separated from the rest of the Commu-
nist aggression throughout the vast
southeast Asian peninsula. This is stra-
tegic nonense. South Vietnam's struggle
against communism is inseparably linked
with the other Communist-caused con-
flicts in the area.
If we let South Vietnam go, another
giant step in the march of communism
will be taken, and the remaining nations
of the southeast Asian peninsula will be
In ever-deepening danger.
Without South Vietnam where do we
make a stand? In Thailand? Or do we
defend Singapore? Would we let that
great base, controlling the water corri-
dor between the Pacific and Indian
Oceans fall to Communist aggression?
To negotiate in South Vietnam while
Communist aggression is spreading
throughout the entire southeast Asian
peninsula is like a man trying to paint
his front. porch while his house is on fire.
Mr. President, our Nation has taken a
stand in South Vietnam. Three Presi-
dents` have faithfully stood by that
pledge. It is not a partisan political is-
sue. It is one of principle, of our good
faith, and one, most certainly, of our
own national security.
As I hear these claims that we cannot
win, that ;we have got to negotiate`
make a deal so we can get out of South
Vietnam-I am grieved, but not sur-
prised. This is not the first time our
spirit has been tested in crisis.
TIiomas Paine said it well, in 1776:
These are the times that try men's souls.
The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot
will, in this crisis, shrink from the service
of their country; but he that stands it
now, deserves the love and, thanks of man
and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not
easily conquered; yet we have this Consola-
tion with us, that the harder the conflict, the
more glorious the triumph.
Mr. SALTONSTALI. Mr. President,
will the Senator yield?
Mr, DIRKSEN. I, yield.
Mr. SALTO1&STALL. I commend the
Senator from Illinois, the minority lead-
er, for the remarks he has made. I seems
to we very clear that we must go to any
conference table from a position of
strength rather than weakness. If we
go to a conference table now, it will not
be construed that we are acting from a
position of strength.
Our boys are being killed. Our boys
are being wounded. We cannot take that
lying down. We must retaliate. As long
as our boys in uniform In South Vietnam
are doing their part, we must live up to
our part at home.
As the distinguished Senator from Illi-
nois has stated, if the Russians, the
Chinese, or any other nation in that part
of the world on the Communist side
agrees to confer at the present time, they
Will do so because they feel that they
can gain something from the negotia-
tions, perhaps more territory or increased
influence throughout the world.
The argument has been made that the
United Nations can keep the peace in
that part of the world. We have seen
what has happened in instances in which
we have asked the United Nations to
join with us in keeping the peace in other
sections of the world. No other nation
joins with us in the endeavor.
The French, the Communists, and
other nations-and I do not put the
French in the same class as I do the
Communists-do not join in the attempt
to keep the peace. We know that we
must get an affirmative vote on the part
of the Security Council to obtain the
support of the United Nations. That is
impossible at the present moment.
If we yield at the present time and
confer on South Vietnam, as the Senator
from Illinois has so well said, our rela-
tions In many other areas of the world-
not only in Vietnam, andlndonesia, but
also in Japan, Korea, even Germany, the
Congo and other parts of Africa-will be
affected.
We have all of those things to con-
sider. We must consider the course to
pursue on the basis of what would occur
in other places in the world as well as
what would occur in South Vietnam.
The important point is that we should
not confer unless we can confer from
strength rather than weakness, and we
must retaliate if our boys are killed and
wounded. That means something to
every one of us In one way or another.
I commend the Senator for what he has
said.
Mr. DIRKSEN. I appreciate the con-
currence of my distinguished friend from
Massachusetts.
Mr. SMATHERS. Mr. President, I
commend the able Senator from Illinois
for the statements which he has made.
I commend him for the position which he
has taken. I cannot help but believe that
he is correct in what he has said. I can-
not help but believe that, as much as we
would like to negotiate an honorable
peace and as much as we would like to get
out of South Vietnam, we find that there
is no cause to believe that there can be a
fair negotiation, but on the contrary
negotiating at this time would amount
to a complete surrender of South Viet-
nam and the final giving away of Malay-
sia, Thailand, and Cambodia, comprising
roughly 1.5' billion people in that impor-
tant area. I hope, in a few moments, to
make a brief statement along the same
line that the Senator has just taken. I
commend him and associate myself with
him. I hope that other Senators will
do the same thing.
Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, I yield
the floor.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
had not intended to speak at this time
because I thought that the distinguished.
Senator from Florida [Mr. SMATHERS]
and the distinguished Senator from
Ohio [Mr. LAUSCHE] were to engage in a.
colloquy with the distinguished minority
leader. But I feel I should make a few
remarks on the subject under discus-
sion, and I think it is well that the sub-
ject is being discussed in the Senate.
As Senators know, I was not in the
Chamber yesterday to hear the statement
of the Senator from Idaho [Mr. CHURCH]
and his brilliant subsequent colloquies
with the Senator from Missouri [Mr.
SYMINGTON] and the Senator from Wyo-
ming [Mr. McGEE]. Nor was I present
Apr the statement of the Senator from
South Dakota [Mr. MCGOVERNI. How-
ever, I have had an 'opportunity to
familiarize myself with what transpired
from the RECORD. I have also acquainted
myself with the statement on yesterday
of the Republican leadership with regard
to Vietnam and have just listened to the
statement of the distinguished minority
leaderon this question.
I want to say to the Senators who have
participated, by these various means, in
the debate on the Vietnamese question
that they have made an outstanding
contribution, a necessary contribution, a
contribution in keeping with the best
traditions of the Senate. They have
raised and discussed with lucidity and
discernment, and with knowledge and
discretion this most serious problem.
What impresses most in these pro-
ceedings is the patriotic unity, irrespec-
tive of party, which is revealed in them.
I say to the distinguished minority lead-
er that, as always, he has displayed his
great Americanism, his dedication to
country far beyond dedication to party
in his prompt support of the recent and
most difficult decisions which the Presi-
dent has had to make with respect to
Vietnam. It is what the Nation has
come to expect from the minority leader
when complex questions of the national
well-being are involved. While he ought
never to be taken for granted, and he
never is, it is, nevertheless, a profound
reassurance to know that the great Sen-
ator from Illinois can be counted on to
put the best interests of the Nation first
in any critical situation.
I think this debate on Vietnam, Mr.
President, has been of profound sig-
nificance if for no other reason tha a
that every participant accepted an iden-
ical starting point-support for the
President in a critical international sit-
uation. There is no doubt and no other
government can have any reason to
doubj that we stand together when the
chips are down. The recognition of the
President's paramount and immensely
difficult responsibilities has been imme-
diate and automatic, by all concerned.
That his hand is upheld by all was made
clear by the Senator from Idaho, the
Senator from South Dakota, the Repub-
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
 x012 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE February 18
at,the time of Dunkirk or that President
Truman enter into negotiations with the
Communists when we stood with our
backs to the sea in the Pusan perimeter.
Such negotiations could only have termi-
nated in total surrender.
I do not think the position of the free
world is as desperate now as it was at the
time of Dunkirk or Pusan. And I am also
confident that if we show the same will
to persevere that Britain displayed at
the time of Dunkirk and that we our-
selves displayed at the time of Pusan,
and if we refuse to listen to. the counsels
of despair, a time will ultimately arrive
when we shall, be able to neogtiate in
honor.
In addition, I feel compelled to com-
ment on another statement made by the
senior Senator from Idaho-a statement
which is not only completely contrary to
the facts but which I consider most un-
fortunate in terms of its impact on
American interests in Africa.
The Senator is apparently strongly op-
posed to the modest assistance which we
are now, giving the legitimate govern-
ment of the Congo to help them resist
the pro-Communist rebels who have been
operating with open foreign backing.
Despite the massive evidence that the
rebellion has been organized and master-
minded by the Chinese Communists, de-
spite the long party line record of Chris-
tophe Gbenye, the rebel leader, despite
the evidence that he has been receiving
funds from Communist sources, the Sen-
ator prefers to, believe that the rebel
movement is not really Communist in-
spired, but basically African nationalist.
Also, despite the large quantities of
Chinese and Soviet arms which have
been captured by the government and
put on, display, the Senator tells us that
the rebel source, of supply-Algeria and
Egypt-"would seem African enough."
The senior Senator from Idaho also
deprecates our association with Tshombe.
He says:
What' matters is how the Africans see him.
And African animosity toward Tshombe is
so intense that he is even barred from asso-
ciating with other African leaders, having
been physically excluded from their meet-
ings. To them. he Is the African equivalent
of an "Uncle Tom." a puppet of the Im-
perialists who uses white mercenaries to sub-
due his own countrymen. I doubt that
Tshombe will even win African acceptance.
Our involvement with him serves only to
turn the tide of African opinion Increasingly
against us.
I know there has been a good deal of
propaganda about Tshombe being unac-
ceptable to other Africans. This propa-
ganda, however, was always grossly
exaggerated. In the U.N. debate, for
example, the representative of Nigeria
made an impassioned defense of
Tshombe. By itself, this should have
chiefs of state said that they "energeti-
cally condemn the action of certain
countries, notably Ghana, which harbor
agents of subversion and organized
training camps on their territory."
Mr. HOLLAND. I was happy to
yield to the Senator from Connecticut.
I yield now briefly. to the Senator from
In additionY to the support of, the r STRATiGG IN A STRAITJACKET
count on the support of Nigeria and
Liberia, while Morocco, Tunisia, and
Ethiopia are certainly not unfriendly.
As of this moment, in short, Tshombe
has the acceptance or support of a ma-
jority of the African nations.
America will not long survive as a free
nation if we permit the rest of the world
to go Communist. Our own national se-
curity demands that we draw the line
against Communist expansion-in Asia,
in Africa, in Latin America, and in Eu-
rope. It demands that we give assistance,
as we have done ever since the Truman
doctrine, to all those nations, large and
small, who are fighting to protect their
independence against Communist sub-
version and aggression.
It would be a terrible blow to the en-
tire free world and to our security if
the Communists were ever to take over
the whole of Africa. And this is precisely
what would happen if they succeeded in
bringing the Congo under their control.
The United States is supporting the gov-
ernment of Prime Minister Tshombe be-
cause it is now generally realized that
Tshombe may well be the only Congolese
who has the combination of qualities
necessary to save his country.
As Senators will recall, the senior Sen-
ator from Idaho and I had some sharp
differences over the question of the
Congo at the time of the U.N. military
action in Katanga. It was always my
regret that when he and several other
Senators visited the Congo in the fall of
'1960, for the purpose of ascertaining the
facts, they did not take the time to visit
Elizabethville and to meet with Prune
Ministers Tshombe. I feel that the un-
fortunate. prejudice which he still dis-
plays against Prime Minister Tshombe
stems in large part from this lack of per-
sonal contact. In the absence of such
contact, the Senator from Idaho inevita-
bly believed some of the propaganda di-
rected against Tshombe during this
period by the three most formidable
propaganda machines in the world-the
Communist apparatus, our own appa-
ratus, and the U.N. apparatus.
I hope that my friend, the senior Sena-
tor from Idaho, will consent to recon-
sider his position in the light of the facts
I have here presented and of the present
situation in Africa. I know that many
people in the State Department, who. at
one time shared the Senator's personal
prejudices against Tshombe, have com-
pletely revised their estimate of him as a
result of their experience with Tshombe
since he became Prime Minister,
And I would like to express the further
hope that when Prime Minister Tshombe.
visits this country, as he is no doubt
bound to do at some future date, the
senior Senator from Idaho will meet him
with an open mind and a willingness to
unanimous consent that there be printed
in the RECORD a most powerful editorial
from the February Issue of Navy maga-
zine.
The editorial is entitled "Strategy in a
Straitjacket" and poses some provoca
tive questions about our southeast Asian
policies. It points out that the American
.habit of landlubber thinking has oper-
ated to restrict utilization of the sea-
power available to United States and
South Vietnamese forces.
The editorial suggests' several ways in
which our seapower potential in the area
can be effectively used to influence the
crucial guerrilla battle on the land. I
commend to the Senate' this constructive
criticism of our Vietnam operations.
There being no objection, the editorial
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
STRATEGY IN A SRATr,TACKEf
A British Army sergeant, in Singapore for
the defense of Malaysia, was interviewed re-
cently by an American reporter. The talk
soon turned to the agonizing war in South
Vietnam and the Tommy put a question of
his own:
"Why In the devil don't you use that
mighty 7th Fleet of yours?"
The question Is exceedingly pertinent and
we can only hope that it is being asked in
the highest councils of the Pentagon and
White House. To be sure, some units of the
fleet have been and are involved to a limited
degree in the war. There are reconnaissance
flights by carrier-based planes and snooping
by our submarines. Destroyers have fired at
menacing enemy torpedo boats and occasion-
ally they keep tabs on the flow of sea trainc
into and out of North Vietnam.
WE CAN DO MORE-
But the full potential of the fleet, even un-
der the limitations imposed by current Amer-
ican policy, is not being employed. Our forces
are under orders not to risk expansion of the
war by attacking North Vietnam, that "privi-
leged sanctuary" which has been the arsenal,
training station, and mastermind of the Com-
munist Vietcong Insurgency in South Viet-
nam. We will not argue the sense of this
restriction here, except to any that one day-
hopefully--we will realize that the war in
Vietnam is our war.
What we are talking about and what the
Tommy meant, of course, is the US. Navy's
ability to influence the land battle. South
Vietnam has a long coastline, and the Com-
munist guerrillas control a substantial por-
tion of it. . Also, there are many miles of
rivers in the country, We are not taking full
advantage of these facts.
Why isn't the enemy continually harassed
from the sea and inland rivers?
Why can't the fleet and its aircraft strike
at targets within the borders of our South
Vietnamese ally if American planes can bomb
North Vietnamese Installations in Laos?
Why aren't we giving our South Viet-
namese allies more "on-the-job training" in
carrying out surprise seabased raids against
enemy supply depots, communications cen-
ters, and other targets?
February 12, when 13 French-speaking views will be drastically altered. Why haven't we organized a really ade-
fW* 0 quote river force for offensive operations?
African stet meetin v' r'tania th a
` in g 2AO r, X F}yyl fir6 h the production of now
called for p {4~X~~t' 6r Y7 ss girTlbYiat~ have been designed for
been enough to demolish the charge that
Tshombe is unacceptable to Africans, be-
cause,. populationwise, Nigeria and the
Congo together constitute the better part
of Black Africa,
Conclusive proof of the untruthful-
ness of this accusation was given on
 Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE
Why don't we step up our efforts to inter-
cept Vietcong infiltrators and supplies being
moved by coastal craft?
The failure to exploit our seapower-di-
reetly or in conjunction with the South Viet-
namese--is a probable result of the national,
habit of landlubber thinking. It was not
surprising that a British army sergeant
asked why we were not using the 7th Fleet.
The British, an Island people, have always
had' au appreciation of the capabilities of
seapower. Such a question could hardly
have come from an American Army non-
com--or four-star general, for that matter,
Unfortunately,,we continue to accept a dis-
credited theory, advanced, ironically, by a
British geographer-Sir Halford Mackinder.
In sort of jingle form, it goes.like this:
"Who rules East Europe commands the
Heartland. Who rules the World Island
commands the World."
Mackinder's theory was most recently up-
set in Korea when an amphibious landing at
Inchon, spearheaded by the Marines, reversed
the entire course of the war, the Korean
Army having peen, for all intents and pur-
poses, crushed. Just as it made South
Korean closer to the United States than to
Communist China in the early 1950's. Amer.
lean seapower today makes. Saigon closer to
But despite the Inchon demonstration
that the maritime nations can control the
rimlands and thus contain the, heartland
U,S. CHANGES NEEDED
Gen, Maxwell D. Taylor, a former Chair-
the master military strategist behind our
Vietnam policy since late 196- He has
lion a year). and in the number of American
advisers (22,000) on duty there, victory seems
The late President Kennedy told President
Ngo Dinh Diem about 60 days before the
latter was deposed and murdered that it was
time for "changes in policy and perhaps in
personnel" by the South Vietnamese Govern-
ment. But what was needed then and is
desperately needed now is a change in
U.S. "policy and perhaps in personnel."
While it may not be his fault, Taylor does
not have the confidence of the top leaders of
two of the most powerful elements in'Viet-
nam, the armed forces and the Buddhist
activists. His land-oriented niilitarystrategy
has not produced victory-in fact, the guer-
rillas control more than half the country
and are stronger than over. It is time for
the voices of seapower to be heard-and
heeded. The Navy and Marine Corps have the
capabilities to make a more significant con-
tribution in Vietnam-today, and under the
It is one thing to shout "patience" when
we are holding our own. But when the
handwriting on the wall reads "defeat," vir.
pression-"Too little and too late"-told
why the battles . and countries were being
loot. We hope that it will not be our epitaph
in South Vietnam.
Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, I thank
the Senator from Florida for yielding.
Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, will
the Senator from Florida yield?
Mr, HOLLAND, I yield to the Sena
for from Rhode Island.
JACK FOXE
Mr, PASTORE. Mr. President, during
our congressional recess, there passed on,
suddenly, a young man who held no pub-
lic office, but had earned the prominence
of a beloved public figure ready at the
call of every pageant and public cele-
bration that added to our Washington
scene.
Jack: Foxe was no stranger "on the
Hill." He was the friend and faithful
ally of many of us. He made his pro-
fession of the theater a respected image
in our Capital; and he brought to us, in
person, the people of the world of "make
believe," and made them our friends.
He boasted no personal fortune; he
had no patronage to bestow; but upon
his untimely death the press of our city
was moved to honest praise that could
be the envy of the mightiest.
I truly believe that such a man ig a
vital part of our history. Th9se of us
who knew him were the better for the
knowing; and all of us can be inspired by
a recital of the sincere estimates of Jack
Foxe, who was so fittingly eulogized by
Father Gilbert Hart-ke, O.P., of Catholic
University, as "husband-father-
friend."
To this end, I ask unanimous consent
that the tributes by James O'Neill, Jr.,
as published in the Washington News;
by Richard L. Coe, as published in the
Washington Post; and by Harry MacAr-
thur, as published in the Washington
Evening Star, be printed at this point in
the RECORD, in connection with my re-
marks.
There being no objection, the articles
-were ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
[From the Washington Daily News of Feb. 15,
10651
A GREAT Loss: JACK FOXE WILL BE SORELY
MISSED IN WASHINGTON
(By James O'Neill, Jr.)
When one of the great ones goes there is
not the simple ache in the heart which one
would feel for a lesser being.
There is, rather, a dreadful, frightening
void, a lack of something, and your own life
the more vacant,
Jack Foxe died.
lie was a man I loved. And all who knew
him loved him.
He was a true professional, and this is the
very top of the ladder.
He 11$0 no peers.
H e was honest; he wail; So a' '$I `you could
set your watch by hind' and he wore a smile
on his heart, for he Idnew better than most
of us that all flesh is heir to fault and many
men are little men.
PRESS AGENT
Jack Foxe was P. movie man. He was a
press agent. You can dress that word up
and Pall him a publicity man or an ad-
But he was a press agent, the finest press
agent who over had to put up with actors,.
. He died of a heart attack, at Bowie race
track, on Saturday,
Jack Foxe loved four things above all
others. His lovely wife, Violet, and his pretty
15-year-old daughter, Patti Gene, first of all.
Then came the film Industry. His friends,
and they were legion, moved up close to
movies in his affections.
Andthen the races. Jack Poe was not
only the finest press agent I will over know,
he was the finest handicapper whoever read
the Morning Telegraph,
SCHOLARSHIP
At Si, and born in New York's Hell's
Kitchen, Jack Foxe had carved ills own niche
in the world. He went to Townsend Harris
111gh" School in New York. nn a highly com-
petitive scholar ship,
But an ,'fectton for show business over-
took him and on graduation he came to
Bali'inore to usher in a theater.
He moved rapidly kip the ladder and man-
agel theaters In Springfield, Ala Es,, end here.
Udder the guidance of the late Carter
Barron, Jack Foxe became a power in Loom's
Theiters sad with Metro-Goidwyrf-Mayer.
He became Metro's and Loew'S "man in
Washington," and so much so that when the
divorcement parted the two companies he
was spirited to New York to work solely in the
Metro vineyard. A spate of this was enough
and Jack came back to Washington a few
years ago
There has been no fete, fiesta, festival, or
civic uproar in which he did not participate.
A member of the National Press Club, he
was constantly laboring in behalf of its mem-
bers to provide the finest in entertainment
and sound counsel.
No cherry blossom festival, inauguaration,
parade or hooraw for dignitaries, from Castro
and Khrushchev to Presidents of, the United
States, was complete without the fine hand
of Jack Foxe, the Flack De Luxe.
This was his professional side,,'
HUMOR
There was another, It was" the quiet,
gentle, understanding man, with, a grand
temper to be loosed on miscreants, and a
huge sense of humor, and of the ridiculous.
Nobody ever fooled him, No one ever dared
lie to him.
He was vastly admired by his competitors
and there is not a newspaperman in Wash-
ington who did not care for this wonderful,
considerate, generous, capable, outgoing
human being.
I have known Tack Pose for It years and
he was my friend. You can count friends on
the fingers of one hand. He was my thumb.
There is much more to tell, but it Is per-
sonal and will rest with me.
I shall miss him fishing on the bay, or at
Redskins' games or over a poker table, but
his gay smile and unconquerable spirit will
be with me always.
The film industry is poorer for his death,
and so ant I.
From the Washington Post (
ONE ON THE AISLE JACK Foxy
(By Richard L. Coe)
In a field notorious for brass knuckles,
rhinoceros skins, and jangled nerves, Jack
Foxe was conspicuously a gentleman.
Associated for over 30 years with Loew's
and Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, 51-year-old Jack
Foxe, whose funeral will be held today, viewed
the wide, tricky field of public relations not
as a day-to-day job blit as a long-range pro-
fession, His approach to his work could
serve as a guide to all of those in It.
IIe was, for instance, no space grabber but
a space saver.
tue Iles in impatience. During the early, vertising expert, or whatever label you care His rule was that if he didn't believe In the
bitter days of World War IT, a p tan ex- to giv v lue of a stor or ersonality, he didn't push
Approved''ior Releasea 4003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R0003001 ~100p06-5
 1965 Approved For ReO GRESSIONAL RECORD BOSENATE 300170006-5 3107
he did not study the whole matter thor-
oughly.
The American Walnut Manufacturers
Association requested that the U:5DC in-
clude the export of veneer in the cover-
'age of the order. It was not included
and the wood used in the manufacture of
walnut, veneer for export accounted for
1.8 million board feet of walnut which
was. charged to domestic use. During
the, conversion period, an estimated 1
million board feet was lost because of
the thicker cuttings. Also, the USDC is
using the base period of January 1, 1964-
December 31, 1964, for these figures al-
though the first 45 days was not covered
by . the order. Consideration of all of
these factors would indicate that the
domestic use was less than 10-percent
over the target,, a most commendable
record for the first year, of a totally vol-
Untary program.
The Secretary states further:
Furthermore, it should be noted that the
prices our domestic users pay for walnut
logs have continued to advance during the
past year, notwithstanding the reduction of
export market opportunities by reason of the
controls. Thus, control of walnut log ex-
ports has not operated as an effective domes-
Lice price' control measure, even if such a
purpose *ere a justifiable objective.
Mr. President, the Export Control Act,
which my colle gue quoted, specifies
that the purposd of the Export Control
Act has as one of its legitimate ends
stopping the inflationary impact.
I ask unanimous consent to have this
specific order printed in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the order was
ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as
follows:
[50 App. U.S.C.]
? 2022. CONGRESSIONAL DECLARATION OF POL-
ICY,
"The Congress declares that it is the policy
of the United States to use export controls to
the extent necessary (a) to protect the do-
mestic economy from the excessive drain of
scarce materials and to reduce the inflation-
ary impact of abnormal foreign demands; (b)
to further the foreign policy of the United
States and to aid in fulfilling its international
responsibilities; and (c) to exercise the nec-
essary vigilance over exports from the stand-
point of their significance to the national
security. (Feb. 26, 1949, c. 11, ? 2, 63 Stat. 7.)
Mr. BAYH. Mr. President, it is un-
fortunate that the Secretary of Com-
merce should question this existing goal,
when Congress specified in black and
white that this was the goal. The in-
dustry reports that the inflationary spiral
of the price of logs did continue in 1964
but was much diminished from prior
years. The increase in price was about
10 percent or less, compared to annual
rates of inflation? as high as 50 percent
in the years just prior to the order.
The Secretary continued:
In conservation terms, the results of the
first year of controls are quite disappointing.
Domestic log consumption has exceeded the
15-million-board-foot target by at least 4.5
million board . feet. The excess of consump-
tion over growth, instead of being 6 million
board feet as originally allowed for the first
year of controls, is' more than 10 million
board feet, or approximately two-thirds more
than the total ggrnount of new growth.
The results are disappointing, but they
are a significant improvement over the
previous years and over projected cutting
for the year, if there had been no con-
trols in effect. This projection showed
possible cuttings of 40 million board feet
compared to growth of 16 million board
feet.
The Secretary continued:
The situation does not seem to involve the
possible extinction of the walnut resource.
On the contrary, walnut'trees?are constantly
being planted and constantly maturing.
Demand is for the moment exceeding new
growth, but market factors will undoubtedly
bring about a balance, ultimately, between
consumption and growth.
This is nonsense. When we cut more
than we grow, we eventually run out.
The maturity rate is now beginning to
reflect conservation practices begun in
the early 1900's. The cutting of 14-inch
minimum diameter trees means cutting
trees 50 to 80 years old.
The Secretary continued:
Among the important factors which could
help to reduce domestic log consumption, for
example, are not only price shifts, but shifts
in consumer preferences (of which there is
already some evidence) and increasing use of
substitute materials.
The only common and practical sub-
stitute for black walnut is in logs: from
Africa; a type of mahogany grown there.
Worldwide consumer acceptance of wal-
nut is continuing and no sharp decline
is expected.
The Secretary continued:
There might be strong reason to prefer
Government controls to the free play of mar-
ket forces if undue hardship would otherwise
result for a significant segment of our econ-
omy. But in the walnut log situation I do
not anticipate that the veneer cutters and
users, and their employees, will experience
great difficulty in shifting to the use of other
woods, should that become necessary or
desirable. As a matter of fact, many of them
are already using other woods, and I am in-
formed that a further shift has already
begun in some degree.
The shift to other woods would be
simple, except that there is no domestic
product to shift to. In other words, a
shift in wood would be a shift to an im-
ported raw material.
The Secretary continues:
Even if technical difficulties were to develop
in making the transition to use of other
woods, it would seem 'preferable to try to
ease these transition difficulties rather than
continue export controls.
The only explanation of this para-
graph seems to be that the Secretary
seems to favor ARA or Appalachia pro-
jects to recover industries, rather than
export controls to protect them.
The Secretary continues:
For, while the controls may benefit log
cutters and users, they also work to the detri-
ment of the log growers and log exporters
by restricting their marketing opportunities.
There is no short-run benefit to do-
mestic cutters and users, since they are
affected by the domestic use quotas in
the short run. They have to cut too.
There is no detriment in marketing op-
portunities since the demand exceeds
growth even with the controls. The log
exporters have been disappointed in the
program mainly because the USDC has
allowed the foreign buyers to take up
most of the export quota. American ex-
port firms were _ bypassed. However,
Americans exporters still had more ex-
ports in all year-except 1963.
The Secretary continues:
Reduced export markets have had much
of their adverse impact in the Appalachian
region. This region, for reasons well known,
is particularly in need of expanded, not re-
stricted, market opportunities for its prod-
ucts.
The walnut cut in Appalachia is negli-
gible-5 percent. Most of the walnut
grows in six Central States far from
Appalachia.
The Secretary continues:
Moreover, controls on the export of walnut
logs are clearly detrimental to our balance-
of-payments position, in that they reduce to
some extent the dollar value of exports from
the United States. While the amount in-
volved may seem to be comparatively small
in the context of the entire balance-of-pay-
ments deficit, it should not be ignored be-
cause of the cumulative effect of all gains,
small as well as large.
Since extinction of walnut logs would
result in total importation of replace-
ment woods, the long-range effect of un-
controlled export would be disastrous to
the balance-of-payments position. The
amount of export dollars lost by the con-
trol is estimated to be $10 million.
Also, the export of logs and veneer de-
creases the opportunity for the domestic
walnut furniture producers, since it pro-
vides their foreign competitors with the
resources needed to compete effectively.
The export of furniture is highly desir-
able compared to the export of raw logs.
The effect of the export of a piece of fur-
niture compared to that of a log is that
there is represented in the furniture ap-
proximately 60 times the value of the
wood needed to produce the veneer in it.
The Secretary concludes:
The President in his recent message to
Congress emphasized the national concern
with regard to the balance-of-payments defi-
cit. He has called upon all of private indus-
try, large and small, to join in a cooperative
effort to make management decisions which
will increase exports and aid in reducing our
unfavorable balance of payments.
For all these reasons, I have decided not
to extend controls on export of walnut logs
beyond the period of 1 year which was origi-
nally announced. Therefore, controls on ex-
port of walnut logs will not be in effect on
and after February 14, 1965.
JOHN T. CONNOR,
Secretary of Commerce.
FEBRUARY 12, 1965.
Mr. President, let me make one ob-
servation. My colleague refers to the
Secretary's message and about the Sec-
retary's request that when we run out
of walnut that will be too bad, that we
will have to shift to some other wood.
Study has disclosed that about the best
substitute that can be found would be
African mahogany.. I believe that the
large quantities of African mahogany,
and the Philippine woods-to which my
colleague has alluded-coming into this
country to replace black walnut, would
certainly shift the Secretary's balance of
payments completely out of the water,
because we would be importing those
woods into this- country, which would
have a detrimental effect, so far as I can
see.
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
 3108
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD SENATE February 18
VIETNAM
Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President, the
charges of the minority leader, made
earlier in the day, that my address
yesterday was in effect, a proposal to
"run up the white flag" in South Viet-
nam and a repudiation of our pledge to
the Saigon government, are not only con-
trary to the facts, but contribute nothing
to a rational discussion of the problem,
The minority leader is a fine patriot,
but no better patriot than any other
Member of this body. It serves no use-
ful purpose to question the fervor, the
devotion to country or, least of all, the
courage of those of us who believe that
the dilemma of southeast Asia must find
a political, rather than a military solu-
tion.
Having stated my own views at some
length yesterday, I do not intend to re-
iterate them today. Neither do I believe
that it is necessary to call for an exten-
sion of the war in Vietnam as proof of
-one's support for the President.
Lyndon B. Johnson has repeatedly
stated that he wishes no widening of the
war in Asia. I support. him in that posi-
tion.
The military initiative we have re-
cently undertaken in the form of re-
taliatory bombings of North Vietnam
should, in my Judgment, be accompanied
by a diplomatic initiative defining the
prerequisites for a satisfactory political
settlement in southeast Asia.
I have , closely reviewed, the debate
today. But, as history shall bear witness,
nothing was said to compare, in accu-
racy of assessment, to the brilliant sum-
mation of Walter Lippmann, entitled
"The Vietnam Debate," published in this
morning's edition of the Washington
Post. I could do no better than to read
the Lippmann article for the REcoan
We are just seeing another attempt to
form a government in Saigon, and much de-
pends, for the near future at least, on
whether it is able to hold together for a
decent time. For the reason why the situ-
ation in Vietnam has become so critical in
the past 3 months is that South Vietnam
has been crumbling and is at the point of
collapse. The Vietcong have been so near
winning the war and forcing the United
States to withdraw its troops that Hanoi and
Peiping have brushed off feelers for a nego-
tiated peace. They believe themselves to be
in sight of a dictated peace.
We, for our part, have found ourselves
quite unable to put together a South Viet-
namese Government which is willing or able
to rally enough popular support to hold back
the advancing Vietcong. The American
Army fighting the Vietcong has been like
then trying to drive away a swarm of mos-
quitoes with baseball bats. However, be-
cause there is nothing else to do, we keep
on. We do not wish to face the disagree-
able fact that the rebels are winning the
civil war.
The easy way to avoid the truth is to per-
suade ourselves that this is not really a civil
war but is in fact essentially an invasion of
South Vietnam by North Vietnam. This has
produced the argument that the way to sta-
bilize South Vietnam is to wage war against
North Vietnam.
The more thoughtless and reckless mem-
bers of this school of thinking hold that only
by attacking North Vietnam. with, heavy and
sustained bombardment can we snatch a vic-
tory in South Vietnam from the_ jaws of de-
feat. They have not yet carried the' day in
Washington. But the President, when he
ordered the retaliatory raids, no doubt in-
tended to remind Hanoi and Peiping that
that the United States could, if it chose to,
inflict devastating damage.
Apart from the question of the morality
and the gigantic risks of escalating the war,
there is no sufficient reason to think that the
northern Communists can be bombed into
submission. We must not forget that North
Vietnam has a large army-larger, It is said,
than any other army on the east Asian main-
land except China's. This North Vietnamese
Army can walk, and nobody has yet found a
way of bombing that can prevent foot soldiers
from walking.
It is most likely that If we set out to
devastate Hanoi and North Vietnam, this
army would invade South Vietnam. In
South Vietnam we could not bomb the army
because that would mean that we would be
killing our South Vietnamese friends. There
is little reason to think that the Saigon Gov-
ernment and its very dubious troops would
be able to fight back, or in fact that it would
want to fight back.
The Asian Communists fight on the land,
and they think about war in terms of infan-
try. I believe that the reason why they are
not terrified, nor much deterred, by our kind
of military power is that they believe a war
on the mainland will be fought on the
ground and will be decided on the ground.
There they have not only superior numbers
but widespread popular support.
For this country to involve itself in such
a war in Asia would be an act of supreme
folly. While the warhawks would rejoice
when it began, the people would weep before
it ended. There is no tolerable alternative
except a negotiated truce, and the seal prob-
lem is not whether we should negotiate but
whether we can.
It is not certain, given the weakness and
confusion in South Vietnam, that Hanoi and
Peiping, who are poised for the kill, will agree
to a cease-fire and a conference and a negotia-
tion. But while this has, I believe, been the
implied objective of our policy, the time has
come when it should be the avowed objec-
tive, an objective pursued with all our many
and very considerable diplomatic resources.
Mr. President, I share Walter Lipp-
mann's misgivings as to whether Hanoi
or Peiping may be willing to negotiate
on any basis acceptable to the United
States. But I see nothing to be lost in
finding out.
As for any warhawk cries from the
other side of the aisle, they leave me un-
impressed. I remember Korea. I re-
call the enthusiastic bipartisan support
given Truman's decision to enter that
war. But when the casualty lists began
to grow, when the fighting would not
stop, when the going got tough, I also
remember how quickly Korea became
"Mr. Truman's war," and how the Re-
publicans made it their principal cam-
paign issue in 1952. I have not forgotten
the Republican advertisements, featur-
ing pictures of the horrors of the Korean
war, castigating the Democratic Party
as the "war party," and praising the
GOP as the party of peace. And I
remember Dwight Eisenhower's dra-
matic pledge to "go to Korea" to arrange
a truce with the Communists.
Before we go down that road again, I
should like to be certain there is no bet-
ter alternative.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. President, I
was very proud, yesterday afternoon, to
stand with the Senator from Idaho in
the most thoughtful and courageous con-
tribution that he made to our thinking
on the crisis in Vietnam.
I am happy to join him this evening,
very briefly, in a reply to the remarks
that were made earlier today on the floor
of the Senate by the distinguished mi-
nority leader [Mr. DIRKSEN].
Mr. President, yesterday on the Senate
floor, I made clear my position on the
Vietnam crisis. I said first of all that I
approved of President Johnson's re-
straint in the handling of that crisis. I
said secondly that the retaliatory air
strikes which he ordered when our forces
were attacked could be justified. I said
thirdly that I was against American
withdrawal from Vietnam unless we
could achieve a satisfactory settlement
by negotiation.
I suggested that while pursuing our
military support of the Vietnamese Gov-
ernment, we also explore the possibility
of a -negotiated settlement to end the
war in southeast Asia. If such efforts
to reach a settlement fail, we would, of
course, continue the military effort.
That position was heavily supported
by the American people in a Gallup poll
published on January 31 Which showed
that 81 percent of the American people
favor an international conference to ex-
plore the possibilities of a negotiated set-
tlement. My mail coming from South
Dakota and elsewhere supports the same
position by a ratio of 15 to 1.
It was thus with dismay that I read on
the news ticker that the Senator from
Illinois [Mr. DIRKSEN] regards-this as "a
proposal to run up the white flag before
the world and start running away from
communism." He implied that efforts
to reach a settlement in Vietnam would
lead to the collapse of American power
all the way to Alaska and Hawaii.
Now, Mr. President, in all due respects
to the very able distinguished minority
leader, I regard his remarks today as
good oratory and bad logic. I have never
advocated running up a white flag and
I do not advocate it now. I know some-
thing about war as a combat pilot in
World War II. But I do not believe that
every problem in the world can be solved
by bigger wars or even by waving the
American flag on the floor of the U.S.
Senate.
In 1952 the Senator from Illinois sup-
ported the presidential candidacy of
General Eisenhower who campaigned on
a pledge to go to Korea and end the
fighting. He won the election. He ne-
gotiated - a:, settlement. He won wide-
spread support for his efforts. It was
not surrender to explore the possibility
of a cease-fire and a settlement in Korea,
and it is not now surrender to explore
the possibility of such a settlement in
Vietnam. It is, in fact, the statesman-
ship and diplomacy of reasonable men.
By the way, Mr.President, some of the
people who are now urging President
Johnson to accelerate the war in Viet-
nam were going up and down the coun-
try attacking President Truman for con-
tinuing the war in Korea more than a
decade ago. They scornfully referred to
it as "Truman's war" and cried out
against the casualties in political
speeches to the American people.
The Senator from Illinois deplores the
fact that Senator CHuRcH and I spoke
"in this chamber which echoes with the
courageous words of brave men now
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
 1965
Approved
For 1iSON1W,17B %VJT 0300170006-5
gorse." Now, Mr. President, there are
still brave men in the Senate, and the
Senator from Illinois isn't the. only one.
It doesn't require any particular bravery
to stand on the floor of the Senate and
urge our boys in Vietnam to fight harder,
and if this war mushrooms into a major
conflict and a hundred thousand Ameri-
cans are killed, it won't be U.S. Senators
who die. It will be American soldiers
who are too young to qualify for the U.S.
Senate.
It does not even require very much
bravery to stand on the Senate floor and
say that one agrees 100 percent with the
President and the Secretary of State
and the Secretary of Defense. It is just
possible that it required more courage
for the Senator from Idaho to lead off
this debate than for the Senator from
Illinois to try to squelch it. I don't in-
tend to be squelched by innuendoes that
it is somehow un-American to try to set-
tle by conference what we have been
unable to settle on the battlefield in 11
years of fighting, in the expenditure of
$4 billion of American resources, and in
the loss of several hundred of the cream
of our American fighting forces.
Finally, Mr. President, the Senator
from Illinois suggests that if we negoti-
ate a settlement in South Vietnam,
American military power will collapse
all the way to Alaska and Hawaii. What
nonsense. America's real military power
in the Pacific will remain where it has
always been-in our naval and air power
right along the coasts of Asia. That is
a Power capable of utterly devastating
China and indeed all of Asia. Indeed,
if, we can become disentangled from the
inconclusive and costly jungle war in
southeast Asia, we will be in a better
position to use our power flexibly and
wisely than we are today.
In short, Mr. President, we have
everything to gain from exploring the
possibilities of an end to the fighting in
southeast Asia, and nothing to lose.
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, the re-
marks which have just been made by
the Senator from Idaho and the Senator
from South Dakota will make the speech
that I had intended to make so much
shorter.
Mr. President, I have waited to hear
the Senator from Idaho [Mr. CITURCH]
and the Senator from South Dakota [Mr.
MCGOVERN]. because I was away from
Washington with the official Senate
delegation to the Mexican Interparlia-
mentary Conference yesterday when
each of them made his speech of great
statesmanship on the Vietnam problem.
This afternoon I read their speeches in
the RECORD. I have waited until this op-
portunity to extend my congratulations
and high commendation to them.
For well, over,a year the senior Sena-
tor from Alaska [Mr. GRUENING] and
the senior Senator from. Oregon have
made speech after speech-sometimes
three to five times, a week-here in the
Senate urging repetitively the major
thesis of the speeches made yesterday by
the Senator from Idaho and the Senator
from South Dakota. In recent months
both of those, two great Senators, the
Senator from Idaho .[Mr. CHURCH] and
the Senator from South Dakota [Mr.
McGOVERN] have indicated in public ing policy of hypocrisy and, in my judg-
comments and in writings that they, too, ment, deception practiced upon the
are of the opinion that we cannot justify American people by John Foster Dulles,
making war in southeast Asia outside the both in,. his London Conference with Win-
framework of international law, which ston Churchill and with Anthony Eden,
has been our sad course,ofaction. and also in his conduct at the Geneva 11 After reading the speeches of the Sen- Conference in. 1954, from which he with-
ator from Idaho and the Senator from. drew when he realized that the parties to
South Dakota and hearing them today, I that conference were not going to follow
have decided to forego the pleasure of American orders,
breaking bread with the President at a
White House buffet reception,. and to
perform what I consider to be a much
greater service by speaking briefly to the
RECORD tonight in opposition to the
President's policies in Asia.
This afternoon the ticker carried a
statement of the majority leader, the
Senator from Montana [Mr. MANSFIELD]
to the effect that those who yesterday
a negotiated settlement of the crisis in, n The United States under the leader-
Asia do not disagree with the present pol- ship of Dwight D. Eisenhower refused to
icy of the President in southeast Asia,
I wish my majority leader to know that
I completely repudiate the. policy of the
President of. the United States in south-
east Asia. I. wish, the RECORA to show,
and I wish,~ny majority leader to know,
that I completely disagree with the pol-
icies the President of the United States
has come to follow in southeast, Asia due,
in my judgment, largely to the prolonged,
over-the-months representations made
to him by the Secretary of Defense, Mr.
McNamara, the, Ambassador in South
Vietnam, Mr. Taylor, the Deputy Am-
bassador, Mr. Alexis Johnson, the Sec-
retary of State, Mr. Rusk, the Bundy's
in the State Department and the White
House, and those others who have been
bent on escalating a war in Asia for well
over a year.
The time has come for the American
people to hold this administration to an
accounting for the course of action that
it has been following in southeast Asia.
The senior Senator from Oregon is satis-
fled that the Pentagon and certain people
in the State Department have been de-
termined for a long time to involve the
United States in a war in Asia.
Mr. President, I should like to say,
"Keep your eyes on their acts of provo-
cation, for they have not, in my judg-
ment, given up their intentions to pro-
voke more and more until finally they can
have an alibi and an excuse for bomb-
ing the nuclear installations of Red
China."
If they succeed in that nefarious pro-
gram, the big show is on, and the world
will then be involved in a nuclear war.
Let those on the Republican side who
talk about running up a white flag make
all the insinuations and innuendoes they
wish in seeking to reflect upon the patri-
otism of those of us who believe that the
United States ought to keep faith with
its ideals and return to the framework of
international law. But let those Repub-
licans who are now talking about white
flags not forget that we are in South
Vietnam today because of a horrendous
mistake in 1954 by Dwight D. Eisenhower,
and John Foster Dulles, the Secretary of
State.
Let the country know that what we are
doing today, so far as American policy is
concerned, is paying the price of a shock-
lie could. not keep France in the war.
He. was, determined to_ keep that war in
Indochina., going. When the nations
participating in the Geneva Conference
in 1954 refused to continue that war and
entered. into an agreement dividing
Indochina into its four parts-Laos,
North Vietnam, South Vietnam, and
Cambodia-John Foster Dulles picked up
his satchel- and. walked out, leaving
sign the accords.
I hope that yesterday the President of
the United States, at his conference with
the former President of the United
States, suggested that Eisenhower go to
South Vietnam and observe for himself
the price in American money and blood
that this Republic is paying for his colos-
sal mistake of 1954.
I am not surprised that the Repub-
licans are rallying around the Repub-
lican banner. But I should like to say
to them and to the President of the
United. States that millions of Americans
are rallying tonight around the Ameri-
can flag demanding that this adminis-
tration stop its warmaking policies in
southeast Asia before we find ourselves
in a massive and colossal war.
In speech after speech the senior Sen-
ator from Oregon has been warning of
this danger on the floor of the Senate for
well over a year. I have said we are on
our way to a war in southeast Asia. We
are in it. It is undeclared war.
That leads me to my next point. I re-
pudiate the policies of the President of
the United States in southeast Asia be-
cause in my judgment, under the Consti-
tution, he cannot commit acts of war in
North Vietnam and elsewhere in south-
east Asia without a declaration of war,
and there. has been no declaration of
war. Under our constitutional system
the Commander in Chief may reply im-
mediately in the defense of our country
until a declaration of war can be acted
upon. The President of the United
States has no constitutional authority to
proceed to lead this Nation into a war.
That is exactly what the President of
the United States is doing in these dark
hours of the Nation's history.
Mr. President, we have become the
international pawnbroker for the shoddy
foreign policies of the two dying colonial
powers of the world. We are spending
billions of dollars of the American tax-
payers' money and killing an unjustifi-
ably increasing number of American
soldiers to try to hold in hock in Asia the
military and colonial tyranny of our Eu-
ropean colonial allies. We are betraying
the history of our country and the future
of peace and freedom.
When those of us are making a plea
that we return to our treaty obligations
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
3109
 3110
Approved ForRelease 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE February 18
and that we lay before the signatories to
those treaties their duty to join in seek-
ing to work out an honorable negotiated
settlement, either through the Geneva
accords or through the United Nations
Charter, we are urging a patriotic course
of action that our Republic ought to fol-
low.
I should like to say to the Senator from
Idaho [Mr. CHURCH] and the Senator
from South Dakota [Mr. McGovzsNI,
"Do not be concerned about the abuse
and the attacks you will receive from the
superpatriots, who seem to think that
the only way to be patriotic is to ad-
vocate war."
Mr. President, I cannot reconcile that
concept of patriotism' with true patriot-
Ism.
I have just returned from Mexico.
If we continue to follow the course of
action that we are now following In
southeast Asia, we shall lose the friend-
ship and the respect of an overwhelm-
1ng majority of the peoples of the world.
It was a sad experience for me, during
the past 2 days in Mexico, to take note of
the 24-hour security protection around
the beautiful American Embassy in Mex-
ico City by Mexican riot squads, each
soldier armed with tear gas guns, and
other personnel standing by to make use
Qf,other weapons to protect the Embassy,
If that became necessary. Why was it
necessary? Because they had heard
that there was underway, a few days
ago, a plan to attack the Embassy.
I pay my high respects and thanks to
the Government of Mexico for doing
what some other governments elsewhere
in the world should have done-taking
the necessary security precautions to
protect our Embassy and to protect
American property.
But this is symbolic. We will find
throughout Latin America a growing un-
easiness about American participation
In war in southeast Asia. It was dis-
cussed again at our conference. I re-
ported on the floor of the Senate some
weeks ago that our State Department ad-
vised our ambassadors in some Latin
American countries to call on the heads
of state and ask for at least some token
support for South Vietnam-some man
power, if they could supply it; If not,
some doctors and nurses; and If they
could not send human beings, to send, at
least, some materiel.
The reports I have received are that
that; attempt to involve those countries
in the war in southeast Asia is deeply re-
sented-and it should be.
In my judgment, we do not have much
time to return to the framework of in-
ternational law. I will take the opinion
of Walter Lippmann, as read by the Sen-
ator from Idaho I:Mr. CHURCH] tonight,
over and above the opinions of Senators
who have been speaking in the Senate,
urging a further escalating of the war,
because I am satisfied that a further
escalating of the war will lead to mas-
sive world conflict. If the President of
the United States follows that course, in-
stead of becoming one of the greatest
Presidents of our history he will go out
of office the most discredited President
in our history, because the American
people will hold to an accounting any ad-
ministration that leads us unnecessarily
Into war. The President of the United
States and his advisers are tonight lead-
ing the country into an Increasing dan-
ger of massive war in Asia. It will not
be stopped until the American people
make perfectly clear to the adminis
tration that they want no more of these
violations of international law.
As the Senator from Idaho [Mr.
CHURCH] brought out a few moments
ago, there has been some comment, false
analogy, and non sequitur argument in
some of the speeches made by those who
support a further escalating of the war,
to the effect that the present situation is
somewhat comparable to the situations
that existed at the time of World War I,
World War II, and the Korean war.
We must not overlook the fact that
Laos, Cambodia, North Vietnam, and
South Vietnam were brought into being
by a negotiated treaty. South Vietnam,
along with the United States, did not
sign the Geneva accords of 1954. In my
judgment, since South Vietnam did not
sign the Geneva accords of 1954, the
United States cannot possibly justify
supporting the conduct of the dictator
in the civil war in South Vietnam on the
ground that all we are seeking to do is to
enforce the Geneva accords of 1954,
which we did not even sign.
Let us return to the conference table
and find out, as the Senator from Idaho
[Mr. CHURCH) suggested 'a few moments
ago, whether there is any hope of trying
to reach a negotiated settlement through
the Geneva Accords. Like him, I have
grave doubts now. We have gone too
far; and the chief responsibility for hav-
ing gone too far lies with the United
States, for our conduct makes it most
difficult to assume that we can persuade
the parties to the Geneva conference of
1954 to meet again and work out a nego-
tiated settlement. But we ought to try.
As I have said so many times in so many
of my speeches, we cannot escape our
responsibilities under the United Nations
Charter.
But it is said that the United Nations
Charter is fast becoming a weak reed. If
it is, I say again that the chief respon-
sibility for that lies with our own coun-
try, for no nation in the world is guilty
on the record of history of undercutting
the underpinnings of the United Nations
more than the United States, since we
started to follow our illegal course of ac
tion in South Vietnam. We have a clear
duty under the United Nations Charter
to take violations of the Geneva Accords,
violations of North Vietnam, Laos, and
even Red China, and, on occasions, Cam-
bodia and South Vietnam, too, to the
United Nations for determination; but
that we have refused to do. By not doing
so, we have become an aggressor na-
tion.
I wish to make one more point before
I close this subject. The American peo-
ple are not being told the facts about
American policy in South Vietnam. The
American people are being told what the
Pentagon, the State Department, and
the White House want to tell them, and
nothing more. That is not in keeping
with the responsibility of Government
officials toward the democratic system.
That is the way uncontrolled executive
power builds up to replace the checks
that the people are entitled to have.ex-
ercised' under our system of democratic
government. So, in my judgment, our
best hope Is to go to the United Nations,
although it will now take some rebuilding
even of the procedures of the United
Nations to get this matter into a juris-
dictional position so that the United Na-
tions can act.
So long as there is hope in, this great
crisis to produce peace the voice of the
senior Senator from Oregon will be raised
in support of such a peaceful approach.
Let me say to those who prefer blood
to peace that I am satisfied that when
history records the analysis and the ap-
praisal of this debate, we who try to lead
our country to the keeping of faith with
its professed ideal that we believe in the
substitution of the rule of law for a uni-
lateral military action, which is but the
rule of the jungle, will be judged by his-
tory as the ones who really followed a
patriotic course in trying to protect man-
kind and prevent it from destroying itself
in a nuclear war.
I am at a loss to understand how any-
one in the Pentagon, the State Depart-
ment, or the White House can think we
can continue to commit attacks in south-
east Asia without a declaration of war,
driving Russia back into the arms of Red
China. Russia cannot possibly hold any
position of influence in the Communist
segment of the world if she does not take
the steps necessary to keep her treaty
commitments to both Red China and
North Vietnam, and come to their de-
fense when they are attacked.
Mr. President, it makes me sad to find
it necessary to criticize my Government
in a matter such as this. But I have my
trust, too. And the trust that I owe
under my oath, taken at that desk, to up-
hold the Constitution, when I came to
this body four different times over the
past 20 years that I have served here, is
to protest the course of action of my
President when I think that course of
action is not in the interest of my
country.
I happen to think that the course of
action that the President of the United
States, the Secretary of State, and the
Secretary of Defense, and their advisers,
are following in southeast Asia today is
a course of action that, if it is not
stopped, will lead the world into a mas-
sive war.
Mr. President, under my discussion on
the Vietnamese problem I should like to
add this paragraph.
I am exceedingly pleased that increas-
ing numbers of American clergymen are
beginning to recognize their responsi-
bilities of spiritual leadership in regard
to the shocking morality of American
foreign policies in South Vietnam.
I ask unanimous consent to have
printed in the RECORD at the conclusion
of my remarks on South Vietnam a ser-
mon preached in Washington, D.C. two
or three Sundays ago by the Reverend
James Clark Brown, of the Cleveland
Park United Church of Christ--Congre-
gational, Washington, D.C. This sermon
is entitled "The Concern Christians Have
About Vietnam."
The PRESIDING OyPICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
(See exhibit 1.)
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
 Approved For Release , 2003110/15-: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 3111
Mr. MORSE. I would particularly the society of Jesus in the 16th century, and, world today. Not long after the Cuban
recommend that Dean Sayre of the Epis- two, the organization of the Salvation Army missile crisis.in October 1962, President Ken-
Copal Cathedral in Washington read this in the 19th century. Both groups have in- nedy was discussing this perilous event that
Berm volved failure as well as success but their had, for a time, put both the United States
overall influence has been remarkable and is and Russia with their respective atomic
iS gentleman of the cloth, who essentially due to the fact of their organiza- arsenals on a collision course. "It all seemed
could not make up his mind as to who he tion on a military principle. Ignatius Loyola easy enough," he remarked, after the Soviet
was going to vote- for in the last Cam- had no specific intent of opposing the Re- bluff had been successfully called, but the
paign because he thought neither candi- formation when-he .,Wrote his "Spiritual Ex- trouble was no one could be sure, at the
date was deserving, has apparently de- ., ercises" and founded the famous Jesuit So- outset, that the Soviets really were bluffing.
cided that the war in Vietnam is a good ciety. It is nevertheless true that the He was asked what he thought the odds
thing, despite the great issue of morality Jesuits were effective in producing a genuine were, at the outset, that the Soviets were not
which is involved in the unjustifiable historical change of direction. They were bluffing. He replied that he had thought the
instrumental, through their missionary and chance that the Soviets meant to go through
slaughter of human beings, all of educational activities, their austere intellec- to the end was "somewhere between one in
whom-Christians, Jews, Communists tual disciplines, in saving great sections of three." By the most realistic use of our
no matter what their religion, faith, or northern Europe for the Roman Catholic imagination it is impossible for any of us
nationality-happen. also to be the chil- Church and in regaining lost territory, to comprehend the terror that would have
dren of Gad. Loyola's success is in large measure due to been let loose in the world had the Soviets
I am glad that we have ,the Reverend the fact that he combined two elements of not changed their course of action. The con-
J.
Brown and an increasing success which went together perfectly; his sequence would have been what military
Jams of clergymen and this COUning own soldierly experience prior to his commit- theorists euphemistically call "a thermonu-
ment, and his recognition of the militant clear exchange." The current Pentagon esti-
who are beginnnig in increasing num- character of original Christianity. The key mate of the cost to this country of an
bers to raise their voices in a plea for to his entire enterprise is found in his terse H-bomb attack is 110 million dead Amer-
Christian leadership, for the application reference, "Christ our Commander in Chief." scans. Nonetheless, most thoughtful Amer-
nf the
rinci
Sa
bi
r
h.
les of Chr?
s one of hi
tia l
d
h
p
p
p
y
og
ap
rs: -
s
s
ea
ers
-4
n connection With the Wa1-11laKlllg poll-
cies in South Vietnam.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent. that following this sermon there
be printed in the RECORD an article pub-
lished in the Buffalo Evening News for
Saturday, January 30, 1965, entitled,
"The United States Does Not Know How
To Fight .'Invisible' Foe in Vietnam-
We're 'Own Worst Enemy'," written by
Hugh Campbell.
There being no objection, the sermon
and-article were ordered to be printed
in the RECORD, as follows:
E881BIT 1
THE CONCERN CilRISTIANS HAVE ABOUT
.:-VIETNAM \.
(A sermon preached by the Reverend James
Clark Brown, the Cleveland Park United
Church of Christ (congregational) Wash-
ington, D.C.)
"Henceforth, in the future, be made strong
in the, Lord and in the power which His
supreme might imparts. Put on the armour
of God, so as to, be aisle to stap,cl firm..against
all the strategems of the devil * * * stand
therefore, first fastening on the best of truth;
putting on the. breastplate of righteousness;
let the shoes n your feet be the gospel of
peace, to give you firm footing; and with all
these, take lip the great, shield of faith, with
which you will be able to quench all the
flaming arrows of, the evil one,"-From St,
Paul :s letter to the Ephesians, chapter,6: 10-
of a warrior; it was always the banner and For we know as a fact of our life, that we
the battle, obedience and command, com- have been destined to live at a time when
pany and militia * * *. He demanded the the skies above us may, at any moment, turn
virtues of a soldier but renounced the condi- from blue to black, erupting in the fallout
tions that fostered them." 1 of atomic war. We know, as a fact of our
This brief reminder of how, from the very life, that whatever else may be said of our
beginning of the Christian era-as well as in relationship to Communist China and Soviet
some of its most influential periods-the em- Russia=they regard any nation's military
phasis has been upon soldierly discipline; weakness or the refusal to use the strength
hard, happy, heroic living; readiness for it possesses, when threatened, an invitation
battle with the enemy (cannot one even say to their aggression and domination.
eagerness for the battle, "Woe be unto me if Having said this, think with me now in
I preach not the Gospel"). The truth of the context of our Christian faith of where
what we are thinking about comes forcefully we as a nation stand in relation to the crisis
to mind when, as 20th century Christian (or in Vietnam. Nobody but the President and
persons so aspiring to be) we are surely aware his most intimate advisers has enough in-
of two central facts: formation about the situation in Saigon,
1. If ever the world needed an authentic Hanoi, Peiping, and Moscow to become dog-
revival of the Christ-like life, it is our world. matic as to what policy should be pursued.
For you and I are confronted not simply with But surely this does not mean that we, as
the enemy of personal evil represented in the citizens, must impose a self-censorship of
seven deadly sins; such evil has always made silence and supinely accept whatever deci-
battle against God's people and always will. sions-or lack of decisions--which others
Today, however, in addition to this, the spirit decide for us. Indeed, one of the strange
of evil is equipped with hydrogen bombs; the ironies of the Vietnam crisis is that while
spirit of evil is operative in the power and the American Government Is spending nearly
practices of national governments, all gov- $2 milion dollars a day to finance our par-
ernments to varying degrees including our ticipation in Vietnam; and, since the war
own; and one consequence of all this is that began in 1946, nearly $6 billion has been
our world is now threatened with- a possible spent of taxpayers money; these facts in
destruction of hellfire and brimstone which themselves are dwarfed in significance by the
is incomparably more cruel than any such fact that as of yesterday 400 Americans have
fate ever described by the most fanatic been killed in Vietnam and the prospect of
Calvinist preacher when talking about the an expanded all-out war increases daily-
wrath of God. the irony is, that, despite all this, the Presi-
2. Surely thoughtful persons realize that dent of the United States has not yet made a
if the Christ-like life, so desperately needed, major speech on the details of this war since
is to have any realistic prospect of achieve-
that; _of a loyal soldier. Surely it need not as never before, a Christ-like faith actively "The time has come," says James Reston
be said that such a. comparison has no re- applied in every area of life, nurtured by in this morning's New York Times, "to call
ference to killing, or preparation for destruc- soldierly Christian disciplines which, will a spade a bloody shovel. This country is in
tion, but rather to, the fact that .both for the bring a creative . awakening to our frozen an undeclared and unexplained war in Viet-
Christiau .,,ab,d, thy, i ommendable,,.soldier-. souls even as the coming of God's spring na c Our members have a lot of long and
there ' is an expectation of and a readiness awakens and thaws loose the ice-locked fancy names for it, like escalation and re-
for battle with the enemy; there is a dis- waters of a thousand streams and sends them foliation, but it is war Just the same
cipline of body, mints and spirit about each rushing toward the great sea which is their a war that is not only undeclared and un-
of them, dedicated as they are to unfailing natural home. explained, but that has not even been widely
obedience to.-the commands of their respec- How contemporary in its relevance, there- debated in the Congress or the country." 2
tive leader. Thus It seems wholly natural fore, is the apostle's appeal that you and I Last August 5, in a campaign speech on Viet-
for the Apostle Paul to say of a friend, "Epa- "put on the armour of God, so as to be able nom, the President said: "There can be, and
phroditus, my brother and fellow worker to stand firm against all the. ,strategems of there must be, no doubt about the policy and
an4, Pellgw sol ier'_ (Philippians 2:_ 25), or the devil * * * first fastening on the belt no doubt about the purpose." But it is in-
when speaking to Timothy, for him to say, of truth, putting on the breastplate of right- creasingly obvious that among his own ad-
"fight gallantly, armed with faith and a eousness, * * * and with all these, taking up visers as well as the American citizenry gen-
good conscience" (I Timothy 1: 18), or again, the great shield of faith, with which you will erally, there is enormous doubt, apprehen-
"Take your share of hardship like a good be able to quench all the flaming arrows of sion, and uncertainly about both America's
soldier of Christ Jesus" (II Timothy 2:3) . the evil one." policy and purpose. Should we not as citi
Indeed, in the whole of Christian. history Think with me of how we may best seek zens, generally, be concerned that the Presi-
two of the most conspicuously effective, to implement this appeal within our life and dent inform us-more fully than he has-
eff to organizing followers of Christ with
the result of il}axilriljul usefulpess,. arid,. in 1 Elton Trueblood, `Company of the Com- - The New York Times, Sunday, Feb. 14.
fluence have been, one, the or, anization 9f nutted P.-P.A. 1965,
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006=5
 3112
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE February 18
of this country's objectives: policies as re- tong guerrillas in South Vietnam, Decem- and raise questions and make criticisms.
gards Vietnam-and of the rationale behind ber 8, 1964. Nine days before his death, Cap- Nothing that I have here said today means,
them? Should not the President himself, be tain Heck wrote the following letter to his in any way, that I or others who raise such
concerned so to tell us? Teddy Roosevelt fellow church members at Redeemer Lu- questions have less regard for the man who
spoke of the office of President as "a bully theran Church in Highland Park, Ill. Pastor occupies the incomparably burendsome of-
good pulpit" whereby one who occupies the Robert A. Wendelin called the letter-which fice of the President at this hour in our his-
office is in a singularly, fortunate position arrived on December 7-Captain Heck's "last tory. Indeed, he has our prayers and our
to educate, to motivate, and inspire, and-to will and testament," to his church: affection for we are all Americans whose com-
unite a divided and uncertain people. I say, CA MAU, VIETNAM, - mon desire is that we may be given the wis-
respectfully, to date, the President has not November 29, 1964. dorn to know what is best to do-and the
done this in relation to Vietnam. DEAR PASTOR WENoExare AND MEMBERS OF courage of God's spirit wherewith to do it.
Let me ask you: Do you feel sufficiently in- RPDEEMER LUTHERAN CHURCH: I'm writing Amen.
formed and satisfied with the answers you this letter to you because I greatly appre- From the Buffalo Evening News, Jan. 30,
have to the following questions? elated the warmth and receptiveness dis- 19ve]
1. "Is it not a fallacy to believe that any played by all of you toward my wife, my
amount of retaliatory bombing (short of lay- family, and myself. UNITED STATES DOESN'T KNow How To FIGHT
ing a massive radioactive carpet across the It is because of this demonstration of hu- INVISIBLE FOE IN VIETNAM-WE'RE OWN
waist of the peninsula) would be effective man understanding that I ask your consid- WORST ENEMY
in preventing the Vietcong from continuing eration and support of an idea that is very (By Hugh Campbell)
to receive whatever supplies they do from near and dear to my heart. (The author of this article has served as a
North Vietnam?" I'm serving here in Vietnam as an adviser Canadian member of the International Con-
t. What is the answer to the statement of to a Vietnamese combat infantry battalion, trol Commission in Vietnam for 2 years, a po-
Senator WAYNE MORSE, a member of the Sen- I am thoroughly convinced that the Commu- sition that has enabled him to see the war
ate Foreign Relations Committee, that "offi- nists cannot be defeated by simply killing firsthand from both sides. An RCAF squad-
cial testimony regarding the supplies of the Vietcong. ron leader in World War II, Mr. Campbell is a
Vietcong rebels makes clear that 90 percent There are many civic action programs un- distinguished corporation lawyer with offices
of -their weapons were captured from GOV- derway with the goal of winning the support in Vancouver. He resides at Campbell River,
ernment sources and that there Is very little of the people by improving their social and British Columbia.)
evidence that support for the Vietcong Is economic conditions. There is a tr mendous now entering its third
third
coming from the north. They are strongest need for skilled technicians and p4ople with The war is in noVietnam. Aday
in the southern tip of South Vietnam, fax- a strong sense of Christian devotion to Im- year e a United d States
nouncement from again expect war in the e Any
from North Vietnam, and they are part the many advantages of our way of life now w we we can full-scale
customary American high pro-
armed largely with American weapons cap-, to these poor people who have so few bless-
tured from the Government forces"? ings. mand in Saigon to the effect that, while the
3, "How much of the success of the Viet- People who are willing to spend a year or situation is serious, it is not hopeless; and
cong Is explained not so much by Communist two-with the possibility of losing their that the war can and will be won.
supplies or direction, but by the justified des-, lives-while working at the grassroots of After nearly 2 years in Vietnam, I've heard
pair and dissatisfaction of the Vietnamese the problem area could contribute to the de- a good many such assurances. But since, as a
people, now in their 20th year of continuous feat of the Vietcong and thus insure the Canadian delegate on the three-nation In-
war; by their lack of confidence in the mill- reduction of the threat of communism to our ternational Control Commission, I had a
tary dictatorship under which they live and society. unique opportunity to observe the war from
which is possible only by reason of American I have not discovered a single L'titheran both sides of the firing line, I think the
support? If the purpose of the war in Viet- missionary working in this area. By send- Americans are talking through their well-
narn Is to establish freedom why do the Viet- ing some Lutheran ministers and laymen padded brass hats.
namese people, themselves, have so little of here in the "field" (not to Saigon but to the The war, as It's now being waged, cannot
it? 'There is no freedom In South Viet- outlying area) to see what a wonderful op- be won by our side--because the Americans,
nam,' Senator MORSE recently said, 'and portunity exists to -orve the Lord, the initial for all their brave talk about developing new
there has never been any freedom in South step could be accomplished. antiguerrilla techniques, are still using ob-
Vietnam since the United States took over. It is easy to sit back and engross ourselves solete methods to fight a new kind of in-
There has been no freedom since the first with the numerous blessings and scientific visible enemy.
American puppet, Diem, became the first dic- achievements of our society; but for those Exactly how Invisible this enemy-the
tator of South Vietnam, followed by General who desire a richer, fuller life and who would Communist Vietcong-can become was forc-
Minh, followed by Khanh, and now followed be gratified by contributing to the preserva- ibly demonstrated to me one day on a dusty
by complete chaos'." tion of our many freedoms-there-are many gravel road leading through the jungle in
Tell us, Mr. President, more clearly than Vietnamese who would be eternally grateful North Vietnam. It was a routine inspection
you have as to why you and your advisers for your assistance. patrol for the International Control Com-
apparently believe that the retaliatory raids i pray that you will do your utmost to urge mission and, for no apparent reason, the
which have already come as close as 35 miles our Lutheran Church to solicit aid in the Communist officer in the lead jeep suddenly
from the Communist China border will cre- form of devoted skilled personnel to assist suggested a halt. -
ate an atmosphere in which negotiations for and guide these very needy people. We piled out of our jeeps and stretched our
peace can then be undertaken (by us) from Sincerely, legs, apparently in the middle of nowhere.
a position of strength? Does not this reason- NORMAN "RUSTY" HECK f Just as inexplicably, he then suggested we
ing assume that North Vietnam and Red That eloquent letter says much to all of resume the patrol. As the convoy started off,
China would be willing to do what we our- us about many aspects of our Christian faith he beeped his horn, and, somewhere nearby,
selves are unwilling to do-that is to nego- and life. Let me, just now, emphasize again a whistle shrilled.
tiate from a position of weakness? Also, a single sentence of it: "I am thoroughly Instantly, both sides of the road were lined
what would our reaction be if enemy bomb- convinced that the Communists cannot be with troops, grinning infantrymen whose
ing came within 35 miles of our border? defeated by simply killing Vietcong." Sure- faded khaki uniforms contrasted sharply with
Mr. President, why have we not taken our ly, the complex problems of Vietnam and the dark jungle background. They'd been
case to the United Nations? Article 33, sec- southeast Asia cannot be settled by arms there all the while, standing not a dozen
tion 1, of the U.N. Charter reads: "The alone. "An infinity of social, political, eco- yards from the convoy. But because of the
parties to any dispute-the continuance Of nomic, religious, tribal, nationalistic, his- foliage that covered their backs from helmet
which Is likely to endanger the maintenance toric and traditional factors are at work in to canvass sneakers, they'd been invisible to
of international peace and security, shall, Vietnam." How sad it is that often gov- three experienced officers.
first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, - ernments, like individuals, find it easier to There was nothing threatening about the
inquiry, conciliation * * " or other peaceful compound a mistake by continuing in it mock ambush. The Communist troops were
means of their own choice." Secretary Gen- rather than confessing a mistake and turn- simply practicing camouflage, and used the
eral U Thant has said: ing away from It. The French, after several International Control Commission as an tin-
"I do feel very strongly that means must years of war and the death of 240,000 of her witting umpire. And although their camou-
be found, and found urgently, within or out- finest sons who lay down their lives in Indo- flags was excellent, it was the mobility of the
side the United Nations, of shifting the quest China, withdrew and it is to her honor that troops that impressed me most.
for a solution away-from the field of battle she did. Let us be guided by the spirit They were many miles from any known
to the conference table." Perhaps the most enunciated by the late President Kennedy: base, and they carried on their backs every-
moving appeal that we see the futility of "Let us not negotiate in fear, but let us not thing necessary for living and fighting- They
expan4ing the war in order to win the peace fear to negotiate." didn't need roads, jeeps, helicopters, or mobile
has been voiced by a young man, Capt. Nor- One final word: It is too easy, I know, to kitchens. They were jungle fighters, as a u-
man W. Heck, Jr., who was killed by Viet- stand outside the terrible office of President sive as poison gas and twice as deadly-t he
kind of guerrillas who wore down the French
Senator WAYNE MORSE on the floor of the Published in an edition of Church Week, masters of Indochina, and finished them off
Senate, Wednesday, Jan. 6, 1966. All-Church Press, Friday, Feb. 5, 1965. at Dienbienphu in 1954.
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
 Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD SENATE
The Pentagon, naturally, has been deter-
mined' not to repeat France's mistakes. In
the past 3 years they've poured in aid and
advisers at the rate of more than $1 million
a day. So generous, so overwhelming has
been this avalanche of assistance, that it has
aided South Vietnam almost to death.
In 1962, there were fewer than 300 U.B.
military advisers in the country-and they
were making noticeable headway against the
Vietcong. The advisers were scattered in
tiny detachments around the country. They
were tough, highly trained men, and they
were revered by the Vietnamese.
But the Pentagon apparently reasoned that
20,000 advisers could win the war 20 times as
fast as 300; they started airlifting them into
Saigon by the thousands (in defiance, inci-
dentally, of the Geneva truce agreement).
With them came wives, children, PX super-
markets, Coca-Cola machines, air con-
ditioners, officers' clubs, station wagons, in-
surance salesmen, school teachers, public re-
lations men-all the equipage of a progres-
sive suburb, without which the American
military seems unable to function abroad.
Suddenly, it stopped being a jungle war,
with Americans fighting on the same terms
as their enemies. It became instead a desk-
soldiers' war, with the fatuities of Saigon's
brass hats canceling the efforts of the men
in the field.
A gap appeared between the South Viet-
namese and their American protectors, and
the gap has been widening ever since.
There's also a gap between the Pentagon's
concept of mobility and that of the guer-
rillas. Putting troops on wheels or in heli-
copters has proven unrealistic in a jungle
war. Disguised as peasants, the Vietcong
simply watch the machines charge futilely
by-perhaps into a mine trap or ambush-or,
if they're detected, simply melt into the
jungle.
Pursuit on foot is fruitless; the South
Vietnamese troops, carrying enough
Ameri- can-made equipment to fight the Battle of
the Bulge, would be ineffective even if they
were as hardy as their enemy. But of course
they aren't, since they're now accustomed
to riding to work.
But all the mistakes haven't been com-
mitted by the military. There are a host of
nonmilitary agencies fighting Saigon's war,
from the spooks of the CIA to the flacks of
the U.S. Information Agency.
Take, for instance, the unimportant but
revealing case of the American pro football
player who arrived in Saigon under State
Department auspices to set up an athletic
program for the Vietnamese. "Gonna teach
these gooks football," he announced to all
within earshot. Several days later, he an-
nounced a change in policy; the gooks he'd
decided, were too small for football-so he
was going to teach them soccer, a game he'd
never played himself.
Or take the avgrage American service wife
in Saigon: for boorishness, offensiveness,
and condescension toward her inferiors, she
takes the fur-lined mug. The generous al-
lowances, PX privileges, villa, chauffeur and
servants are all new to her-and with rare
exceptions, it shows. Her kids are no bet-
ter. The spectacle of a bunch of crew-cutted
gumchewing teenagers lording it over the
natives in the streets of Saigon is a lesson
in how not to conduct foreign relations.
Or, finally, take the matter of Saigon's
justly famous night life, which consists of
scores of saloons, each equipped with a bevy
of the prettiest little bar girls in southeast
Asia. The patrons are almost exclusively
American; and one South Vietnamese woman
who owns a string of such establishments,
told me she estimates that half her girls
are actively pro-Vietcong, while the rest
maintain a profitable neutrality by spying
impartially for both sides.
The result of all this ugly Americanism
has been exactly what you'd expect: the
No. 32-31
South Vietnamese is starting to wonder if
his Communist enemies might not be pre-
ferable to his American friends. Once he
publicly mourned the loss of American lives.
Now, the nearly 300 Americans killed in Viet-
nam seem meaningless compared, with his
own terrible losses-more than 160000 dead.
Once he believed that his government,
good or bad, would be free of foreign inter-
ference. Now he's convinced that his gov-
ernment-whichever assortment of generals
happens to be in power at the moment-
is a puppet of the Pentagon.
If the foregoing sounds like an anti-Amer-
ican tirade, it's not intentional. There still
are hundreds of smart, dedicated, and effec-
tive Americans in Vietnam. They want to
win this tragic war and, through a first-
hand acquaintance with the realities of guer-
rilla warfare they think they know how to
do it. Unfortunately, they're only fighting
the war, not running it.
For this reason, the Communists are al-
most certain to nibble their way to victory
eventually. When they do, it will be a disas-
ter for the West. For all my reservations
about life in the Saigon sector of the free
world, I'm convinced, after seeing both places,
that the South Vietnamese are vastly better
off than their countrymen to the north,
When I went to Vietnam, I shared the
common Canadian view of, such faraway
places. I half suspected that, for those un-
fortunate enough to live in such countries,
life in the "free" sector was just about as
miserable as life under communism. But a
few visits to Hanoi and other Communist
centers quickly disabused me of this notion.
I'll never forget the people who would pass
me on the streets and whisper "A bas les
communistes," or the officials who risked
their freedom to tell me privately of their
hatred for the regime of Ho Chi-minh. It
was a rude contrast with Saigon, where free
speech, while not prevalent, is at least still
possible. ,
For all their strategic failings, the Amer-
icans are fighting a just war. But they're
going to lose it unless they make drastic
changes-for at present, the American is his
own worst enemy in Vietnam. By his obtuse
policies and actions he has squandered the
good will of his allies. Without it, he can't
win. Without it, there is nothing left to
win.
WORLD BANK FLOTATION OF $200
MILLION BONI) ISSUE IN UNITED
STATES
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, on Jan-
uary 19, I had occasion to have printed
in the RECORD an exchange of letters with
the Secretary of the Treasury concerning
the World Bank floatation of a $200 mil-
lion bond issue in the United States.
This series of letters culminated in a
communication from me dated January
8, requesting Secretary Dillon's detailed
comments on this transaction. On Jan-
uary 22 an answer was received from the
Treasury Department. I believe that
this communication should also be made
available to all those who are interested
in the international monetary situation,
especially as it affects our position in
the world.
The Secretary of the Treasury has as-
sured us that the approval of the U.S.
Government for the World Bank's re-
quest to float the loan in the United
States was taken without and dissent.
We are also told that the transaction
"will in no way affect our balance-of-
payments deficit this year," although
we have no way of knowing how it might
be affected in 1966 or later. Frankly, I
3113
take small comfort in the thought that
we are storing up more trouble for the
future.
But I am less interested in the tech-
nical aspects of this transaction than I
am in the very much larger question of
our financial policies toward the world.
The Treasury response does not question
the World Bank's need for further re-
sources, and in effect says that-although
borrowing in the European markets
would be far preferable-the United
States will continue to come up with
funds whenever required by the interna-
tional banking community. I am not at
all satisfied that our policy has to be of
such a quiescent nature.
In the first place, we need far more
justification for hastening to,provide ad-
ditional resources for the World Bank.
From its operations the Bank has
amassed reserves which now are some-
where around the $1 billion mark. It is
true, that after much hand wringing the
Bank has agreed that a modest propor-
tion of future profits may be diverted
into the operations of its IDA soft-loan
affiliate; yet it says that these enormous
reserve funds should be maintained in-
tact to preserve a climate of confidence
throughout the banking community.
From the size of the reserves, it would
appear that the appetite for confidence
is virtually insatiable.
Second, we are told at every oppor-
tunity, especially by those seeking more
U.S. foreign aid money, that the under-
developed countries have about reached
the place where they can no longer fi-
nance hard loans of the kind extended by
the World Bank. This makes me wonder
whether the World Bank's resources will
not increasingly be used to support pro-
jects in the developed countries which are
members of the organization. If such is
the case, I am totally confused as to the
need for U.S. support for the economies
of the developed countries.
Thus, Mr. President, I must record my
lack of faith in the proposition that the
World Bank should be provided with re-
sources by the U.S. market whenever it
requires them.
We hear a great deal of talk and we
see many actions today by the industrial-
ized countries-especially those in Eu-
rope-which stem from a desire to assert
their independence from U.S. leadership
in the Western World. The occasion of
the World Bank's requirement for fur-
ther resources, it seems to me, would be
a great opportunity for the European
countries to show their power and so-
phistication by encouraging the flota-
tion of bond issues in their markets.
However, we are told that these coun-
tries which are declaiming so .,loudly
about their great strength and inde-
pendence have not developed market
conditions which would permit such
flotations.
Rather than put any pressure on
these countries to develop their markets
and lower interest rates, the United
States apparently prefers to continue to
fill the gap and thereby relieve Western
Europe of any such pressure of neces-
sity.
At the present time, one of the most
notable developments on the European
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
 Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE Fe&r tart' 18
scene is the gleeful way in which the
French are turning dollars into gold and
causing difficulties for the United States.
It seems that this development is a mat-
ter for much embarrassment within the
U.S. Government; I would suggest that
it should be the occasion for a reappraisal
of our financial policies with respect to
the international monetary scene and
our so-called partners among the indus-
trialized countries of Europe.
Every time the United States attempts
to assert some leadership within the
Western World we are told that our allies
fail to follow the lead because of their
strength and self-confidence; we are as-
sured on every hand that the European
scene has changed radically within the
last decade. Such being the case, I see
no reason whatsoever why our policies
should not be adjusted accordingly. Yet
I see no evidence that the U.S. Treasury
Department is tailoring its policies to the
changed situation. I suggest that the
kind of thinking reflected by Secretary
Dillon's response to my inquiries is
severely outdated and will not be
changed without an emphatic expression
of views by members of the legislative
branch of this government.
Mr. President, I ask. unanimous con-
sent to have printed in the RECORD my
letter of January 8 to the Secretary of
the Treasury and Mr. Dillon's response
dated January 22.
There being no objection, the letters
were ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
JANUARY 8, 1965.
Hon. C. DOUGLAS DILLON,
Secretary of -the Treasury,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. SECRETARY: I wish to recall my
letter to you of October 13, 1964, in which I
expressed concern over the prospect that the
World Bank would seek to raise new capital
in the U.S. market. In your response of
October 27 you stated that the United States
should not at present prohibit "any and all
attemps by the Bank to mobilize private
funds for development through bond sales
to U.S. residents." There nevertheless was
at least an implication that the bulk of the
$300 to $400 million of new capital required
by the World Bank might be raised outside
this country. According to the New York
Times of December 29, however, the World
Bank has now announced it will float a $200
million bond issue in the United States be-
ginning on January 18.
It seems to the that the key sentence in
your October 27 letter was the following:
"Any application by the Bank for bond
sales in our market will be reviewed on its
merits in the light of the concrete situa-
tion at the time-including our own balance
of payments and the effect of any Bank bor-
rowing thereon." Frankly, I 'am not aware
of any measurable improvement in our bal-
ance-of-payments situation during the past
2 months; indeed, I would assume the con-
trary from the New York Times story of
December 30, 1964, by Richard E. Mooney---a
copy of which Is attached. The article re-
ports that the OECD annual review of the
U.S. economy contains the advice "that more
curbs on outfiowing capital may be needed
to-put the country's international payments
In better balance." Yet the proposed World
tank bond issue appears a dramatic move in
the opposite direction.
In these circumstances, I would like very
much to know just what sort of review of
the Bank application took place within the
U.S. Government. Specifically, was approval
of the application given by the National
Advisory Council on International Mone-
tary and Financial Problems, and was the
decision taken unanimously? How do you
assess the Impact on our balance of payments
in concrete terms?
In short, I would appreciate learning the
full story of this transaction and its im-
plications; you need not be concerned about
sparing me any details.
Sincerely yours,
THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY,
Washington, D.C., January 22, 1965.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR WAYNE: I am happy to answer the
questions raised In your letter of January 8
concerning the World Bank bond issue in the
United States. This $200 million bond flota-
tion was successfully launched last week.
The Bank did this a few days earlier than
contemplated in the report you cited, be-
cause market conditions were thought to be
propitious.
The World Bank announcement on Janu-
ary 5 of the contemplated issue was made
after the U.S. Government approved the
Bank's request as required by its articles of
agreement. You asked whether theNational
Advisory Council decision was unanimous.
It was. I gave the proposal my closest atten-
tion, and let me also say that my own ap-
proval of the Bank's request was completely
in accord with the considerations which I
mentioned in my letter to you of October
27, 1964.
As I said in that letter, the World Bank
management is fully aware of the need for
utilizing European capital markets to the
maximum extent funds are available on rea-
sonable terms. I can reassure you, based on
my conversations with the Bank - manage-
ment from time to time In the past 2 months
in connection with the contemplated bond
issue, that they have every Intention to pur-
sue assiduously this course. The Bank feels
that it might be able to raise between $100
and $140 million in new money outside the
United States for the remainder of its present
fiscal year (which runs concurrently with our
own). This amount is in addition to the
$298 million of new and refinancing opera-
tions arranged by the Bank outside the
United States earlier this fiscal year. In-
cluded in the latter was'a private placement
entirely outside the United States of a $100
million, 2-year, 41/4 percent bond issue with
central banks and other Government insti-
tutions in 26 countries. The remainder was
essentially a refinancing operation also in-
volving a private placement of negotiable
notes with an institutional investor outside
the United States. A part of this transac-
tion will be effected at the beginning of Feb-
ruary. While the refunding transactions did
not affect the total of the Bank's outstanding
funded debt, in the absence of that financing
an equivalent amount of matured debt
would have been paid off net by the Bank,
thereby adding to foreign exchange reserves
abroad.
You asked about the effect on our balance
of payments of the $200 million bond issue.
While the World Bank needs to have these
funds firmly available to maintain conti-
nuity of its financial operations, particu-
larly its substantial lending commitments,
it will not actually have to disburse these
newly acquired funds for some time. Ac-
cordingly, the World Bank management in-
tends toplace in the United States the pro-
ceeds of the issue in time deposits or in-
vestments which have maturities in excess
of a year. In terms of the U.S. balance of
payments, the outflow of long-term capital
represented by U.S. purchases of the bonds
will be matched by at least an equal off-
setting inflow of long-term capital, and thus,
the entire transaction will in no way affect
our balance-of-payments deficit this year.
The manner and extent to which these funds
will affect our balance of payments in 1966
or later will depend on a variety of factors
when these funds are actually disbursed.
should point out in this connection, that the
net effect of the World Bank's overall oper-.
ations on the U.S. balance of payments since
the inception of the Bank has been a favor-
able one. This has been particularly true in
the period since 1958, which is the period oi
our most serious balance-of-payments prob-
lem.
Furthermore, dollar accruals of the Work
Bank are completely different in terms o;
potential calls on our gold stock from such,
accruals to the reserves of the surplus coun-
tries of Europe. Resort to the U.S. capita:
market in the latter case adds to their dollar
reserves which in turn can readily be trans-
lated into calls on our gold. It was par-
ticularly in order to dampen the rapidly
growing volume of such borrowings, with al:
that this implied, that the Interest Equali-
zation Tax was adopted. This tax proved
effective in helping further reduce the regu-.
lar deficit in the U.S. balance of payment:;
in 1963 and the first three quarters of 1964.
While all the results for the fourth quarter
of 1964 are not in, as you said, it may not
turn out as we had hoped. I am following
these developments very closely.
Finally, I need hardly reiterate my view:;
on the Important role the development; o;'
European capital markets can play in allevi-
ating international payments imbalance.
The need of the World Bank to enter the
U.S. market reemphasizes my conviction of
the importance of further progress. The
Bank recognizes the significance of such..
progress. The Europeans, too, are increas-
ingly recognizing the need.
With best wishes.
Sincerely,
SUBSIDIZING NASSER
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, some
days ago, when I debated on the floor of
the Senate the proposal of the admin-
istration to continue to subsidize Nas-
ser in carrying out his shocking policies
of tyranny in the Middle East, I over-
looked a letter which I had received from
the Democratic Club of Portland State
College, Portland, Oreg., in support o
the position which I presented in my
argument against the President's pro-
gram, which he barely won by a vote of
44 to 38 in the Senate, which empowered
him to continue to subsidize Nasser
in what I considered to be Nasser's pro-
gram of tyranny in the Middle East.
I ask unanimous consent to have
printed in the RECORD the letter of Jan-
uary 14, 1965, written by Bob Larson,
president of the Democratic club, and
the resolution which they passed at their
meeting.
There being no objection, the letter
was ordered to be printed in the RECORn,
as follows:
PSG' DEMOCRATIC CLUB,
PORTLAND STATE COLLEGE,
Portland, Oreg., January 14, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: The PSC Democratic
Club would like you to have the enclosed
resolution inserted Into the CONGRESSIONAL.
RECORD, and if possible read at your con-
venience In the Senate or an appropriate
committee of the Senate. Having read your
views on foreign aid I am sure you agree with
us that we should review any aid that may
be ending up as waste. The PSC Democrats
do not feel our foreign aid should be used
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
 ;19 6,5
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP'67B00446R000300170006-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 903
have urged the Department of Labor to
permit this supplemental labor so that
their employees would not be deprived of
their jobs.
This reduction in the crop because of
the failure to harvest goes even farther
than that. The man who makes the
boxes or who makes the cans or who
transports the finished product to the
market also has employees whose work
hours would be shortened with this crop
loss.
Usually, as far as the grower is con-
cerned, in the long run, the lack of sup-
ply and the increased demand will raise
his price to the point where he will pos-
sibly get as many dollars back from the
short crop as he would have had he mar-
keted his whole crop, but then this in-
crease will be reflected in the price of
fresh and processed fruit to the con-
sumer. Is the Secretary acting in the
interests of all our people. when he de-
liberately follows policies that would re-
sult-in raising the prices to consumers?
It can result in the housewife deciding
that the price of citrus is too high and
she will resort to,some synthetic product
which is cheaper but one which I do not
think many doctors would prescribe for
babies to drink in place of pure orange
juice.
This does not only affect the citrus
industry. The Florida sugarcane indus-
try has more than tripled during the last
3 years, largely as a result of the encour-
agement of the U.S. Department of Agri-
culture. This season We have approxi-
mately 235,000 acres of sugarcane to be
harvested in Florida. Domestic workers
simply do not like to, and therefore will
not, cut sugarcane on Florida's muck-
land. The Department of Labor has
acknowledged this for many years. In
the past they have always authorized
enough supplemental foreign workers to
assure that this crop could be harvested
without losses due to lack of labor. How-
ever, during the current season, sugar-
cane producers have been turned down in
more than a dozen requests that have
been made to the Department of Labor
for additional foreign workers that were
needed to avoid the possibility of crop
loss.
On January 17 and 18, we experienced
temperatures as low as 18 degrees in the
sugarcane belt, and the dangers of a
crop loss suddenly . became a reality.
Several of the mills have been able to
grind cane at only 80 percent of the rated
capacity which means that many thou-
sands of tons of cane that could have
been ground are now damaged along
with the remainder of the crop. Re-
newed appeals for necessary amounts of
labor to minimize losses resulting from
the freeze were also denied until recently,
when the Secretary of Labor said that
the sugarcane industry could have 300
more workers, when these workers are
released by the citrus industry. The
citrus industry has not been in a posi-
tion to release these workers and any
relief that may ultimately come from
that direction will be too late to avoid
losses that have already occurred. A
survey of four of -Florida's sugarcane
mills last week shows that they estimate
their losses to date-due entirely to lack
of sufficient canecutters-at a total of
$1.754.000.
Florida growers planted 3,500 acres of
strawberries this year. Some 1,900 acres
of strawberries were planted in the lower
east coast area, and growers in that area
have largely depended upon supplemental
foreign workers to efficiently produce and
harvest their crops. But, when these
strawberry growers sought this year to
obtain a relatively small number of .sup-
plemental foreign workers who were
needed to lay down polyethylene weed-
control covers, they were turned down
time and again. The use of polyethylene
weed-control covers would greatly mini-
mize the amount of labor needed to con-
trol the weeds by hand. Yet the De-
partment of Labor could not see this fact
and continued to delay acting on these
growers' requests until blooms or flowers
set on the strawberry plants. It then be-
came necessary to install the weed-con-
trol covers over blooming plants with
the result that these blooms were severely
damaged, and the first two pickings of
the strawberry crop were lost. It is not
enough to say that this loss was due to
the lack of labor. This loss was due di-
rectly to the lack of prompt action by
the Department of Labor.
In addition to losses such as those de-
scribed, all segments of the industry in
Florida report increasing losses in grade
and quality of their crops due to lack of
labor.
I want to make it clear as I said before
that Florida agricultural employers pre-
fer to use American workers. It is rea-
sonable for them to expect a fair day's
work for a fair day's pay, and our farm-
ers want to give them this, but on the
other side of the coin, I believe that they
have a right also to expect the Depart-
ment of Labor to supply qualified and
willing workers or, if they are not avail-
able in sufficient numbers, to quit vacil-
lating and denying what are obvious
facts and readily certify as to the exist-
ence of the labor shortage so that crop
losses will not be so large.
The entire attitude of the Secretary
of Labor seems to be that he wants to
look to the agriculture industry to solve
our unemployment problems. But the
simple fact is that neither the Secretary
of Labor nor our farmers can force peo-
ple to do manual labor in our fields and
groves unless they wish to do it.
Mr. Speaker, it is my judgment that
the situation that exists in Florida to-
day and that threatens to become worse
during the remainder of our season, will
also pose a very serious threat to agri-
culture -throughout this Nation in the
very near future. I have it on good au-
thority that many growers are talking
in terms of cutting back their produc-
tion of ground crops by as much as 50
percent unless some encouragement and
assurance of adequate labor is forthcom-
ing from the Secretary of Labor. This
is the kind of situation when an execu-
tive officer of the Federal GiLvernment
can easily be of valuable help to this
country. I am talking about the kind
of help that results from the cooperation
of an industry that is vital to the total
welfare of the United States. I do not
know who or what caused the Secretary
of Labor to adopt such an unrealistic
and unsympathetic attitude toward our
agriculture industry, but he should move
immediately to correct his errors of judg-
ment, which already have cost farmers
and growers and workers in Florida many
millions of dollars-and will cost the con-
sumers many millions more.
It is a somber fact that this Nation
never has as much as a week's supply
of fresh fruits and vegetables en route
from the producer to the market and
available to the consumer. The strength
that holds this chain of food production
and distribution together is no greater
than its weakest link. Farmers in much
of the Nation will soon be faced with a
decision to plant as much seed as they
did a year ago, to cut back their planting
operations or not to plant at all. Their
decisions will be made on an individual
basis and will be based upon their respec-
tive judgments as to how this Govern-
ment will'respond to their plea for fair
and reasonable treatment. The lack of
any encouragement from the Secretary
of Labor or-alternatively-the assur-
ance of our Government- that it will in-
deed be sympathetic and responsive to
the needs of our industry will no doubt
be the determining factor as each pro-
ducer decides his future role as a food
producer in this Nation. His decision
will be reflected in a very short time in
every grocery store across this Nation.
The responsibility for this decision will
not rest in the hands of the individual
producer; it will rest in the hands, of a
few responsible officials in Washington
who have not up to this point chosen to
act responsibly. Let us hope that they
areaware of the high stakes that are in-
volved and avoid the needless crisis that
will be threatened if they fail to act af-
firmatively nd promptly in the public
interest.
A PROCLAMATION
(Mr. PUCINSKI asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his re-
marks.) -
Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I have
today introduced a resolution which ex-
presses support of the American people
for President Johnson's heroic determi-
nation to wage carefully measured and
meaningful retaliation against military
installations in North Vietnam which
serve as staging areas for training Com-
munist forces to carry on continued
aggression against South Vietnam.
This resolution would also assure the
people of South Vietnam that the people
of the United States stand flrinly behind
them in their long and tireless efforts
to preserve for South Vietnam freedom
and independence.
The resolution states further:
The people of the United States, through
their elected representatives in the Congress
of the United States, send to the people of
South Vietnam their heartfelt admiration
for the great sacrifices which the people of
South Vietnam have endured during the
past 20 years in their struggle to retain self-
determination and human dignity.
I shall include a text of the entire reso-
lution at the conclusion of my remarks.
Approved.For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
 2904
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE February .4 8
Mr. Speaker, it Is my sincere hope that It would be only a matter of days be- The President has announced his pol-
the Congress will approve this resolution fore South Vietnam was overrun by the icy of carefully measured retaliation
without delay as our answer to those who Communists and not much longer before against military targets which serve as
naively continue to believe that some- Thailand, Burma, Cambodia, Malaysia, the basis for training Vietcong Commu-
how we can negotiate a peaceful solu- and the whole of southeast Asia would be fists for aggression against South Viet-
tion with the Chinese and North Viet- victimized by Communist aggression. nam.
namese Communists to the problem of Those who cling to the belief that we This carefully calculated escalation is
Vietnam. can negotiate ignore the fact that it was the only course this Nation can take and,
Those who propose negotiation never only 10 years from Manchuria to Pearl indeed, it serves notice on the Peiping
spell out with whom we are to negotiate Harbor and less than 18 months from and Hanoi Communists that this Nation
or on what terms, nor do they take the Munich to the rape of Poland on Sep- would not stand by with impunity while
trouble to recall that we have now been tember 1, 1939. they wage barbaric aggression against
negotiating with the North Korean Com- There are those who urge this entire our allies in South Vietnam.
munists for 11 years in hopes of arriving matter be turned over to the United Na- No man wants war less than President
at a workable peace treaty which would tions, completely ignoring the fact that Johnson and I am sure that every single
bring peace and stability to Korea. the United Nations has had several op- decision he has. made has been carefully
During these 11 years of negotiations at portunities to deal withthe problem of weighed against all of the consequences.
Panmunjon, the Communists have vio- southeast Asia. The United Nations is This is a period which can turn the
lated every single provision of the truce in no position to take any overt action tide for freedom. It requires complete
negotiated by President Eisenhower in since the Soviets could use their veto understanding from the American peo-
1953. power in the Security Council. ple and it also requires complete dedi-
North Korea today is one of the most Wish as we may, southeast Asia is be- cation.
formidable Communist military bases in yond the help of the United Nations. It is for this reason, Mr. Speaker, that
the whole world, and this was accom- General de Gaulle has been making all I hope the following resolution will be
plished by the Communists during the sorts of suggestions as to what we should carefully considered and adopted by the
past 11 years while fruitless negotiations do about this problem, but I believe the Congress.
were going on. American people should know that his My resolution follows:
Nor do those suggesting negotiations true role in this problem is only that of Whereas the United States, during the
over Vietnam care to mention the fact a kibitzer. administrations of President Truman, Presi-
that we have indeed been negotiating General de Gaulle has made no offer to dent Eisenhower, President t ennedy, and
with the Chinese Communists in War- commit his troops to enforcing any peace President Johnson, has been committed to a
settlement that might be negotiated. As policy of assisting the people of South Viet-
saw, Poland, now for almost 5 years. de Gaulle is nam preserve their freedom and Independ-
We have held more than 127 ex- a matter of fact, General from Communist aggression; and
ploratory sessions with the Communist not even in this game. Whereas the North Vietnamese Commu-
representatives in Warsaw, and as far as There are those who ask, "Do the ~ stss have In recent months stepped up civil-
not know, the Chinese Communists have South Vietnamese have the will to win?" 9 their
not made one single solitary concession Mr. Speaker, I believe it Is the South ian and military installations in South Viet-
which would indicate or create an at- Vietnamese who should ask if we have nam; and
mosphere for any meaningful negotia- the will to stand and support their ef- Whereas this aggression has caused the
forts toward total victory. serious loss of life to American observers
tions to resolve the problems of southeast presently stationed in South Vietnam to help
Asia or curb Chinese Communist sub- It is my hope, Mr. Speaker, that adop- train South Vietnamese troops against Com-
version In that part of the world. tion of my resolution would dispel any munist aggression; and
Mr. Speaker, I hope this resolution will fears the South Vietnamese might have Whereas the President of the United States
be adopted because it is important for regarding our determination to help has had to order carefully measured retalia-
the world to know that the people of the them preserve their freedom. tory action against the North Vietnamese
militarv staging
United States stand firmly 'behind the I am sure that President Johnson areas where Hanoi and
y ping g Communists have e been or are being
people of South Vietnam in their heroic along with the South Vietnamese would trained for aggression against South Viet-
struggle for freedom. be most eager to seek a peaceful solution nam; and
It is also important to know that the and, yes, negotiate intensively, the mo- Whereas the President of the United States
people of the United States stand firmly ment the North Vietnamese Communists has made it abundantly clear that to with-
behind President Johnson in his brave withdraw their troops from South Viet- draw American assistance from South Viet-
decision not to capitulate to Communist nam and cease their aggression and sub- nam would expose the whole of southeast
Asia to occupation by the Chinese Commu-
infamy. version. nist forces; and
I have the highest respect for Presi- For us to withdraw under any condi- Whereas such occupation would violate all
dent Johnson's judgment, and while I tions short of complete Communist with- the principles of the Geneva Conference of
know that he would never deliberately drawal would be merely to intensify the 1954 in which South Vietnam was guaranteed
lead us into a needless war, neither risk of world war M. Its independence and freedom from Commu-
would he surrender our freedom to Com- Peiping has clearly announced its mill- nist aggression; and
munist treachery. tart' policy for all of southeast Asia. It whereas withdrawal of American support
from South Vietnam would only serve to
Mr. Johnson indeed carries a heavy has a militaristic appetite that feeds hasten the day when Communist forces in
burden today. It would be my hope we upon success. Asia and China could wage all-out aggres-
can approve this resolution to show our Mr. Speaker, there are those who ques- sion against the rest of the world; and
dedicated President that we as Ameri- tion the sincerity of our South Vietna- Whereas the Hanoi and Peiping Commu-
cans stand firmly behind him in these mese allies and place the burden of their nists have failed to show a single overt act
days of historic decisions. suspicions on the fact that South Viet- which would indicate the problems of Viet-
Mr. Speaker, it is high time that we nam has undergone major changes of nam could be settled through negotiation:
Americans realized that for us to fail in government nine times in the last 2 Re Now,so olveherdfore, be it
d, That it is the sense of Congress,
our positive action now would be an open years. speaking for the American people that-
invitation to world war III. Certainly, the internal problems of 1. This Nation stands firmly behindPresi-
I know it is difficult for many people South Vietnam are of deep concern to us, dent Johnson's determination to wage care-
to understand the situation in South but the fact remains that the people of fully measured and meaningful retaliation
Vietnam and why we have to be there in South Vietnam have endured greater against military installations in North Viet-
the first place. But both President John- hardship, sacrifice, and agony during the nam which serve as staging areas for training
Communist forces to carry on continued ag-
son and Secretary Rusk have made it last 20 years in their struggle for free- gression against South Vietnam;
crystal clear that for the United States dom than we Americans have endured 2. That the people of the United States
to abandon South Vietnam today would in the last 200 years of our existence. stand firmly behind the people of South
mean a complete surrender of the entire I believe that the course chosen by Vietnam in their long and tireless efforts
southeast flank of our Pacific defense President Johnson is the only course that to preserve for South Vietnam freedom and
perimeter. can avoid world war III. Independence; and
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
 '19 &5 CONGRES_ - .-AL 'RECORD-` IUU Wwww~~~ 2905
S. The people of the United States, through
their elected Representatives in the Congress
of the United States, send to the people of
South Vietnam their heartfelt admiration
for the great sacrifices which the people of
South Vietnam have endured during the
past 20 years in their struggle to retain
self-determination and human dignity.
Mr. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, yester-
day on rollcall No. 16 I was not recorded
as having voted. I was on official leave
from. the House. Had I been present I
would have voted "nay."
UNITED NATIONS
(Mr. FARBSTEIN asked and was
given permission to address the House
for 1 minute, and to revise and extend
his remarks, and to include a resolution.)
Mr. FARBSTEIN. Mr. Speaker, it is
with great honor that I rise to com-
pliment the United Nations, which is
celebrating its twentieth anniversary
this year. We are all aware of the vital
services which this world organization
has performed in preserving interna-
tional peace. I have supported this or-
ganization since its inception in the tu-
multuous days after the Second World
War. Furthermore, I am proud, as are
my constituents, to have the headquar-
ters of the United Nations in the great
city of New York.
As a member of the House Foreign Af-
fairs Subcommittee on the Near East, I
have personally witnessed its invaluable
role in preserving the independence and
stability of states in that area of the
world. Were it not for the United Na-
tions Emergency Force a serious inter-
national crisis would have ensued. The
mediation efforts of Count Folke Berna-
dotte and Dr. Ralph Bunche were in-
strumental in creating the machinery
whereby Israeli-Arab coexistence would
be insured.
I, therefore, submit for consideration
a resolution which can express the con-
tinued faith of the United States in the
growth and strengthening of the United
Nations. The resolution reads as fol-
lows :
H, CON. RES:
Concurrent resolution expressing the con-
tinued faith of the United States in the
.growth and strengthening of the United
Nations
Whereas President Lyndon B. Johnson said
in his state of the Union message, "we renew
our commitment to the continued growth
and effectiveness of the United Nations"
realizing "the frustrations of the United
Nations are a product of the world we live
in, not of the institution which gives them
voice" knowing full well "it is far better to
throw these differences open to the assembly
of nations than permit them to fester in si-
lent danger"; and
'Whereas the renewal of this commitment
on the 20th anniversary of the founding of
the United Nations is celebrated by the ob-
servanceofInternational Co-operation Year
during which the nations of the world are
implored to emphasize those areas in which
their mutual. interests achieve greater im-
portance over the issues which cause fric-
tion; and
No. 32-5
Whereas in each year of its history, the
United Nations has become a more vital in-
strument of peaceful negotiation and settle-
ment in issues directly affecting the stabil-
ity of the world; and
Whereas the United Nations has recognized
the re-evaluation of rising expectations
throughout the world and in furtherance
thereof the United Nations has concurrently
maintained a vast effort to improve and
"promote social progress and better stand-
ards of life in larger freedom" through its
economic and social functions; and
Whereas the United States has, in the
past recognized the principle of fiscal re-
sponsibility towards a world organization;
and
Whereas in his inaugural address the late
President John F. Kennedy said "to those
peoples in the huts and villages of half the
globe struggling to break the bonds of mass
misery, the United Nations offers a beach-
head of cooperation which may yet push
back centuries of poverty, fear and distrust
to achieve a world where the strong are just,
the weak secure, and the peace preserved":
Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Congress of the United
States, That we do hereby reaffirm our con-
tinued commitment to the United Nations
and endorse, encourage and sustain this cru-
cial effort of mankind to achieve a greater
society of nations dedicated to the proposi-
tion that peace, order and progress in the
world can best be accomplished through co-
operation in the United Nations.
HORTON AMENDMENT FOR
WOMEN'S RIGHTS
(Mr. HORTON asked and was given
permission to extend his remarks in the
body of the RECORD.)
Mr. HORTON. Mr. Speaker, earlier
this week, it was my privilege to be pres-
ent at the annual Susan B. Anthony
luncheon of the Rochester Federation of
Women's Clubs. The gathering held in
my home community of Rochester, N.Y.,
commemorated the 145th anniversary of
the 19th century suffragette's birth.
Susan B. Anthony honored the history
and heritage of Rochester. She waged
war on discrimination and won. The
19th amendment to our Constitution
guaranteeing women the right to vote is
an eternal monument to her towering
triumph, and its foundation was built in
Rochester.
But, just as man does not live by bread
alone, neither do women gain full equal-
ity by voting rights alone. Therefore,
in the proud tradition of Susan B.
Anthony's home, I have worked and
voted for legislation to secure there addi-
tional rights. In the last Congress, we
passed a law requiring equal pay for
women performing the same work as
men and we amended another law to ban
discrimination against women in various
Federal programs.
Now, in keeping with my efforts, I am
pleased to announce that I have intro-
duced today a constitutional amendment
making equal rights for women the law
_of the land.
Our Constitution is a very great docu-
ment, but its greatness hinges on the fact
that it is susceptible to change. A
change in providing equal rights is long
overdue.
Our society still contains too many re-
mains of ancient rules of law which treat
women as inferiors. The amendment I
support does not contemplate that women
must be treated in all respects the same
as men, but, while preserving in law ob-
viously natural differences, it would do
away with separate classifications for
jury duty, property and inheritance
rights, and other citizen benefits that
bear no real relation to sex.
This amendment is not new but was
first suggested in 1923. Since that time,
it has been introduced in every single
Congress. An impressive list of nation-
wide organizations have recorded their
support of this proposal in the past.
Most recently, on September 14, 1964,
the Senate Committee on the Judiciary
submitted a report asking for favorable
consideration of the amendment. The
Senate report of the 88th Congress re-
minds us that "Adoption of this amend-
ment will complete women's long move-
ment for legal equality."
There remain many well-known ves-
tiges of ancient rules of law which treat
women as inferiors. In many States, a
woman cannot handle or own separate
property in the same manner as her hus-
band. In some States, she cannot engage
in business or pursue a profession or
occupation as freely as can a member of
the male sex. Women are classified
separately for purposes of jury service
in many States. Community-property
States do not vest in the wife the same
degree of property rights as her husband
enjoys. The inheritance rights of widows
differ from those of widowers in some
States. Restrictive work laws, which pur-
port to protect women by denying them
a man's freedom to pursue employment,
actually result in discrimination in the
employment of women by making it so
burdensome upon employers. Such pro-
tective restrictions hinder women in
thier competition with men for super-
visory, technical, and professional job op-
portunities.
In this session of Congress I sincerely
hope the House will take favorable action
on this much needed amendment. The
evils which this amendment seeks to cure
are many. These evils have a historical
basis in the inferior position of women in
medieval days and under the old English
common law, but they have no sound and
reasonable basis in 20th century Amer-
lea. I ask for your cooperation and
favorable action.
THE FARM LABOR SITUATION
IN FLORIDA
The SPEAKER. Under previous order
of the House, the gentleman from Flor-
ida [Mr. GURNEY] is recognized for 60
minutes.
(Mr. GURNEY asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks and include extraneous matter.)
Mr. GURNEY. Mr. Speaker, I want to
bring to the attention of this House to-
day, a most serious situation in Florida.
The economy of my State of Florida
is facing one of the gravest economic
threats in all its history.
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
 2906
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE ebruay 1 8
The great agricultural industry of
Florida, the No. 2 money crop of the
State, has already suffered losses run-
ning into many millions of dollars, and
stands to suffer a much greater loss in
the weeks ahead unless relief is received
immediately.
What is this threat to our citrus, our
green vegetables, our sugarcane?
Is it a threat of nature like our disas-
trous freeze of 2 years ago, or drought, or
flood, or a swarm of insects?
No, none of these.
I am ashamed to tell this House, but
the plague in this case is the U.S. Gov-
ernment itself.
The Great Society has not only de-
clared war on poverty, but has also de-
clared war on Florida farmers.
Nor is the war confined to Florida
farmers. Although they bear the brunt
of the attack and battle at this moment,
farmers in California, Arizona, Texas,
and many other States are in similar
battles of varying intensity.
Nor is the war confined to agriculture.
In our complex society, when one in-
dustry takes an economic beating, the
effects are far reaching and felt through-
out the land. Industries and people
who handle agricultural products take
their financial losses too. Jobbers, deal-
ers, canners, wholesale markets, and re-
tail stores and a host of other industries
magnify the direct loss of the farmers
manyfold.
Take transportation-rail and truck-
a very sizeable source of their revenues
come from hauling food to market.
The livelihood of many a truckdriver,
or truckowner in Florida depends upon
hauling to market one crop, citrus, each
year. There will be great numbers of
these people this year who will not make
enough this season to make both ends
meet or to properly feed, clothe, and
shelter their families.
Now what's the problem anyway?
Why this loss of millions of dollars? And
why is it so unnecessary?
The problem is simple. Florida farm-
ers cannot get labor to harvest their
crops, to pick the citrus? cut the sugar-
cane, gather in the vegetables.
They are unable to get sufficient labor
because the U.S. Department of Labor
and more specifically, the Secretary of
Labor, Mr. Wirtz, has arbitrarily refused
to help our people. Hehas shut his ears
to their pleas and his eyes to their plight.
He has even gone further in hearings
held before the Senate Agricultural Com-
mitte a month ago. His answer to the
presentation of overwhelming evidence
in the form of incontrovertable facts and
figures of severe labor shortages and con-
sequent crop loss was simply to para-
phrase, to say "There is no labor short-
age, there are no crop losses."
The facts and figures were produced
and Introduced in evidence by respon-
sible and leading citizens of my State of
Florida. They were corroborated in some
instances where he had personal knowl-
edge, by the senior Senator from Flor-
ida, SPESSARD HOLLAND, a man who has
had a lifetime of working knowledge of
the citrus industry in Florida, as a
grower, who has served on the Senate
Agriculture Committee for years and who
is recognized and respected throughout crete example of how, he said, "send them
Florida as an expert in agricultural Christmas cards."
matters. Now, Mr. Haltigan's prediction of the
Yet this Cabinet officer of our Govern-
ment simply dismissed the massive evi-
dence presented to him in these Senate
hearings in a manner that can be only
interpreted as "I don't believe you."
Now let us review the problem at this
point.
Florida farmers are faced with the age-
old problem of harvest. It has not
changed in thousands of years, and it is
the same in Maine and California that
it is in Florida, and the same in the
United States as in every part of the
world. Mother nature ripens a crop
all at one time. You cannot schedule
a harvest like you can an automobile
production line.
When the harvest ripens, the farmer
needs a lot of willing and able hands to
harvest the crop. Years ago, in an agri-
cultural economy there was no problem,
the whole family, the whole community
gathered in the harvest.
But now tin an urban society, the eco-
nomic facts of life are that there just
are not enough workers in any given
locality, in our case Florida, to pick the
crops. Laborers have to be brought in,
recruited from somewhere else.
In Florida, our farmers have brought
in so-called offshore labor, which refers
to workers from the Bahama Islands.
Now this. recruiting of offshore labor
has been carefully and strictly super-
vised. First of all, it is governed by Pub-
lic Law 414, the Immigration and Nat-
uralization Act. The workers from the
Bahama,Islands are permitted to come in
only temporarily for the harvest season.
They may only supplement domestic
labor, take up the shortage. They may
not replace domestic labor. The applica-
tions for offshore labor are processed
carefully by the Government and the
numbers to be imported must be certi-
fied by the Department of Labor.
In years past this arrangement worked
well. The Department of Labor recog-
nized that sufficient domestic labor could
not be recruited and certified enough off-
shore labor to take up the slack.
In recent years, and particularly in
this present administration, and partic-
ularly under Secretary of Labor Wirtz,
there has been a changing attitude.
What has really happened is that Sec-
retary Wirtz has arbitrarily taken the
position that he intends to prohibit the
importation of any foreign labor.
For example, this year at the National
Canners Association meeting in San
Francisco, William J. Haltigan, Chief of
Research and Wage Activities of the
U.S. Department of Labor said, "The
days of the bracero program are gone
and the days of other foreign workers
are numbered." He went on to say that
agricultural labor "must be met through
employment of domestc workers."
Incidentally, later in this same meet-
ing and in answer to a question how do-'
mestic workers were going to be induced
to do hard farm labor which they had no
stomach for, he said that employers
should induce workers by "making them
feel wanted" and when asked for a con-
numbered days of foreign workers has
been borne out in Florida in salutary
fashion by his boss, Secretary Wirtz.
As his lieutenant made the speech, the
Secretary was denying the requests of
Florida citrus growers for additional off-
shore workers and now, Secretary Wirtz
threatens to cut off the whole program
when the present certifications expire.
To put it another way, it looks as though
Florida citrus men will have no foreign
pickers when the big Valencia orange
crop ripens for picking in April.
Already, Florida citrus men have suf-
fered a loss estimated at nearly $6 mil-
lion. This loss occurred on the early and
mid-season crop with 3,500 off-shore
laborers working in our groves, for the
Department of Labor did certify this
number, but this was not nearly
enough to do the job. If these pickers
leave Florida soon for the islands, the loss
on the Valencia crop will be many times
that already suffered.
There are groves today with - fruit so
thickly on the ground, you cannot see the
dirt beneath. Millions of dollars of hard
work and care and fertilizing down the
drain because of the arbitrary attitude of
one man, Secretary Wirtz. Literally, the
sight is pathetic enough to make a per-
son want to weep and then get angry
enough to want to do something drastic
to those responsible for this mess.
Mr. DOLE. Mr. Speaker, will the gen-
tleman yield?
Mr. GURNEY. I am glad to yield, to
the gentleman.
Mr. DOLE. I would like to point out
that I had the privilege of witnessing this
firsthand. Last Friday I went to Or-
lado, Fla. I was there and visited
as a member of the Committee on Agri-
culture some of the groves, and I can
attest to the facts stated by the gentle-
man from Florida that you cannot see
the ground.
I believe perhaps the most striking
illustration was the comment of one
Duke Crittenden, who operates the Crit-
tenden Fruit Co., about 37 North
Carolinians who were brought from
North Carolina to comply with the re-
quest of Secretary Wirtz that only do-
mestic labor could be used. The com-
ment was that of 37 who were brought,
paid for, and transported by Mr. Critten-
den, in 1 week only 1 remained. He
is now referred to as the "lone ranger"
in the groves of Mr. Crittenden.
This is an example that although do-
mestic help may be fine, may be satis-
factory and may be desirable, while we
are experimenting with this so-called
domestic help, the growers of Florida are
losing millions of dollars.
As the gentleman has pointed out so
well, as for the money lost, this is tragic
history. The oranges have literally
turned to garbage. But there is the
huge Valencia crop, which will mature
in mid-April. Something needs to be
done about that.
I found this quite interesting from the
standpoint of being a Kansan, since in
Kansas we do not have citrus fruit. I
thought it might be of interest to the
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
 1965
Approved For tgMlW
iyWt 5 RR SZ?kQf Q300170006-5
of the Digest "are used regularly in U.S.
classrooms.
"If the Digest is to continue being used
in the classrooms," Christensen declares,
"teachers at least owe it to their students to
warn them of its bias, its partisanship, and
the dubious character of its reporting on the
Washington scene."
after a fatherly admonition, gave them a
lesson in the now often repeated saying that
"only in unity there is strength." He gave
each a twig and asked them to break it,
which they did easily. Then he gave them
a bundle of twigs and asked them to break
them. This they could not do. So he asked
them to stay united in their kingdom, for
only by unity they will keep off the on-
slaught of their enemies.
To our sorrow
the sons did not take heed
,
American Sokol Centennial of their father's advice and the seed of dis-
unity was implanted into the hearts of fu-
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. HUGH SCOTT
OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
Thursday, February 18, 1965
Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, this week
many thousands of Americans of Sla-
vonic origin or descent are celebrating
the centennial of the founding .of the
first Slovak Catholic Sokol organization
in the United States. This fraternal,
cultural, and physical fitness organiza-
tion, with its ideals of equality, liberty,
and brotherhood, has made many contri-
butions to the life of our country. A
noted Slovak-American journalist, John
C. Sciranka, recently sent me an article
on the Sokol centennial which had been
printed in Katolicky Sokol-Catholic
Falcon-the official publication of the
Slovak Catholic Sokol. I ask unanimous
consent that this informative article be
printed in the Appendix of the RECORD.
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
THE So oi, TRIUMPH AND OUR FELICITATION
Sokolism has proved to be the vanguard of
fraternal, cultural, and physical fitness life
among the new Americans.
Considering that there are some 35 million
Americans.of Slavonic descent living in the
50 States, there is a vast field for the Sokol
Corps.
The Americans of Slavonic origin and de-
scent have a rich heritage. Their history
starts here even before the arrival of the
first pilgrims on the Mayflower.
History proves that when the first Sokol
Society was founded in 1862 in Prague, its
founders, Tyra and Fugner, succeeded in
spite of many prevailing obstacles in.uniting
the Slavs.
In a very short period, Sokol organizations
took root in various Slavonic countries, and-
we, their descendants are today paying trib-
ute to their sacrifices during this Sokol cen-
tennial celebration.
And although living under the rule of des-
potic monarchs, and through two world wars
and the Korean conflict, when the powerful
empires and rich dynasties perished, Sokol-
ism still flourishes.
The current centennial observance of the
first Sokol organization in the United States
and the issuance of 120 million Sokols physi-
cal fitness commemorative stamps, is indeed
one of the greatest triumphs of Sokol ideals.
SLOVAK KING SVATOPLUK
This feat was accomplished by a Sokol
unity, which was the dream and desire of
our forefathers for the past 12 centuries.
At this time we recall the admonition of
a, Slovak King Svatopluk to his three sons,
that only in unity there is strength. To ex-
emplify this he used the separated and
united twigs., According to an old legend, Slovak King
Svatopluk, after whom our group 7 of Wilkes-
Barre, Pa., is named, summoned his three
sons to his bedside before his death and
ture generations. Due to this disunity, first
the Mongolian hordes, then the despotic
imperialists, and in our generation the pagan
nazism and atheistic communism have gained
power in the Christian Slavonic countries.
Perusing through the pages of history we
learn that the spark of equality, liberty,
and brotherhood was ignited by the founding
of the first Sokol organization in Europe in
1862. Shortly before this historical date the
cause of Panslavism showed its potent
strength under the leadership of Jan Kollar,
the archpriest of Panslavism, Paul Safarik,
L'udevit StOr and other Slavonic leaders.
SS. CYRIL AND METHODIUS
Simultaneously with the gospel of Pan-
slavism and Sokolism came the observance
of the millennium of the advent of Apostles
SS. Cyril and Methodius to the present
Slovakia and Moravia.
This millennium of SS. Cyril and Methodius
in 1863 was observed by 80 million Slavs
inspite of many obstacles. The Civil War was
raging in this country and the true believers
of Sokolism fought on the side of the famous
emancipator, President Abraham Lincoln,
whose birthday we are observing.
But in Europe, this millennium was a sort
of baptism for Sokolism for the fact is that
wherever these two apostles were honored,
the Sokol ideal took root and continued to
flourish even to this day inspite of any ob-
stacles, tyrants or oppressors.
When the, time came to organize the
Czechoslovak legions, the Sokols in Europe
and America were the first to give initiative
and under the leadership of that immortal
son of Slovakia, citizen of France and co-
founder of the first Republic of Czechoslo-
vakia, Gen, Milan R. Stefanik, the Sokols
were in the forefront as leaders and legion-
naires of this famous legion whose "march
of the 70,000" through Russia will always live
in history. The Sokols as legionnaires in
France, Italy, Russia, and other countries
will forever live as legendary heroes. They
marched to victory under the Sokol banners.
Prior to World War I, the Sokol spirit
should be credited with many accomplish-
ments of the Slovak and Slav leaders. We
mention here only the monumental achieve-
ments of Archbishop Jozef Strossmayer,
famous orator at the first Vatican council
and his great apostolate for the ideals of SS.
Cyril and Methodius. Also Bishop Stefan
Moyzes, and Dr. Karol Kuzmany, Catholic
and Protestant leaders, who stood at the
helm of the newly created Slovak Academy,
the Matica Slovenskfi.
It was during this trying, nevertheless
glorious period that Pope Leo XIII of the
blessed memory issued the famous encyclical
"Grande Munus" on September 30, 1880 in
honor of SS, Cyril and Methodius as
apostles of the Slavs, whom he also honored
by renovating the basilica of St. Clement In
the Eternal City, where St. Cyril is buried.
And it was the same Sokol spirit which led
the Slovak and other Slavonic nations to
the famous Velehrad, where SS. Cyril and
Methodius preached and spread the gospel
of brotherly love as true disciples of Christ,
when Nitra, their original see already was in
the hands of the enemies of the Slovak
and Slavonic nations.
Today, the teachings of SS. Cyril and
Methodius triumph for the sacred liturgy
has again reverted to'the peoples language.
A6.97
SPIRITUAL TRIUMPH
In this glorious age of spiritual triumph,
the Sokols are observing the centennial of
their first organization in the United States.
It is, indeed a double triumph for God and
Nation, our Slovak Catholic Sokol motto.
With this, great triumph, we are certain
that the Sokol leaders will create the much
needed Sokol Corps and adopt the firm pro-
gram for the rejuvenation of the Slovak and
Slavonic fraternalism in America.
During the Sokol centennial in the Capital
of our great country, let us not only look
to the past but use all our powers of con-
centration and wisdom for a better future.
Let us harness the vast talents of our
American youth of Slovak and Slavonic origin
and descent for the perpetuation and growth
of those great fraternal and, physical fitness
ideals, initiated by our Sokol pioneers a cen-
tury ago for greater America and the freedom
of captive nations.
7:
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. JOHN 0. MARSH, JR.
OF VIRGINIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, February 17, 1965
Mr. MARSH. Mr. Speaker, it is clear
that not one of us, no matter in which
branch of Government he may be priv-
ileged to serve, can supply the complete
answer to the dilemma of Vietnam.
Particularly because of this fact, it is
important that we make available to
ourselves all pertinent background in-
formation, in order better to understand
the problem, and to permit us to make
such individual contributions as might
seem useful toward the eventual solution
in the interest of the United States and
of the free world.
In this connection, and under leave
to extend my remarks in the appendix,
I include a commentary which appeared
in the issue of February 3, 1965, of the
Washington Report of the American Se-
curity Council, written by Dr. James D.
Atkinson, international politics editor of
the Council, 'and distinguished member
of the faculty of Georgetown University:
NONE So QUICK
There has been a mounting campaign to
get the United States out of South Vietnam.
Many reasons are given for this position.
For example, we are told that the people in
South Vietnam are fainthearted in the fight
against the Communist Vietcong. Yet these
supposedly fainthearted people have been
enduring casualties measured in the thou-
sands every year-and for many years-in
defending themselves against communism.
In the vast area that is washed by the
waters of the Pacific Ocean, the United
States is fortunate-thus far-to have many
staunch friends. These friends have indi-
cated their friendship by joining with us in
defensive treaties for the maintenance of
peace in the Pacific Ocean area. Thus we
participated with Australia and New Zealand
in the ANZUS Treaty. Australia, New Zea-
land, the Republic of the Philippines, and
Thailand (Britain, France, and Pakistan are
participants but are not in the. Pacific)
joined with us in the Southeast Asia Treaty
Organization, SEATO. South Vietnam came
under the protection of SEATO in accordance
with article IV of the treaty. We have mu-
tual defense treaties with Japan, Nationalist
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 CIA-RDP67B00446R0,00300170006-5
 A698 Approved F8f)%Wes?89 110/1&C~1~-&DPf~ 00300170006 ebruary 18
China, and South Korea. Thus the meas-
ures which we take-or fail to take--in Viet-
nam will produce a political and psychologi-
cal fallout extending far beyond that strife-
torn country.
OTHER TAKEOVER EFFORTS STARTED
Some of the far-reaching effects which
might result if there were an American
policy of appeasement in Vietnam have al-
ready been foreshadowed. This is because
U.S. policy has sometimes appeared to be
hesitant and unsure. Thus during the last
drays of December 1964 a cladestine Commu-
nist radio station run by the Thailand Inde-
pendence Movement began broadcasting
propaganda against the present pro-Ameri-
can government of Thailand. There has
been a fresh outbreak of the Communist
Hukbalahap guerrillas in the Philippines.
Since the long drawn out Huk revolutionary
activity in that country which peaked in
the early 1950's was supported by the Chi-
nese Communists, it is likely that the cur-
rent terrorist operations of the Huks are
once again being stimulated by the Red
Chinese. If this upsurge in revolutionary
action by the Communists in southeast Asia
is taking place as a result of what the Com-
munists interpret as our lethargy in that
part of the world, one may well ark what the
effect would be if we were to embark on a
policy of appeasement in South Vietnam.
The Chinese Communists are attempting
to change the balance of power in the Pa-
cific. Their appetite is insatiable. Earlier
it was Korea. Then it was Tibet and later
an incursion into India. But now and for
the past-decade it has also been a drive into
southeast Asia. And always accompanying
this revolutionary advance in the Pacific
has been Chinese Communist mischiefmak-
ing in Africa and in Latin America. Almost
daily the press reports details of the Chinese
Communist support of the Communist guer-
rillas in the Congo. And no longer ago than
October 26, 1964, our good Latin American
neighbor, Colombia, reported that Commu-
nist-sponsored guerrillas in that country
were equipped with arms supplied by Com-
munist China and Cuba. In short, Chinese
Communist revolutionary activity is in con-
flict with American interests not only in the
Pacific but elsewhere. American withdrawal
from South Vietnam will no more appease
the Red Chinese ambitions than would our
withdrawal across the Pacific to Hawaii.
Rather, it would stimulate them to further
conquests and so might well trigger an all-
out war.
The Soviet Union is giving propaganda
and political warfare support to the Chi-
nese Communist efforts in Vietnam. The of-
ficial Soviet news agency Tass announced
December 30, 1964, that a permanent office
of the Vietnamese National Liberation Front
would be opened in Moscow. On January 5.
1965, the official Communist Part, newspaper
Pravda printed an aggressive letter of So-
viet Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko to
North Vietnam's Foreign Minister. Said
Gromyko: "The Soviet Union supports res-
olutely the just national liberation struggle
of the people of South Vietnam against the
armed intervention of American imperialism
and the antipopular regime of Saigon. The
Soviet Government demands that the United
States stop all interference in the affairs of
South Vietnam, that it withdraw its troops."
There are many public indications that
the Soviet Union is in close touch with the
Communist Vietcong. For example, on it
Moscow Radiobroadcast of. January 14,. 1965,
Lieutenant Colonel Leontyev of the Soviet
armed forces said: "The battle at Bin Ghia
made it clear that the South Vietnamese
guerrilla forces can now take on big-engage-
ments, engagements involving several battal-
ions on either side." It has since been re-
ported that units of battalion size have been
brought into the South Vietnamese fighting
from North Vietnam. From all of this it
would seem not only that the Vietcong is
committing large units to the fighting, but
also that the Soviet Union is becoming en-
couraged to take a more belligerent tone by
what it believes to be signs of American
vacillation in southeast Asia.
THE CHOICES
What options, then, has the United States
with reference to our policy in South Viet-
nam? In blunt terms it would appear that
we have two options: To go; or to stay.
The policy of going is sometimes called
a policy of neutralization. This would mean
the formation of a government in South
Vietnam in which the Communists or pro-
Communists would participate. Sooner or
later-and, if past experience with coalition
governments is a guide, it would be sooner-
the Communists would dominate the govern-
ment. Reduced to its essentialsthe policy
of neutralization is a policy of scuttle and
run, a policy of appeasement. Both on
grounds of morality and of self-interest, it
should be rejected.
But why should we stay in Vietnam? The
answer to this question is really the answer
to another question. And that is why we are
in Vietnam.
PRESIDENT JOHNSON'S POSITION
In his state of the Union message, Presi-
dent Johnson answered this question. Said
the President: "We are there, first, because
a friendly nation has asked us to help against
Communist aggression. Ten years ago our
President pledged our help. Three Presidents
have supported that pledge. We will not
break it. Second, our own security is tied to
the peace of Asia. Twice in one generation
we have had to fight against aggression in the
Far East, To ignore aggression now would
only increase the danger of a larger war."
Both Radio Moscow and the Communist
North Vietnam Radio Hanoi have commented
somewhat impudently on the President's
speech. Said Radio Moscow on January 7:
"Once again he repeated the wornout lines
that American armed forces are in South
Vietnam to give 'help' and safeguard United
States security in South Vietnam." And
Radio Hanoi on January 9 said: "In his state
of the Union address to the U.S. Congress on
January 4, Johnson once again disclosed U.S.
stubbornness in continuing its aggressive
plot in South Vietnam. Johnson brazenly
stated that the United States would stay in
South Vietnam."
But President Johnson's words are not
"worn out." His words reflect the verdict of
history on the policy of appeasement. A firm
policy in Vietnam today is the best guarantee
of avoiding a general war tomorrow. How
much might not have England-and the
world---been spared had the appeasers of the
1930's listened to the advice of Sir Winston
Churchill. Militarily Communist China is
still a paper tiger-less powerful than Hitler's
Nazis in the early 1930's. Today Communist
China's challenge in the Pacific can be met
without excessive risk. But the peril to free-
dom in the Pacific will continue to rise with
each year if we refuse to face up to this
challenge.
WHAT CAN BE DONE
If we stay in South Vietnam what can we
do to improve the situation? The following
steps would start us in the right direction:
(1) Increased interdiction of Communist
supply routes into South Vietnam and such
related measures as might be required. (2)
Recognition that Vietnam is a theater of
military operations by the appointment of
a military officer rather than a diplomatic
officer as chief of the country team of U.S.
personnel there. The protection of the peo-
ple from Vietcong terrorism is a prerequisite
before any semblance of stability can be
achieved and this is essentially a military
operation. Appointment of a military officer
as head of the country team would be in ac-
cord with the priority of requirements in
what is unquestionably an area of combat
operations. (3) The establishment of a naval
quarantine on North Vietnam as an aggres-
sor against the peace of southeast Asia. The
pressures on the present land supply routes
by such a naval quarantine on North Viet-
nam will not be fully effective for several
years. Precisely because of this, however, a
naval quarantine would signal to our friends
throughout the Pacific-and no less impor-
tantly to Communist China-the long-range
determination of the United States to stop
Chinese Communist aggression. The display
of such firmness would be a psychopolitical
act which would go far toward enlisting sup-
port for U.S. policy not in the Pacific alone
but throughout the world.
A decision to stay in Vietnam is not the
easy way out for the short run. Quite the
contrary, it will mean an intensification of
the long and hard struggle. It is to be
expected in our political- system that ques-
tions will continue to be raised about the
wisdom of continuing to meet, indeed, even
of having accepted the challenge in Vietnam.
But viewed in a larger context, Vietnam is
but a testing ground. Our resolve there is
the measure of our will elsewhere. An
American withdrawal from Vietnam would
inevitably be followed by a withdrawal from
other parts of the world in which it is said
that we are "overextended." In such a con-
text is Vietnam any more untenable than
Berlin?
These words from the Book of Proverbs
are helpful in evaluating the attitude of
many toward our friends in South Vietnam:
"None so quick to find pretexts, as he that
would break with a friend; he is in fault
continually."
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. STROM THURMOND
OF SOUTH CAROLINA
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
Thursday, February 18, 1965
Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I
call to the attention of my colleagues an
excellent editorial by Mr. Harry C.
Weaver of station WOKE in Charleston,
S.C., dated February 12, 1965. Mr. J.
Edgar Hoover, Director of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation, has repeatedly
warned our country against eff orts to
subvert the thinking of our young peo-
ple in this country, and he has empha-
sized the danger in permitting members
of the Communist Party to go from
campus to campus in this country,
preaching their Communist diatribes
-against our free enterprise system and
our belief in God.
I ask unanimous consent to have this
excellent editorial printed in the Ap-
pendix to the RECORD.
There being no objection, the editorial
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
Young people, throughout the world and
our United States of America, are being used
as pawns in the master plot of our Commu-
nist enemies to end freedom everywhere.
These antifreedom forces understand clearly
that youth is most vulnerable for question-
able crusades and rebellions against author-
ity, whether it be National, State, or local.
With this knowledge, the Communists within
our country and around the world are using
the youth for their own deadly purposes.
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
 Approved For Release ;2003/10/15: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
CONG PSSIOONAt IttOltb APP "NI
A713
study had concluded that a stable military
environment between the United States and
the Soviet Union could become unstable if
tensions increased.
The 'purpose of Phoenix was to get an in-
dependent view by nongovernmental experts
of how arms control fits into the complex
military and' political problem of attempt-
ing to control international tensions. The
Institute for Defense Analyses was chosen
as an independent contractor because of its
experience on the earlier project and because
It had done work on related problems for the
Department of Defense.
The papers written by Vincent Rock for
the Phoenix project make two interrelated
points: (1) that arms control agreements,
while they can contribute to the control of
tension, are not enough to keep internation-
al tension within safe limits; the control
of tension needs to be tackled over a broader
front; and (2), that substantive arms con-
trol agreements Vill probably not be reached
until there is more communication, under-
standing and reduced tension between our-
selves and the Soviet Union.
The author considered various arms con-
trol measures: proposals to reduce the se-
crecy of Soviet society (which is important
for on-site inspection); increased trade with
the Soviet Union; and various other areas
of interaction he deemed to be constructive
and in keeping with U.S. interests.
2. JUSTIFICATION
As the report itself states, the judgments
expressed in the paper are those of the au-
thor and do not necessarily reflect the views
of the Agency. A research program in any
field produces results to which exceptions
can be taken. As far as the sponsoring
Agency is concerned, however, judgment of
a contract study should be based upon (1)
whether the subject needed research, and .(2)
whether the contractor was responsibly
selected.
As to the first point, the title of the study,
"Common Action for the Control of Con-
flict: An Approach to the Problem of In-
ternational Tensions and Arms Control" in-
dicates that this was a subject pertinent to
the activities of the Disarmament Adminis-
tration and one which it should have
studied.
As to whether the contractor was respon-
sibly selected, the Institute for Defense
Analyses was created at the request of the
Department of Defense in 1956. It was
formed so the Government could tap the
reservoir of scientific talent represented by a
number of the Nation's leading academic in-
stitutions. At the time the Phoenix contract
was let, IDA's President was Mr. Garrison
Norton, Assistant Secretary of the Navy in
the Eisenhower administration. Mr. Vincent
Rock has held positions in the field of na-
tional security affairs under both Repub-
lican and Democratic administrations. In
general, IDA appeared to be well qualified to
conduct the study.
3. CRITICISMS AND CONCLUSIONS
There are some criticisms that distort the
report. For example, it has been claimed
that Phoenix 1 urges: "That America con-
verge her national institutions and values
gradually toward Communism. * * * That
we abandon Berlin. * -* * That we set up
Communist Parties in countries that do not
at present have a Communist- threat, that
we retreat when threatened by the Soviets
and that we overlook the assassination of
pro-'Western leaders."
None of these suggestions are made in the
Phoenix 'report.
It has also been claimed that Phoenix 1
is a top-secret document. None of the Phoe-
nix reports are classified in any manner.
Other` criticisms involve assertions that
certain foreign policy recommendations
made by Rock are being followed as a guide
for U.S. policy.
The Phoenix'rbpbrtwas printed in July
1963. Many of the ideas contained in the
report were advanced,long before that date,
although they were not previously ap-
proached from the standpoint of their re-
lationship to arms control. The implemen-
tation of some of these long-standing ideas
did take place after the publication of the
Rock report. This was, however, coinci-
dental. The fact is that the implementation
of some of these ideas was related to an im-
proved atmosphere in our relations with
the Soviet Union.
A number of examples have been cited as
foreign policy recommendations originated
by Rock: "Example, the report recommended
the United States seek Soviet cooperation in
future space efforts."
Recommendations for international coop-
eration on the peaceful uses of space were
made by the House of Representatives in
House Concurrent Resolution 332, passed in
June 1958; by President Eisenhower before
the U.N. General Assembly on September 22,
1960; and by President Kennedy at a March
21, 1962, news conference. "Example, the
report recommended that the United States
consider assisting Soviet agriculture."
The expansion of farm exports was recom-
mended by President Kennedy in his Febru-
ary 6, 1961, special message to Congress on
gold and the balance-of-payments deficit,
more than 2 years prior to the Rock report.
"Example, the report recommended reducing
restrictions on trade with the Soviet Union."
On July 14, 1958, President Eisenhower
wrote Premier Khrushchev:
"Expanded trade between our countries
could, under certain conditions, be of mu-
tual benefit and serve to improve our rela-
tions in general. This would especially be
true if it were accompanied by bfoad con-
tacts between our peoples and a fuller ex-
change of information and ideas aimed at
promoting mutual understanding as a basis
for lasting peace.
"Our people have done a great deal in re-
cent years to promote higher standards of
living through expanded trade with many
countries. They would like to trade with
the Soviet Union as well, for the same pur-
pose."
"Example: The report recommended in-
creasing scientific cooperation with the So-
viet Union."
In his January 9, 1958 state of the Union
message, President Eisenhower recommended
a worldwide program of science for peace.
And President Kennedy said in his state of
the Union message of January 30, 1961:
"This administration intends to explore
promptly all possible areas of cooperation
with the Soviet Union and other nations 'to
invoke the wonders of science instead of its
terrors."'
ARMS CONTROL AND DISARMAMENT AGENCY-
STATEMENT ON STUDY FAIR (FOCUS ON ARMS
INFORMATION AND REASSURANCE)
Various recent publications have contained
false information about the U.S. Arms Con-
trol and Disarmament Agency and the above-
captioned research study done by the In-
stitute for Defense Analyses under the joint
sponsorship of the Agency, the Department
of Defense, and the U.S. Naval Ordnance
Test Station.
The subject of the attack is a 32-page pa-
per written by Mr. Bruce Russett, a political
scientist at Yale University. It is entitled
"Information and Strategic Stability." The
volume in which it appears, "Studies on In-
formation and Arms Control," contains pa-
pers by several non-Government researchers
which: examine barriers in the Soviet Union
inhibiting information useful in verifying
arms control agreements; explore the diverse
types of accessible information; and discuss
reasons why conflicts may be caused by mis-
information or misinterpretation of informa-
tion among adversaries in times of crisis.
Mr. Russett addressed himself to the last
subject. His ideas do not purport to repre-
sent any views but his own, as noted in the
disclaimer at the beginning of the report.
No specific arms control or reduction pro-
posal has resulted from suggestions con-
tained in the study.
It has been charged, for example:
1. That the Arms Control Agency "is trying
to sap our military strength" and "blend our
country into the Communist camp by mak-
ing us too weak to fight."
This charge is completely false. U.S. arms
control and reduction policy is directed at
maintaining military balance by verified in-
ternational agreements that would control
and reduce armaments proportionately, thus
giving no country an advantage over the
United States, Such agreements were sought
under the Eisenhower administration and are
sought now because they would reduce the
risk of war and the costly and dangerous
burden of armaments.
2. That the research document states "the
Government must use restraint in gathering
intelligence data about Soviet intentions and
capabilities."
The statement quoted appears nowhere in
the Russett paper, nor has it been said by
the Arms Control Agency.
3. That "the Disarmament Agency says
there is 'significant danger in. information
which is too informative.' "
The U.S. Arms Control Agency has made
no such statement.
4. That "one'section recommends that, in
order to prove to the Soviets that we have
no designs ,on their territory, we would side
with them to put down a rebellion in East
Germany or Cuba."
The Russett paper does not recommend
this, and the Agency does not support such
an idea.
5. That "the grab-bag of surrender items
put forth by the Disarmament ? Agency was
dreamed up by the familiar Institute for De-
fense Analysis, which has to spend $10 mil-
lion of the taxpayers' funds to tell us how
to give away freedom and be safe."
These are not "surrender" items; they were
not put forth by the Arms Control Agency;
and the Agency spent only $10,000 as its
share of this joint research project with the
Department of Defense.
6. That the Russett paper proposes agree-
ments that would delay or control the trans-
mission of destabilizing information; e.g.,
"Automatic data-processing machines which
would receive information, screen it, and
give 'a sparse output.' "
The Agency has evaluated these and simi-
lar ideas and rejected them as impractical
and lacking in merit as a basis for develop-
ing arms control proposals. At least one of
these suggestions, however, has been grossly
distorted and deserves comment. It has
been charged, on the basis of the following
quotations from the author, that he would
sabotage U.S. submarines and unilaterally
disarm our forces: "One proposed solution is
for the Soviets to be able to demand that a
few submarines, of their choosing, surface
and make their positions known." ' This sen-
tence is preceded by the author's statement
that "It might be desirable, for instance, to
assure the Soviets that no Polaris submarines
were within firing range of the U.S.S.R.; and
yet we could not afford to pinpoint the lo-
cation of all of them." In context, the ob-
jective is to reassure the other side that we
were not massing for an attack, if in fact
we were not, thus avoiding a senseless pre-
emptive attack by them on us due to nu-
clear jitters. Moreover, this and other ideas
are presented from the standpoint of ex-
changing information, thus contemplating
the possibility of reciprocal action by the
Soviet Union, Finally, as indicated above,
this proposal has not been adopted by the
Arms Control Agency.
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
 .714
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX February _18
[From the New York (N.Y.) Herald Tribune,
Feb. 1B, 19651
THE VIE'rNAls DEBATE
(By Walter Lippmann)
We are just seeing another attempt to
form a government in Saigon, and much
depends, for the near future at least, on
whether it is able to hold together for a
decent time. For the reason why the situa-
tion in Vietnam has become so critical in
the last 3 months is that South Vietnam
has been crumbling and is at the point of
collapse. The Vietcong have been so near
winning the war and forcing the United
States to withdraw its troops that Hanoi and
Peiping have brushed off feelers for a ne-
gotiated peace. They believe themselves to
be in sight of a dictated peace.
We, for our part, have found ourselves
quite unable to put together a South Viet-
namese Government which is willing or able
to rally enough popular support to hold back
the advancing Vietcong. The American
Army fighting the Vietcong has been like
men trying to drive away a swarm of mos-
quitoes with baseball bats. However, be-
cause there Is nothing else to do, we keep on.
We do not wish to face the disagreeable fact
that the rebels are winning the civil war.
Theeasy way to avoid the truth is to per-
suade ourselves that this is not really a civil
war but is in fact essentially an invasion
of South Vietnam by North Vietnam. This
has produced the argument that the way to
stabilize South Vietnam is to wage war
against North Vietnam.
The more thoughtless and reckless mem-
bers of this school of thinking hold that
only by attacking North Vietnam with heavy
and sustained bombardment can we snatch
a victory in South Vietnam from the jaws of
defeat. They have not yet carried the day
in Washington. But the President, when he
ordered the retaliatory raids, no doubt in-
tended to remind Hanoi and Peiping that the
United States could, if it chose to, inflict
devastating damage.
Apart from the question of the morality
and the gigantic risks of escalating the war,
there is no sufficient reason to think that the
northern Communists can be bombed into
submission. We must not forget that North
Vietnam has a large army-larger, it Is said,
than any other army on the east Asian main-
land except China's. This North Vietna-
mese army can walk, and nobody has yet
found a way of bombing that can prevent
foot soldiers from walking.
It is most likely that if we set out to dev-
astate Hanoi and North Vietnam, this army
would invade South Vietnam. In South
Vietnam we could not bomb the army be-
cause that would mean that we would be
killing our South Vietnamese friends. There
Is little reason to think that the Saigon gov-
ernment and its very dubious troops would
be able to fight back, or in fact that it would
want to fight back.
The Asian Communists fight on the land,
and they think about war in terms of In-
fantry. I believe that the reason why they
are not terrified, nor much deterred, by our
kind of military power is that they believe
a war on the mainland will be fought on the
ground and will be decided on the ground.
There they have not only superior numbers
but widespread popular support.
For this country to involve itself in such
a war in Asia would be an act of supreme
folly. While the warhawks would rejoice
when it began, the people would weep be-
fore it ended. There is no tolerable alter-
native except a negotiated truce, and the
real problem is not whether - we should ne-
gotiate but whether we can.
It is not certain, given the weakness and
confusion In South Vietnam, that Hanoi and
Peiping, who are poised for the kill, will
agree to a cease-fire and a conference and a
negotiation. But while this has, I believe?
been the implied objective of our policy, the
time has come when it should be the avowed
objective, an objective pursued with all cur
many and very considerable diplomatic re-
sources.
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
of
HON. WILLIAM F. RYAN
OF, NEW YORK
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, February 1 8, 1965
Mr. RYAN. Mr. Speaker, the situa-
tion in Vietnam is complex. Although
the power exists to destroy North Viet-
nam, that course of action could lead to
a Chinese invasion of South Vietnam
and a Korean style war. Therefore,
American airpower is not wholly rele-
vant. And on the ground there is now a
new type of war-a guerrilla war In
which the Vietcong seems to have sub-
stantial support of the population. As
the French learned in Algeria, large
armies equipped with the most modern
equipment are no substitute for the sup-
port of the population In guerrilla
warfare.
In the midst of the complexities the
New York Times and Walter Lippmann,
the distinguished columnist, have writ-
ten lucid and enlightening editorials and
articles. The most recent appeared In
today's New York Times and the New
York Herald Tribune. I urge all my
colleagues to read the following:
[From the New York (N.Y.) Times, Feb. 18,
1965]
THE PRESIDENT ON VIETNAM
If the United States has a policy in South
Vietnam, its outlines do not emerge with
any clarity from the statement President
Johnson appended to his speech before the
National Industrial Conference Board yes-
terday.
The President reiterates that this country
wants no wider war, yet his statement sur-
renders all initiative to the Vietcong and
their external allies. "Our continuing actions
will be those that are justified and made
necessary by the continuing aggression of
others," Mr. Johnson says. He stresses that
the United States seeks no conquest and that
its sole aim is to "join in the defense and
protection of the freedom of a brave peo-
ple,"
All this is admirable as a reaffirmation of
the consistent American position on the Viet-
namese conflict, but it provides no answer
to two factors that have emerged with over-
whelming force in recent weeks, One is that
the South Vietnamese, ruled by a succession
of fragile governments under the domina-
tion of bickering warlords, are showing lit-
tle appetite for doing any fighting in their
own defense or even for helping to guard our
troops against sneak attack. The second is
that the nature of the Vietcong guerrilla tac-
tics makes it almost Impossible to hit back
at the Communist forces without carrying
the attack into North Vietnamand thus cre-
ating the wider war the President wants to
avoid.
Each northward strike enlarges the peril
of active intervention by Communist China
and increases the pressure on Soviet Russia
to abandon the withdrawn position it so
plainly prefers. What is still lacking in the
President's formulation is any hint of the
c!rcumstances under which a negotiated set-
tlement, of the type proposed by Secretary
General Thant of the United Nations, might
be approached. Without such a move, the
potentiality of a vastly expanded war in-
creases each day.
Free Enterprise
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. GEORGE HANSEN
OF IDAHO
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, January 19, 1965
Mr. HANSEN of Idaho. Mr. Speaker,
under leave to extend my remarks and
to include extraneous material, I include
in the RECORD two editorials aired by
radio station KSL, Salt Lake City, Utah,
which is heard in part of my congres-
sional district.
The first editorial, aired during the
week of January 17, 1965, deals with what;
can be accomplished by free enterprise
as compared with a government mo-
nopoly.
The second, aired during the week of
January 24, 1965, portrays graphically
just how large $100 billion is.
I commend the two editorials to the
attention of my colleagues.
TELEPHONE
This, ladies and gentlemen, is the tale of
two industries. Both are involved In com-
munications, Both are nationwide. Both
are monopolies in their field.
One is the American Telephone & Tele-
graph Co., which has just announced it will
reduce its long-distance rates by $100 million
a year. The other is the .U.S. Post Office,
which plans to increase Its rates by $300
million a year.
In the past 30 years, the cost of a coast-to-
coast telephone call has been reduced from
$9.50 to $2.25--or $1 after 9 p.m. In the same
period, the cost of mailing a first-class letter
has risen from 2 to 5 cents.
In those 30 years, the telephone companies
have steadily paid dividends to their stock-
holders and have paid more than $22 billion
in taxes into the U.S. Treasury. Meanwhile,
the Post Office has lost more than $10 billion.
Through breathtaking technological ad-
vances In the telephone system, you can dial
a number anywhere in North America, or put
a call through in minutes halfway around
the world. With a man carrying a bag from
his shoulder just as he did 30 years ago, it
takes 2 days to send a letter to the other
side of town--with delivery once a day.
One of these industries is based on the
free enterprise profit system. The other is
run by Government.
Guess which is which.
THE BUDGET
Imagine yourself standing at the corner
of Main and Broadway with $100 billion
baled up in $10 bills that you want to give
away.
You work hard at it. Peeling them off as
fast as you can work, you give one away
every second. You work at it 12 hours a
day, 365 days a year.
But you hadn't better plan on early retire-
ment, because it's going to take you 635
years to get the job done.
Or suppose you start a business and don't
do too well at it. In fact, you lose $1,000 a
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170006-5