CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 48
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 25, 2003
• Sequence Number: 3
• Publication Date: May 7, 1965
• Content Type: OPEN

Approved For Release 2003/10114: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
May 7, 1965 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 9529
my education. I'd rather work for civil judged in a material sense. He became the
rights. It's more exciting and it means first Negro farmer to defy threats and offer
more." a campsite to the marchers. His courage was
Putting two and two together, one can
easily see the backbone of a new revolution
in Alabama which could rout Governor
Wallace and many segregationists as soon as
the next elections are held if the franchise is
given the Negro. There Is no turning back
now and Alabama Negroes are ready to sacri-
fice lives, property, and individual futures for
the common cause.
This Is a heartening development consider-
ing the long years of apathy and compla-
cency. But it is a process fraught with dan-
ger; whites in Alabama must decide the tools
or weapons for the shaping of the future.
If there is cooperation and teamwork, the
change will be peaceful; if there is continued
violence and hatred. there will be counter-
attacks and a bloody confrontation.
On the first day, the hypocrisy of the Ala-
bama system was clear to every marcher:
a hypocrisy fortified by Senators and Repre-
sentatives in Washington erupting with
charges of "communism" at every assault on
their dynasty. Each day saw Alabama's Gov-
ernor urging constituents to protect white
supremacy and further divide the races, the
State's police trying to weed out militants by
excessive 'head rappings, its posses roving
streets and roads at night to harass civil
rights workers. Here in a great Southern
State of the world's greatest democracy, it
took a vast army-helicopters in the air,
mine demolition teams scouting ahead for
dynamite, GI's posted 50 feet apart the full
route, truckloads of troops at every intersec-
tion, a 200-man Army force following the
pilgrims, hundreds of FBI agents and Justice
Department aids, thousands of the federal-
ized Alabama National Guard, and the Pres-
ident, himself to guarantee We travel for
the nonviolent demonstration a mere span of.
60 miles.
In a nation that propagandizes democracy
throughout the world, with soldiers snaking
along the front in Vietnam, and shortwave
radios dotting the globe, it was incongruous
for many of the outside visitors to believe
that the state of affairs had drifted to such
brutality and bestiality in Alabama. Such
a revelation plus the hardship of travel
brought anguish and pain to newcomer civil
righters, causing a white minister to suffer
a mental collapse.
For the hazardous journey, it took a de-
termined spirit and a sound body and mind
to become an effective cog in the pilgrimage
to the cradle of the Confederacy. Only a
small number of the 10,000 who joyously left
Selma on "that great getting-up morning"
had any ambitions of walking the 54 miles
to Montgomery-except by auto after the
first 8-mile stretch. For one thing, the court
order limited the number to 300 on the two-
lane section of the highway.
The first day's army was a motley col-
lection-a California couple wheeling a baby,
ladies in high-heeled shoes, barefoot college
-students, VIP's from across the country,
maids and porters, clerics with sleeping bags
and youngsters. The atmosphere was mov-
ing, emotional-a ragged army tramping
through a wasteland.
By the time the line reached a railroad
6 miles from Selma, where 1,000 were sup-
posed to be entrained back, the passengers
refused to drop out. They wanted to reach
the first camp, the farm of David Hall, a
Negro father of eight who had survived the
heartache of deciding whether to welcome
the marchers and be harassed or turn them
down. His farm was less than prosperous
and his livestock consisted of a small herd
of cows, a few hundred chickens and four
guinea hens. His four-room house added
little to the value of the 80 acres. But
Farmer Hall's contribution couldn't be
a selling point to other Negro farmers along
the route.
This spirit of militancy among Alabama
Negroes was a key factor throughout the
march. The courage and drive inspired the
whites in moments of greatest despair.
Recognizing this peculiar circumstance,
SCLC strategists devised a campaign plan
which focused attention on the Alabama
natives as "the chosen few" of the march-
the ones who would walk the entire dis-
tance-while many of the out-of-staters
were assigned to housekeeping chores to
keep the people's army on its feet as the pil-
grimage snaked through one of the most
barbaric sections of Alabama.
Devotion of the whites to task of keeping
army marching was exceptional. California
priests and ministers set up and dismantled
the camp tents. Whites manned the com-
munication system, the security operations,
the mess tents, the latrine trucks and even
cleaned up the sites. A Canadian professor,
Sam Farr, helped clean a latrine truck.
Pittsburgh r'?stor Richard Bigeler passed out
coffee in the breakfast line. Purnell Roberts
(Adam of TV's Bonanza family) picked up
litter around the tents.
Against a backdrop of terror-inclement
weather and dropouts from fatigue, the
teamwork of whites and Negroes forged a
unity that defied comparison in the bigoted
State. A subfreezing temperature at the
first stop disillusioned some and slowed down
preparation of supper and nocturnal vespers.
But with marchers shivering and hesitating
to roll out sleeping bags, big Jim Orange,
the song leader, hopped onto a truck and
launched a singing session. "Freedom" he
shouted and hundreds huddling around fires
to keep warm soon turned the campsite Into
a singing, swaying mass of humanity.
Obviously, survival under the adverse con-
ditions (which forced accompanying GI's to
gripe about hardships) brought on soul
searching. "Was this worth it?" many a
marcher, Negro and white, asked himself. "I
froze and you can quote me," boomed Rev.
Richard Leonard, pastor of New York City's
Community Church, the largest Unitarian
congregation in the country, "But I found
myself. Suffering intensifies determination."
Negro TV actor William Marshall, who
turned down contracts to participate, told
reporters, "This is my State and the State
of my friends. We must bring it in line
with the 20th century." He admitted that
he didn't sleep a wink on the first night, but
as a security marshal, he tended to his job
day after day.
Shivering in the cold in a transient mili-
tarized ghetto was one type of suffering.
The intense Alabama sun was so broiling at
times that medics had to apply sunburn
lotion to faces-making some marchers look
like zombies. Driving rain frequently soaked
freedom lovers to the skin and turned fields
into oceans of mud so unfirm that tents
could not be erected and there was no dry
standing room. The constant drain on food
and water found some going hungry and
thirsty for hours without relief. At one
time, the water rankled with kerosene from a
tank car that had been used for other pur-
poses and some of the people developed stom-
ach disorders. Suffering for the cause was
the theme, the life, as feet blistered, legs
and backs ached and faces burned with too
heavy a dose of the sunshine of freedom.
Because this type of existence was not the
life of many of the middle class visitors, the
survival etched a memory which could not
easily be forgotten. To endure meant com-
mitment and involvement in a lifelong civil
rights struggle. At a camp breakfast, SCLC
aid Andy Young summed up the predica-
ment in explaining why the oatmeal was
served without cream. Said Young: "Folks
down here make less than $2,000 a year and
don't know what cream tastes like."
Of the chosen few selected to tramp the
entire distance, five gleamed with almost
heroic brilliance. Prosperous Baltimore,
Md., Physician Thomas C. Jones "woke up one
morning" and decided he had a stake in the
march. Leaving five patients at a hospital
in care of a colleague, he flew to Alabama
and worked around the clock for a full week.
Riding ambulances, walking, answering sick
calls in camp at night, he became "The Doc"
for hundreds. Why did you participate?
"It was the toughest assignment I've ever
handled." Dr. Jones replied, "But, golly, it was
the most inspiring, too. More of us have to
get involved." Easygoing Judge King, a 20-
year-old Marion, Ala., civil righter, walked
a good bit with Mrs. Leah Washburn, a white
Atlanta mother. They chatted, sang, and he
carried her coat for spells. "I got new ideas
about white people," he described the period.
"Some are real nice. Now I feel like a man."
Declaring that he traveled to Alabama and
walked the entire distance, rather than be
a "4-hour marcher," New York State race
relations expert George Fowler hiked, ate
the camp food, and bunked down in a sleep-
ing bag alongside Alexander Aldridge, Gov.
Nelson Rockefeller's cousin and aid and
former White House staffer Harris Wofford.
Said Fowler: "This is an amazing experience.
I'm convinced the movement should touch
tine northern big cities and bring the pride
to its people that this march has brought to
these fine deprived people in Alabama. It
is remarkable and I have grown, too."
Arrested seven times in Selma for demonstrat-
ing, 17-year-old Joe Boone was typical of
Alabama's new breed. Serving as a marshal
for the highway trek, Boone went right to
work when he arrived at campsite, heading
a cleaning detail. His enthusiasm and ex-
ecutive ability were noted by pilgrims who
could visualize the great waste of Negro
talent. "My mother and father never thought
this day would come," stated Boone, "but it's
here and I want to do my part." Perhaps
the most apologetic pilgrim was 82-year-old
Rager Lee, the grandfather of slain civil
righter Jimmie Lee Jackson. He walked only
a few miles on the first day and had to quit
with tears in his eyes. He came back off and
on to put in a few miles as a show of his
interest. "Just got to tramp some more,"
he kept repeating.
From the swamps of hate and despair, the
pilgrims trudged nearer Montgomery. The
goal was in sight. Cars stopped and pas-
sengers ran across the strip of grass to join
their freedom brothers. Buses and trucks
unloaded more. Hundreds joined the line
stretching it from 100 yards long to three
miles of moving and singing pilgrims. No
longer was there the studied wave of Ne-
groes-a flick of the hand or the nod of a
head to avoid suspicions of whites.
At the crossing into Montgomery, shouts,
cheers and singing came from some 500 well-
wishers who waited for hours at the city lim-
its. There were tears, big and bouncy, run-
ning down cheeks. There was arm waving,
Including some whites. Teachers and stu-
dents rushed from buildings to urge on the
marchers and some even embraced and
kissed Dr. King. Cooks ran out from
pantries, leaving patrons with standing
orders. In windows of motels, chamber-
maids waved and cried with joy. While
whites silently watched, the Negroes jumped
for joy. At intersections and along the way,
crowds stood and joined in the singing.
It was the day of freedom. The weary had
come home.
From 50 States came supporters-all de-
termined to make the last assault onto the
American fiagless Alabama State capital.
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
~` 9530 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE May 7, 1965
Pouring in by train, bus and plane, the
backers continued to come. At first, reports
counted 10,000, then more and more. The
city was packed tightly-in hotels, homes,
and churches.
Tomorrow would be better.
Led by Drs. King and Bunche, and fea-
turing the army of the new republic, the
300 "chosen few" with red capes as a badge
of honor, the last-lap march passed the Jef-
ferson Davis Hotel where 9, huge Confederate
flag stretched across the front, the Old Slave
Square where many of their forefathers had
been sold on the auction block, and up to
the State Capitol. The front lines had
reached the Capitol and marchers were still
leaving the City of St. Jude, stretching their
might and power three miles across the city.
The pilgrimage was the largest in city his-
tory-50,000-and its interracial force was
awesome to the tiny band of State lawmakers
who gasped at the show of power. More
American flags were carried in the hands of
the pilgrims than flew in Montgomery, and
perhaps, throughout Alabama. "We Shall
Overcome," the marchers, Negro and white,
sang loud and clear in a beautiful blend of
democracy. During the historic program,
two Negro maids listened from a window of
the guarded State capitol and waved during
the tremendous singing of the freedom an-
them, causing some to marvel at the new
courage of the Alabama Negro-no matter
his age or job. The new will to gain freedom
spread throughout Montgomery, throughout
Alabama, and had spread on to other South-
ern States and even to the North, Inspired
by deaths of two civil rights figures, and
harassed throughout by the fear of death,
the Selma-to-Montgomery pilgrimage con-
cluded also with two deaths, those of Detroit
housewife Viola Lfuzzo and Jim Crow.
THE WAR I
Mr. MORSE. Mr. dent, I ask
unanimous consent that letters, tele-
grams, and editorials which I have re-
ceived in support of my position against
the unjustifiable war in Vietnam may be
printed at this point in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the material
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
WEST Los ANGELES, CALIF ,
May 7,1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Your magnificent courage in behalf of
peace deserves the thanks of millions.
S. I. Casady, President, California Demo-
cratic Council; Henry Waxman, Presi-
dent, California Federation of Young
Democrats; Don Smith, Chairman, Los
Angeles CORE; Ruth Abraham, Amer-
ican Civil Liberties Union; Rev. J.
Hugh Anwyl, Mount Hollywood Con-
gregational Church; Maurice Weiner,
Vice President, Californians for Liberal
Representation; James Scott, 30th Dis-
trict Director, California Democratic
Council; John Slevin, American
Friends Service Committee; David
Cheal, Friends Committee on Legisla-
tion; Gail Eaby, Women's Strike for
Peace; Gussie Sitkin, Women for Leg-
islative Action.
Hon. Senator MORSE.
DEAR 8ia:`Everyone is against you but the
people. God bless you, Senator, keep up
your fight. Let's get out of Vietnam.
0. ORBAN.
THE UNIVERSITY or TOKYO,
Tokyo, Japan, April 30, 1965.
Hon. WAYNE L. MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C., U.S.A.
Sin: I was a Fulbright exchange graduate
student for the year 1955-56, and a Rocke-
feller fellow during 1956-57. I visited the
United States again last year as an Eisen-
hower fellow. While in America, I was al-
ways greatly impressed with the courage and
independence you showed in criticizing a
wrong policy of the administration and in
advancing an imaginative and sound alterna-
tive.
I am writing this letter in a serious hope
that the voice of the Japanese people con-
cerning the war in Vietnam will be heard by
influential political leaders in the United
States.
If you allow me to speak with candor, I
must tell you that the United States is ap-
pearing in the eyes of the Japanese public
as an increasingly violent, horrible, and per-
haps deranged nation as far as its policy in
Vietnam is concerned. Furthermore, the
brutalities directed against civil rights
marchers were reported almost every day with
pictures of what we had been told to con-
sider as utterly "un-American"; i.e., uncivi-
lized and undemocratic, scenes. What is
happening in the mind of the common citi-
zen here is something far beyond a political
disagreement to the U.S. policy toward Viet-
nam. It is ?a deep moral indignation against
the stand taken by the U.S. Government and,
indeed, the moral prestige of the United
States seems to have reached by far the low-
est point In the whole postwar history of
United States-Japanese relations.
The Japanese are gravely concerned with
the situation in Vietnam not only because
we have profound sympathy with the people
of South Vietnam, whose earnest desire for
peace and survival is disregarded by the
United States which is allegedly fighting for
their freedom, but also because escalation of
war will almost inevitably involve Japan in
a conflict in Korea and over the American
bases in Okinawa and on the main island.
The general consensus among the Japa-
nese, even including the political leaders in
the Conservative Party, business leaders, and
many intellectuals, who have been com-
mitted to Japan's alliance with the United
States, is that the Vietcong are more na-
tionalist than Communist, the domino
theory is untenable and irrelevant, and a
settlement should be worked out, not by war
or the bombing of North Vietnam or the use
of poisonous gases and napalm bombs, but by
diplomatic negotiations.
There is a recent opinion poll taken toward
the middle of March by the Mainichi, one of
the three largest national papers with a cir-
culation of approximately 4 million. As high
as 100 percent of the sample knew that a
war is being waged between the South Viet-
namese Government and the U.S. Armed
Forces, on the one hand, and the "Vietcong,"
on the other.
One of the questionnaires reads: "What do
you think is the first step to be taken for
the termination of war In Vietnam?"
Percent
Withdrawal of U.S. troops--------------- 40
Opening of international negotiations---- 46
Cease-fire by "Vietcong"---------------- 4
Increasing bombing of North Vietnam---- 0
Don't know and others---------------- 10
Although I am aware that, strictly scien-
tifically speaking, there are some minor ques-
tionable points in the techniques used in
this poll, I do feel that this survey represents
a fair picture of the general reactions of the
Japanese people. Please note that this poll
had been taken before the use of gas by the
U.S. troops was reported.
The hope created by President Johnson's
address on April 7, has been completely can-
celed out by the massive bombardment on
the following days. In retrospect, his speech
even contributed in strengthening the indig-
nation of the Japanese public against Ameri-
can policy because many of us found our-
selves "cheated" by the hopeful illusion pro-
duced by the President's address.
In view of the critical situation in Vietnam
which is threatening peace in Asia and the
security of Japan, 93 intellectual leaders liv-
ing in the Tokyo area addressed an appeal to
the Japanese Government, by way of handing
it over to Prime Minister Sato on April 20.
It called for a prompt and effective action
by the Japanese Government toward peace-
ful settlement of the Vietnamese problem.
It urged the Japanese Government (1) to
clarify its position that if war should escalate
into a larger scale involving additional coun-
tries Japan would disapprove American bases
in Japan being used for combat operations,
(2) to appeal to the U.S. Government for an
immediate suspension of air attacks on North
Vietnam, and (3) to appeal to the United
States and other countries concerned to open
diplomatic negotiations, at once, to which the
"Vietcong" should be a party, and to effect
an immediatecease-fire.
The full text of the statement, despite its
being of considerable length, has been pub-
lished by two of the largest national papers,
the Asahi with a circulation of approximately
5 million and the Mainichi mentioned above.
This was an extraordinary treatment by the
press of an appeal issued by an ad hoc group
of intellectuals.
It may also be noted that this appeal was
an unusual action by nonleftiat, liberal intel-
lectual leaders here said that many of the
signatories hold influential positions not only
among academic circles but as advisers to the
Government-a fact that would in part ex-
plain the willingness on the part of the Prime
Minister to meet the five representatives.
Enclosed, I am sending you (1) a copy of
the English translation of the appeal, (2) a
clipping of the front page of the Mainichi
Daily News, English edition of the Japanese
Mainichi, that carries a report on the state-
ment, and (3) an editorial of the Asahi Eve-
ning News, again English edition of the Asahi
in Japanese, that gives full support to the
appeal. You will also find (4) a news report
of the Japan Times, which is known for its
pro-American orientation, on the remarks of
Mr. Matsumoto on the Vietnamese war. He
was former Ambassador to Great Britain and
has just been to southeast Asia as special
envoy of Prime Minister Sato. You might also
be Interested in information on (5) the
agreement between Mr. Lodge and Premier
Sato that Japan can never become a direct
operational base 'for the American forces
fighting in Vietnam. Mr. Matsumoto's re-
marks as well as this agreement indicate heai-
tation and reluctance on the part of the Jap-
anese Government to become involved in the-
war in Vietnam in collaboration with the
United States.
I am sending you these reports in the hope
that they will draw your attenion and prove
to be of interest to you. I should be deeply
grteful if you take into your consid-
eration the view of the Japanese public
stated herein.
Sincerely yours,
YOSHIE:AZU SAKAMOTO,
Professor of International Politics.
APPEAL TO THE JAPANESE GOVERNMENT ON THE
WAR IN Vn4TNAM
The devastation and the danger brought
about by the war in Vietnam are being ag-
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
May 7, 1965 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
gravated day by day. Not only is this war
causing unsurpassable misery to the people of
Vietnam, but it is also constituting a great
menace to peace in Asia and to the security
of Japan. It is no wonder that there is rap-
idly growing among the Japanese people con-
cern and apprelension as to the implica-
tions of the war. We deeply regret that the
Japanese Government has not taken any
positive action by way of fulfilling its re-
sponsibilties to guarantee the security of Ja-
pan.and to restore peace in Asia.
Therefore, we strongly urge our Govern-
ment to make a prompt decision according
to the three proposals we present below, and
to declare its intention to the Japanese
people and to other nations.
1. If the United States should persist in
her present policy, there is an imminent
danger of armed conflicts ensuing between
the United States and the People's Republic
of China, regardless of the calculated design
of the Government of the United States.
Furthermore, there is a natural fear for the
tension being heightened at the 38th parallel
in Korea, between South Korea, who has sent
troops to South Vietnam, on the one hand,
and North Korea, who has pledged military
support to the National Liberation Front
(Vietcong), on the other. It is past any
dispute that our involvement in these armed
conflicts resulting from the military opera-
tions of the United States will be absolutely
incompatible with the security of Japan.
It is true that Japan is bound by the
security treaty to collaborate with the United
States. Nevertheless, article I of this treaty
holds that, in accordance with the provision
of the United Nations Charter, international
disputes shall be settled by peaceful means,
and the parties to the treaty. shall refrain
from "the threat or use of force against the
territorial integrity or political independence
of any state." We believe that the present
use of force by the United States in Vietnam
is in violation of these provisions. It is evi-
dently in line with the general rule of inter-
national law that in such a case Japan is
not necessarily bound by the above-men-
tioned duty of collaboration. This point is
clearly illustrated by the position of the
United States who, at the time of the Suez
crisis, opposed the military actions under-
taken by Britain and France, in spite of the
fact that the United States was in alliance
with these two nations.
Accordingly, we appeal to the Japanese
Government to manifest its position imme-
diately to its own people and to other na-
tions that if the war in Vietnam should es-
calate into a war on a larger scale involving
additional countries, Japan would refuse to
let the U.S. bases in Japan be used for the
purpose of military combat operations. A
declaration of the Japanese Government in
making this stand will in itself be an im-
portant impetus toward preventing the war
in Vietnam from escalating into armed con-
flicts between the United States and China
or the Soviet Union. .
2. The direct cause of such expansion of
the war in Vietnam is the air attacks by the
United States on North Vietnam. For this
reason, the first thing that should take place
to prevent this danger is the cessation of the
bombardment on North Vietnam by the
United States and the South Vietnamese
forces.
Moreover, the air attacks on the north are
in themselves operations beyond the limits
of self-defense, even if further escalation of
the war might somehow be avoided. Such
an abuse of the right of self-defense is con-
trary to the provisions of the United Nations
Charter and article I of the Japan-United
States Security Treaty. It may be noted
that the Government of the United States
no longer endeavors to justify its actions by
invoking such concepts as retaliation or
collective self-defense, as it did at the be-
ginning of the air attacks on the north.
Though there may be a certain degree of LIST OF SIGNATORIES
aid given by North Vietnam to the National
Liberation Front, even the figures given by
the U.S. Government in the "White Paper on
Vietnam" show clearly that the military as-
sistance from the north is very modest in
terms of military force. Looking back on
the whole process of the war in Vietnam, we
are persuaded to believe that the aid from
the north has been more of a counterbal-
ance to the enormous amount of military
aid offered by the United States to the South
Vietnamese Government, which has taken
measures to suppress any groups opposing
its policies, and has forfeited the support of
the people. This means that the United
States is not entitled to justify the air at-
tacks on the north, by citing the help ex-
tended by North Vietnam to the National
Liberation Front.
For these two reasons, we urge the Japa-
nese Government to appeal to the United
States for immediate suspension of the air
attacks on the north.
3. At present, in South Vietnam,a grue-
some war is going on, side by side with the
air attacks on the north. We cannot re-
frain from expressing our profound indigna-
tion against the recent use by the U.S.
forces of napalm bombs, poisonous gases
and other atrocious weapons, and especial-
ly ly against the bringing in of tactical nu-
clear weapons into South Vietnam.
If the United States should continue to
fight the National Liberation Front with
such,means of warfare, which would make
the war in Vietnam literally a war of an-
nihilation, the greater part of South Viet-
nam will inevitably be reduced to a scorched
land of complete devastation. The people
of South' Vietnam are exhausted by the war
that has lasted more than 20 years. There
is no doubt about their not desiring con-
tinuation of such a war. The United States,
however, is pursuing war efforts and destruc-
tion, against the will of the Vietnamese peo-
ple who are longing for peace. The fact that
Japan belongs to Asia makes it all the more
impossible for us to remain inactive in the
face of the suffering of the people in South
Vietnam.
In view of what has been stated above, the
war in South Vietnam conducted by the
United States cannot escape from being
called an unexcusable disregard of human
dignity and the right of national self-de-
termination. In order that South Vietnam
should emerge out of its present condition
of misery and despair, diplomatic negotia-
tions should be opened without delay to
terminate the war. In this respect, we wel-
come President Johnson's statement, made
in response to the proposal by the 17 non-
alined nations, to the effect that the United
States "remains ready for unconditional
discussions." This kind of diplomatic dis-
cussions, however, must be accompanied by
an unconditional cease-fire, so that there can
be no room for continued military opera-
tions with the aim of gaining a favorable
position for negotiation.
The essential conditions for a solution to
the war in Vietnam will be firstly to base
the whole argument on the recognition that
this war is fundamentally a civil war, and
should be treated as such; the National Lib-
eration Front should be recognized as a party
to the negotiation; the U.S. troops should
eventually be withdrawn; and there should
be corresponding suspension of the aid from
North Vietnam.
We fervently hope that the Japanese Gov-
ernment, in full realization of the points
Toshiyoshi Miyazawa, professor of law, St.
Paul's University, professor emeritus of the
University of Tokyo, member of the Japan
Academy.
Ihiro Osaragi, writer; member of the Art
Academy of Japan.
Hyoe Ouchi, professor emeritus of the Uni-
versity of Tokyo, former president of Hosei
University, member of the Japan Academy.
Tetsuzo Tanikawa, president of Hosei Uni-
versity.
Sakee Wagatsuma, professor emeritus of
the University of Tokyo, member of the
Japan Academy.
Abe, Tomoji, writer, professor of English
literature, Meiji University.
Aomi, Junichi, professor of jurisprudence,
University of Tokyo.
Ariizumi, Toru, professor of law, Univer-
sity of Tokyo.
Arisawa, Hiromi, professor emeritus of the
University of Tokyo.
Banno, Masataka, professor of Chinese his-
tory, Tokyo Metropolitan University.
Egaml,. Fujio, professor of biochemistry,
University of Tokyo.
Egami, Namio, professor of archeology,
University of Tokyo.
Fujimoto, Yoichi, professor of physics,
Waseda University.
Fukuda, Kanichi, professor of political
science, University of Tokyo.
Fukushima, Masao, professor of Chinese
law, University of Tokyo.
Fukutake, Tadashi, professor of sociology,
University of Tokyo.
Hidaka, Rokuro, professor of sociology,
University of Tokyo.
Hori, Toyohiko, professor of political
science, Waseda University.
Horigome, Yozo, professor of European his-
tory, University of Tokyo.
Hotta, Yoshie, writer.
lenaga, Saburo, professor of Japanese his-
tory, Tokyo University of Education.
lizuka, Koji, professor of human geogra-
phy, University of Tokyo.
Inoue, Yoshio, professor of Tokyo Union
Theological Seminary.
Ishii, Teruhisa, professor of law, University
of Tokyo.
Ishikawa, Shigeru, professor of economics,
Hitotsubashi University.
Isono, Fujiko, lecturer in sociology, Japan
Women's University.
Isono, Seiichi, professor of law, Tokyo Uni-
versity of Education.
Ito, Masami, professor of law, University of
Tokyo.
Ito, Mitsuharu; associate professor of eco-
nomics, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies.
Ito, Set, writer.
Iyanaga, Shokichi, professor of mathe-
matics, University of Tokyo.
Jodai, Tano, former president of Japan Wo-
men's University.
Kaiko, Takeshi, writer.
Kaino, Michitaka, lawyer.
Kato, Shuichi, writer.
Katsuta, Shuichi, professor of pedagogy,
University of Tokyo.
Kawata, Tadashi, associate professor of
international economics, University of Tokyo.
Kido, Mataichi, professor ' of journalism,
Doshisha University.
Kikuchi, Isao, former president of Kyushu
University.
Kinoshita, Hanji, professor of political
history, Tokyo University of Education.
Kiyomiya, Shiro, professor of law, Nihon
University.
Kuno, Osamu, lecturer in philosophy,
Gakushuin University.
cited above, will send urgent appeals to the
United States and other nations concerned' Kobayashi. Naoki, professor of law, Uni-
to open diplomatic negotiations at once, to
which the National Liberation Front should
be a party, and to effect an immediate cease-
fire, so that there will be the earliest pos-
sible restoration of peace in Vietnam.
varsity of Tokyo.
Maruyama, Masao, professor of political sci-
ence, University of Tokyo.
Matsuda, Tomoo, professor of economic his-
tory, University of Tokyo.
Approved For-Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
9532 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
Matsumoto, Nobuhiro, professor of oriental
history, Keio University.
Minemura, Teruo, professor of labor law,
Keio University.
Miyake, Yasuo, professor of chemistry,
Tokyo University of Education.
Miyazaki, Yoshikazu, professor of eco-
nomics, Yokohama National University.
Munakata, Seiya, professor of pedagogy,
University of Tokyo.
Mutai, Risaku, professor emeritus of Tokyo
University of Education.
Nagai, Michio, professor of sociology, Tokyo
Institute of Technology.
Nakagawa, Zennosuke, professor of law,
Gakushuin University.
Nakamura, Akira, professor of political
science, Hosei University.
Nakamura, Takafusa, associate professor of
statistics, University of Tokyo.
Nakano, Yoshio, professor of English
literature, Chuo University.
Nambara, Shigeru, former president of the
University of Tokyo.
.Niida, Noboru, professor emeritus of the
University of Tokyo.
Noda, Yoshiyuki, professor of law, Uni-
versity of Tokyo.
Nogami, Mokichiro, professor of physics,
University of Tokyo.
Nogami, Yaeko, authoress.
Nomura, ]Meiji, professor of labor law,
Waseda University.
Nomura Koichi, associate professor of
Chinese history, St. Paul's University.
Oe, Kenzaburo, writer.
Okochi, Kazuo, president of the University
of Tokyo.
Ooka, Shohei, writer.
Otsuka, Hisao, professor of economic his-
tory, University of. Tokyo.
Saito, Makoto, professor of American his-
tory, University of Tokyo.
Sakamoto, Yoshikazu, professor of interna-
tional politics,. University of Tokyo.
Sato, Isao, professor of constitutional law,
Seikei University.
Sugi, Toshio, professor of French litera-
ture, St. Paul's University.
Sumiya, Mikio, professor of economics, Uni-
versity of Tokyo.
Serizawa, Kojiro, writer.
Tajima, EizO, profesor of physics, St. Paul's
University.
Takahashi, Kohachiro, professor of eco--
r omic history, University of Tokyo.
Takano, Yuiclli, professor of international
law, University of Tokyo.
Takeda, Kiyoko, professor of history of
thought, International Christian University.
Takeuchi, Yoshimi, writer, Chinese litera-
ture.
Tamanoi, Yoshiro, professor of economics,
University of Tokyo.
Tanaka, Shinjiro, critic, arms control and
disarmament.
Tsuru, Shigeto, professor of economics,
Hitotsubashi University.
Tezuka, Tornio, professor of German lit-
erature, St. Paul's University.
Tomonaga, Sin-itiro, professor of physics,
Tokyo University of Education.
Toyoda, Toshiyuki, professor of physics, St.
Paul's University.
Uchiyama, Shozo, professor of civil law,
Hosei University.
Uemura, Tamaki, honorary president of
Japan YWCA.
Wakimura, Yoshitaro, professor emeritus
of, the University of Tokyo.
Watanabe, Kazuo, professor of French lit-
erature, St. Paul's University.
Yamamoto, Tatsuo, professor of southeast
Asian history, University of Tokyo.
Yoshida, Hidekazu, music critic.
Yoshida, Tomizo, director, Cancer Insti-
tute, Tokyo.
[From the Asahi Evening News, Apr. 22,
1965]
APPEAL ON VIETNAM CRISIS
We are in complete agreement with the
aims of an appeal submitted on Tuesday to
the Japanese Government by 93 scholars and
men of letters. This is because we believe the
most important problem now Is how to pre-
vent the danger of the Vietnam situation
from escalating.
First, we wish to take note of the fact that
it took the form of an appeal to the Japanese
Government. We think that this is the
proper line to take in any such movement.
The reason is that if, instead, such a move-
ment takes the form of direct statements or
actions aimed at the United States or the
Communist side, there is danger of it being
led in an unexpected direction by a sudden
outburst of feelings.
Utmost care must be exercised so that such
a movement does not move toward fostering
bad feelings against a certain country or
race. One of the saddest results of the Sino-
Soviet polemics is in its fanning of racial an-
tagonism. The Vietnam war may further in-
crease this danger.
If Hanoi is bombed, what a big shock will
be felt by our people. There is a possibility
of a recurrence of the disturbance that broke
out in 196Q over the problem of the Japan-
United States Security Treaty.
In considering the possibility of such
danger, it will become of increasing im-
portance in the future for such movements
in our country to take the proper Bourse
and be directed to the Government or the
Diet. And If we can trust the Government
and the.Diet to properly understand the cur-
rent. feeling of the people and act accord-
ingly, the movement will of itself maintain
order.
AMERICAN VIEW
In criticizing the appeal, it is pointed out
that the U.S. Government and the majority
of the American people consider that North
Vietnam is invading the South and that the
prerequisite to negotiations is to stop it.
Aside from whether this American view is
wrong or not, it is also pointed out that the
Americans believe so.
It is reasonable. But even if there had
been a little aid to the south from the north,
as a real problem, as a result of the bombing
of the north, the aid from the north to the
south can be imagined to have been cut,
while the aid that the United States has ex-
tended to the South Vietnam Government is
far greater than the aid from the north to
the Vietcong. In view of this, an appeal to
the United States and South Vietnam to
first stop bombing the north cannot be said
to be unreasonable so as to cease the vicious
cycle in which one retaliatory action leads
to another.
In particular, we wish much thought to be
given to how much the friends of the United
States were hopelessly disillusioned by the
series of bombings of the north, which were
launched immediately after President John-
son gave his Baltimore speech, which was
so rich in suggestions.
At the same time, we must strongly ask
the Vietcong and the Communists not to
make the withdrawal of American troops
the prerequisite for negotiations for peace.
Such a demand for withdrawal Is eventually
right, and the United States itself is not
against it, but it must be said to be too
costly a demand that ignores commonsense.
We imagine that the most difficult problem
remaining would concern the treatment of
the Vietcong. Negotiating with "rebels" or
their participation In talks may be hard to
bear. But historically, this has been so for
all movements of colonies for liberation.
American independence started with the re-
volt against the mother country, Britain. ]
May 7, 1965
has been so in the independence of Ireland
and India. French President Charles de
Gaulle was wise in deciding to negotiate with
the Front de Ia Liberation Nationale (FLN)
in Algeria.
In considering the problem thus, the basis
for a judgment lies in lust how much ter-
ritory and how many people the Vietcong
presently has under its control. On this
score, the Vietcong, whether one likes it or
not, must be recognized as a belligerent
organization.
REASONABLE
After all, Japan cannot take the stand
that it does not matter if South Vietnam
is communized. Therefore, opinion is strong
that it should aid the United States and
South Vietnam. This is reasonable in a way.
But actually, is not the problem of how
to meet communism more important?
It is not wise to oppose ideology with
armed force. The U.S. Government is prob-
ably fully aware of this reasoning. But the
tragedy of South Vietnam may be said to
have been in not discovering a democratic
reformer for a leader.
It may be logically contended that the
United States can do nothing but strengthen
its military actions at the present stage.
But it is also a fact that as the military
operations are strengthened, the originally
non-Communist democratic people as well
as the nationalists will be rapidly pushed
toward communism. Experience has fre-
quently shown that if people who are not
Red are branded as such and continually
called so, they will really become Red.
Not only the United States but the Soviet
Union and China, the big powers, tend to be
short in understanding the nationalism of
the small countries. Even among Commu-
nist countries, which stand on the princi-
ple of internationalism, the nationalism of
the small countries is strong.
Even if the fears of the United States
against the expansionism of China are jus-
tified, is not the United States itself break-
ing down the strongest barrier against
China's expansion by its bombing of North
Vietnam?
PREDICAMENT
If the United States-Vietnam policy fails,
Japan will be placed in a terrible predica-
ment. Therefore, we wish the United States
to consider the advantages and disadvan-
tages, not from a small military and political
standpoint, but from a broader standpoint.
To be sure, the argument may be made
for a continuation of the bombing of the
-north, and if China comes out, to take it as
a chance to hit and destroy its nuclear power
in the bud. But victory on the ground can-
not be gained by destruction from the air
alone. Japan has proved by its experience
in China that even if points and lines are
secured, the war will not end and the tide
of popular feelings cannot be won over.
The important thing now is to end the
escalation of the war. Consideration for
world opinion can be discerned in the joint
statement by the Soviet Union and North
Vietnam. President Johnson's Baltimore
speech reveals that it was motivated by a
peace appeal by nonalined nations.
The present situation can move toward an
expansion of the war, or it can be the right
moment for listening to the peace appeal. It
is at a most delicate stage when moves can
be made either for peace or war.
The present, therefore, is no time for the
Japanese Government and ruling party to
stand idly by watching developments in the
belief that there is little possibility of an.
armed clash between the United States, the
Soviet Union, and China. The reason is that
there are many Japanese who take a serious
view of the situation. Since there are so
many such people, the way to allay their
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
May 7, 1965 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.- SENATE
fears and make them move with reason is to .trust the South Vietnam Government and
listen to their voice and take proper action. lean more toward the Vietcong.
"If the Vietnam. war is to be won by mili-
[From the Japan Times, Apr. 24, 1985] tary action, it must be done by land forces
DIET COMMITTEE HEARS BRIEFING ON VIETNAM which will be able to weed out the enemy
WAR-BOMBING WON'T INDUCE HANOI To from every nook and corner of South Viet-
FAVOR PEACE TALKS, MATSUMOTO SAYS nam. However, if the Vietcong are to be
Shunichi Matsumoto, adviser to the For- annihilated, all the farmers must be killed.
eign Office and former Liberal-Democratic The United States is stuck in a quagmire, not
member of the Diet, said Friday he doubted knowing whether it can win the war or not."
if U.S. air raids on North Vietnam would On the other hand, Sakamoto said he did
for not think the four conditions decided at the
induce North Vietnam to res
ond t
bid
p
o
s
peace talks. North Vietnam Congress on April 10 could
Matsumoto, former ambassador to Britain, be put into practice immediately. The four
1954
tGeneva
who recently toured the three Indochinese conditions Include respect of the
nations as a special envoy of the Govern- agreement eemrnt on Vietnam and the withdrawal
ment, appeared before the House of Repre- of American forces from South Vietnam.
sentatives Foreign Affairs Committee to brief He said d it it was necessary to call upon world
on the Vietnam situation. opinion for the realization otion of this principle
and restore e peace soon possible.
Also appearing at the committee session Sakamoto said that the e Vietcong were
were Takeshi Kaiko, author of "The War in organized by political, religious, and mass or-
Vietnam," and Tokumatsu Sakamoto, pro- ganizations before the formation in January
fessor at Aichi University and chairman of 1962 of the People's Revolution Party, which
the Japan-Afro-Asia Joint Committee. corresponds to the Communist Party.'
All three men spoke up against the U.S. He said the true character of Vietcong
policies toward Vietnam. was set forth in the 10 principles announced
Qualifying his statement that it was a at the time of its formation and 6 others
purely personal point of view, Matsumoto adopted at its second convention in January
said that, while the Vietcong did identify 1964.
Itself with communism and were receiving Its aim, he said, is to knock down "U.S. im-
help from North Vietnam, he disagreed with perialists and their agents" and set up a
the contention of a highly placed U.S. Gov- racial and democratic coalition government.
ernment official that 90 percent of the Viet- He said the other objectives included en-
cong were Communists. forcement of a land reform program, adop-
About U.S. bombing of North Vietnam, tion of policies dedicated to neutrality and
Matsumoto said: peace, and peaceful reunification of North
"I am not so sure if the bombings would and South Vietnam.
make North Vietnam feel like heading for a Answering questions by committee mem-
peace conference table. In the light of Ho bers, Matsumoto said there was no need for
Chi Minh's past record and disposition, North Japan to propose the holding of a peace con-
Vietnam isn't going to give up easily in spite ference at present.
of the air raids." He said various moves are being made to
Matstunoto said it would be extremely dif- convene such a conference and that it is suf-
ficult to weaken the Vietcong with air raids ficient for Japan to declare itself as one of
and sporadic attacks alone. the chief advocates of peace in the area.
"If you want to exterminate them," he Socialist Satoko Tokano then said she be-
said, "you'll have to destroy the whole land. lieved the Government should tell the
And that would be a formidable task even United States that bombing of North Viet-
for a strong army." nam is meaningless and asked Matsumoto's
Matsumoto noted that the United States view on this matter.
was beginning to realize that air raids on Matsumoto replied that he was of the
North Vietnam would not bring about the same opinion, adding that he hoped Henry
desired results. Cabot Lodge, special envoy of President
He said that was why the United States Johnson, would convey this view to the
was stepping up warfare against the Viet- President.
cong. Kailko said he had heard that even U.S.
Matsumoto said if the United States con- veterans who fought in the Korean war were
tinuecl to escalate its bombings of North of the opinion that "farmers cannot be
Vietnam, Communist China and the Soviet blamed for helping Vietcong guerrillas," or
Union would probably not remain silent. He "Vietcong will win this war."
also said if the United States intensified its He said "now that the Vietcong have de-
attack on the Vietcong, the entire Viet- cided to fight to the last, there will be no
namese people would oppose the United alternative but to recognize the Vietcong
States and the war might be turned into a group as a legal entity and, finally, for the
fierce "racial battle." United States to withdraw from South
Consequently, Matsumoto continued, it is Vietnam.
necessary to bring peace to the embattled
speech at Baltimore and it is regrettable that JAPANESE VIEWPOINTS: AMERICANS' JUSTICE
the Vietnam situation is becoming more ag- (Letter to the Asahi Shimbun, Tokyo)
gravated," Matsumoto added. EDITOR: I do not understand the Ameri-
Matsumoto said the U.S. proposal of pro- cans any more. The United States is con-
viding $1,000 million for the development of tinually bombing -North Vietnam because
southeast Asia, including North Vietnam, they think communism is evil.
was an indication that the United States has Why don't the Americans, many of whom
recognized the necessity of promoting the are people of good commonsense, think about
welfare of the people in that area. He said putting an end to the war?
it would also be well for Japan to increase Is the United States to continue bombing
her economic assistance to the countries in till North Vietnam is totally destroyed?
the area. I now remember the atomic bombings on
Matsumoto said the stabilization of the Nagasaki and Hiroshima. The United States
area cannot be.achieved for long by military may have its own argument for dropping
actions, politics, and ideology alone. An the A-bombs on those two cities. But still
ultimate solution to the,, problem must be there remains in us something that is un-
obtained by raising the living standards of convinced about the justification of atomic
the people and developing the economies of bombings.
the countries. We, as the country which first triggered
Meanwhile, Kaiko declared that the farm- the war, have avoided discussion of this
era hold the key to Vietnam but they do not subject.
9533
However, the attacks on North Vietnam
face us squarely with all the realities in-
volved.
It seems to me that the United States is
bombing North Vietnam for reasons which
are not acceptable to other nations.
Why on earth must the United States con-
tinue to drop bombs on North Vietnam when
even Canada is voicing its opposition?
I do not understand any longer what the
American people claim as justice.
EIGO SEGAWA,
Jobless.
[From the Japan Times, Apr. 25, 1965]
LODGE AGREES JAPAN WILL NOT BE TURNED
INTO VIETNAM WAR BASE-L.B.J.'S ENVOY
SEES PREMIER; REQUESTS JAPAN AID EFFORT
Special U.S. presidential envoy Henry
Cabot Lodge and Prime Minister Eisaku Sato
Saturday agreed that Japan can never be-
come it direct operational base for the U.S.
forces fighting in Vietnam.
Their meeting at the Prime Minister's offi-
cial residence at Nagata-cho Saturday began
at 4 p.m. and lasted more than 2 hours.
Lodge arrived at 1:59 p.m. Saturday.
Sato told Lodge that Japan is increasingly
concerned over expansion of the Vietnam war
and also conveyed Japan's desire that the
United States make more efforts to find a
peaceful settlement of the Vietnam conflict.
Lodge, former ambassador to South Viet-
nam, said the United States is fighting to
secure the freedom and liberty in South
Vietnam and also expressed a hope that
Japan understands the difficulties now facing
the United States to obtain these objectives
in Vietnam.
Lodge also urged that Japan undertake an
active role in the development of southeast
Asia under the program recently suggested
in President Lyndon B. Johnson's Baltimore
speech.
Lodge, who is on a tour of Oceania and Far
Eastern countries as Johnson's special envoy,
arrived at Tokyo International Airport by a
special plane Saturday afternoon for a 3-day
stay in Tokyo.
Soon after his arrival, Lodge visited the
Prime Minister at his official residence, ac-
companied by U.S. Ambassador Edwin O.
Reischauer.
The meeting was also attended by Foreign
Minister Etsusaburo Shiina and Chief Cabi-
net Secretary Tomisaburo Hashimoto.
After the meeting, Hashimoto said Lodge
did not have a special proposal to make but
exchanged views with the Prime Minister on
the Vietnam Issue.
Hashimoto, however, refrained from dis-
closing whether or not Sato presented to
Lodge a concrete Japanese plan for peaceful
settlement of the Vietnam question.
Hashimoto said that Sato told Lodge that
the United States should not involve Japan
in the Vietnam war by turning its bases here
into direct operational points for its military
operations in Vietnam. Lodge reportedly an-
swered that he agreed with Sato's view on this
matter.
According to Hashimoto, Lodge, going into
details over Johnson's plan for southeast
Asia's economic development, added that the
United States does not yet have a concrete
plan for such a program. He said, however,
that the United States expects Japan can co-
operate actively in the program because of
its geographical proximity, experience, and
know-how in the Asian development.
[From the Mainichf Daily News; Apr. 21,
1985]
JAPANESE SAGES URGE IMMEDIATE SUSPENSION
OF NORTH VIETNAM AIR ATTACKS
President Tetsuzo Tanikawa, of Hosei Uni-
versity, Novelist Jiro Osaragi and three pro-
fessors emeritus of Tokio University-Toshi-
yoshie Miyazawa, Hyoe Ouchi and Sakae
Wagatsuma-Tuesday filed a joint proposal
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 May 7, 1965
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
And the United States, by associating itself
with France's effort, took its first long step
toward making the Vietnamese cynical about
American protestations of support for na-
tional self determination. Thus ended the
first U.S. attempt to build up a competing
government in Vietnam.
This failure left two important political
legacies: First, the Vietminh had gained
overriding control of Vietnamese national-
ism; and second, most of rural Vietnam,
south as well as north, had become ac-
customed to being administered by the
Vietminh and had reason to be loyal to it.
In the eyes of the Vietnamese peasant, the
Vietminh had rid the country of colonial rule
and had enacted beneficial social reform,
especially in the agrarian sphere. These
legacies have powerfully affected the political
scene in post-Geneva Vietnam and still limit
the possibilities for attaining American ob-
jectives there.
Yet despite these inherent disadvantages,
soon after the Geneva Conference the United
States for the second time attempted to es-
tablish an anti-Communist Vietnamese gov-
ernment, this time no longer in association
with France. Although the circumstances
might have seemed to doom this American
effort from the outset-no matter how en-
lightened its execution-there was one cru-
cially important, though temporary and in a
sense artificial, advantage which the United
States enjoyed. This derived from the un-
equivocal provision in the Geneva accords
that elections would be held in July 1956,
under international supervision, to unify the
country under one government .7 In antici-
pation of these elections (and also because of
its preoccupation with the economic rehabili-
tation of the North), the Vietminh initially
honored a central provision of the accords
and abstained from militant tactics in tb';e
South. The American-sponsored Ngo Dinh
Diem government thereby. won a reprieve
lasting several years in which to could have
built up popular support.
Vietminh but as a necessary step in building
a position of greater strength from which to
negotiate 2 Similarly, we are now insisting
that greater military power must be brought
to bear before we can attain a suitable posi-
tion for negotiations. The French ignored
then, and the United States is ignoring now,
basic political factors that limit what can be
achieved by military power. With us as with
the French, the lack of popular support for a
regime artificially fostered by Western
backers and out of line with the mainstream
of Vietnamese nationalism has precluded any
politically effective application of military
power.
EARLY ATTEMPTS TO BUILD A GOVERNMENT
American efforts to build up an anti-Com-
munist government in Vietnam began at
least 5 years before the 1954 Geneva Confer-
ence on Indochina and were initially under-
taken in cooperation with, and in support of
the French .8 Abandoning Roosevelt's post-
war objective of denying Vietnam to France
and making it a United Nations trusteeship,4
the Truman administration backed France in
her efforts to reimpose military control .5 In
adopting this policy, Truman's advisers were
hoping that either concurrently or following
the reestablishment of such control, France
would grant a substantial measure of inde-
pendence to a non-Communist Vietnamese
Government. But that hope rested on a fun-
damental error in assessing Vietnamese po-
litical forces and was shattered, politically 0
quite as dramatically as subsequently it was
militarily with the debacle of Dienbienphu.
During its early efforts to build up a Viet-
namese Government, Washington failed to
appreciate the extent to which Ho Chi Minh
and the Vietminh were regarded as the sym-
bol of Vietnamese nationalism-for most
non-Communists as well as Communists.
2 See Anthony Eden, "Full Circle" (Boston,
1960), p. 100, and Navarre, op. cit.
8 By 1954 American aid to the French war
effort in Indochina was considerably greater
than the amount France herself was spend-
ing on these operations. In September 1953
the French Prime Minister announced that
the additional aid then being granted by the
United States would defray 70 percent of
France's expenditure on the war. Finally in
1954 "the American Government undertook
to underwrite the entire cost of the war,
allocating $1,175 million for that purpose"
(Donald Lancaster, "The Emancipation of
French Indochina" [Oxford, 19611, p. 417).
`Roosevelt indicated that he had this in
mind at the 1945 Yalta Conference; see Al-
lan B. Cole, ed., "Conflict in Indochina and
International Repercussions: A Documentary
History, 1945-55" (Ithaca, N.Y., 1956), pp.
47-48.
'The United States consistently urged the
French to grant real independence to the
states of Indochina, but our urging was polite
and restrained. Any real pressure, it was felt,
Would so antagonize the French as to have
adverse effects upon American plans to make
France a keystone in the defense of Europe.
Even after 1950, American efforts to exert
pressure on France in the Far East were in-
hibited by what the United States deemed to
be her more important European objectives-
first the commitment to NATO, and later the
attempt to establish a European Defense
Community, which was ultimately defeated
by France herself.
0 Even if France had yielded to our request
that she grant real independence to the
puppet government she promoted under Em-
peror Bao Dai, it was most unlikely that a
majority of the Vietnamese would have
chosen him over Ho Chi Minh. As Eden de,
scribed Bao Dai, he was "neither a popular
nor an Inspiring figure. He preferred the
casino to the council chamber and the antics.
of his corrupt and transient ministers in
Saigon did not appeal to moderate nation-
alist opinion" (Eden, op. cit., p. 89).
THE GENEVA ACCORDS
To understand why the Vietminh granted
this reprieve, and indeed to appreciate both
the course of subsequent developments and
the possibilities open today, it is essential to
understand certain features of the Geneva
accords which have frequently been over-
looked. Moscow and Peiping each for its
own special reasons,8 pressured the Vietminh
into signing an armistice with Prance and
negotiating a political settlement which, it
s See article 7 of the "Final Declaration of
the Geneva Conference," in "Further Docu-
ments Relating to the Discussion of Indo-
china at the Geneva Conference, June 16-
July 21, 1954," hereafter referred to as
Geneva Accords (London [Her Majesty's Sta-
tionery Office, Cmd. 9239], 1954), p. 10._ Sig-
nificantly, article 7 stipulates that the elec-
tions were to be antecedent to and a neces-
sary condition for the "fundamental free-
doms, guaranteed by democratic institu-
tions" and that the elections were to be held
"in order to insure * * * that all the neces-
sary conditions obtain for free expression of
the national will." This particular portion
of the accords has frequently been quoted
out of context, with the key phrases in re-
verse order, in order to justify the refusal to
hold elections on the grounds that the nec-
8 The Soviet Union probably put pressure
on the Vietminh in order to induce France
to stay out of the projected European De-
fens Community; see Lancaster, op. cit., pp.
336-337, and Daniel Lerner and Raymond
Aron, editor, "France Defeats EDC" (New
York, 1957), pp. 16-17. China, on the other
hand, had determined to embark on Its
somewhat delayed 5-year plan and tempo-
rarily to lay aside its more militant line.
For China's relationship to the Vietminh at
the conference, see Lancaster, op. cit., p. 334.
was generally agreed, gave the Vietminh con-
trol over far less territory than its military
position warranted .0 Nevertheless, had they
been carried through in their entirety ac-
cords could have served the Vietminh's in-
terests.
The basis of the accords was a military
truce between the Vietminh and France.
This was designed to end the 9-year-old war
and open the way for an internationally sup-
ported political agreement which would pro-
vide for the peaceful resolution of outstand-
ing problems. The political accords agreed
to at Geneva 10 established the conditions for
transferring political competition to the elec-
toral plane. The Vietminh, yielding to So-
viet and Chinese pressure, u laid down its
arms and agreed to the temporary partition
of the country, 12 pending reunification
through nationwide elections." It dis-
9 The Vietminh agreed not only to give up
control of rich areas in the delta south of
Saigon but also to evacuate major centers
of support north of the 13th parallel. As
French Premier Mendes-France stated before
the National Assembly: "So far as the de-
marcation line is concerned, the enemy was
asking for the 13th parallel; and today we
have the 17th. Now between the 13th
and 17th parallel Tourane [now Danang]
and Hue are located, and there are three
provinces which have always shown allegi-
ance to the Vietminh and which the Viet-
minh is now going to evacuate so that they
may pass under our control" (Journal Offi-
ciel de la Republique Francaise, Debats Par-
lementaires, Assemblee Nationale, Seance du
vendredi 23 juillet 1954 [Paris, 1954], p.
3580).
10 The political accords at Geneva were
subscribed to by verbal assent by Cambodia,
China, the Democratic Republic of Vietnam
(Vietminh), France, Laos, the U.S.S.R., and
the United Kingdom. The United States
and the State of Vietnam (French-sponsored
Bao Dal regime) were not parties to the ac-
cords, but the United States made its own
unilateral declaration (see [17] below).
11 As the New York Times correspondent,
Tillman Durdin, cabled from Geneva:
"Vietminh leaders are not entirely happy
about the peace settlement in Vietnam. A
number of members of the Vietminh delega-
tion have declared openly that pressure from
Chinese Communist Premier Chou En=1ai
and Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav M.
Molotov forced their regime to accept less
than it rightfully should have obtained
here." These Vietminh officials contended,
according to Durdin, that the military situ-
ation in Vietnam would have given the Viet-
minh almost full control within a year, and
that Cambodia and Laos could have taken
over eventually. They saw the settlement as
a sort of appeasement; "in interests of Soviet
and Chinese Communist international rela-
tions," they feel "their revolution has been
slowed down, if not halted, right on the verge
of complete success" (New York Times, July
25, 1954). See also Jean Lacouture and
Philippe Devillers, "La fin d'une guerre:
Indochine 1954" (Paris, 1960), pp. 282-285.
12 The Vietminh, as well as China and the
Soviet Union, also recognized the potential
danger in further fighting, should it lead to
a massive American Intervention. With the
promise of elections before- them, however,
the Communists had little reason to chal-
lenge the United States further and thereby
determine the credibility of vague warnings
about massive retaliation.,
1s The official Vietminh newspaper, Nhan-
Dan, reflected the confident expectation of
the North Vietnamese that elections would
be held when, just after the conclusion of
the Conference, it reported: "The final de-
claration of the Geneva Conference has
stipulated the withdrawal of foreign troops
from Indochina and -_4t * * general elec-
tions in each country 'of Indochina. * *
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 May 7, 1965
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 9537
namese people 28 Programs urged by the
United States for the improvement of social
and economic conditions," for winning the
allegiance of the non-Vietnamese mountain-
dwelling peoples 30 and for the establishment
of strategic hamlets 31 were generally unsuc-
28 Contrary to the position taken in the
State Department's white paper of Feb. 27,
1965, this is the view of most independent
and informed observers.
20 Under Vietminh control the peasants
were often given land and not required to
pay taxes on it; but when the Diem govern-
ment's land reform was put into action the
peasants had to buy this land from the land-
lords and pay taxes. The Vietcong success-
fully presented this to the peasants as an
oppressive measure. See J. L. Finkle and
Tran Van Dinh, "Provincial Government in
Vietnam: A Study of Vinh Long Province"
(Michigan State University Advisory Group,
Saigon, 1961). Moreover, the South Vietna-
mese peasants often ridiculed Diem's rural
programs because of their non-Vietnamese
origins. The Vietcong's denunciations of
the My-Diem government-that is, the Amer-
ican-Diem Government-thus frequently
echoed popularly expressed sentiments. See
Scigliano, op. cit. pp. 158 and 206. The Sai-
gon administration also made the mistake of
frequently assigning upper level local ad-
ministrators with regional backgrounds dif-
ferent from the rural populations under their
authority.
80 Despite its statements to the contrary,
the Diem regime failed to develop a policy
which took account of the tribal peoples'
grievances. The government ignored a re-
port prepared by the Michigan State Uni-
versity Advisory Group which urged real and
"sorely needed" reforms in the relationship
between the tribal peoples and the Saigon
authorities (final report covering activities
of the Michigan. State University Vietnam
Advisory Group, for the period May 20, 1955-
June 30, 1962 [Saigon, 19621). Mounting
tension between the government in Saigon
and the tribal peoples eventually led to the
limited rebellion of September 1964 in which
the tribal people in the Ban Me Thuot area
killed a large number of lowland Vietnamese
and made demands for greater autonomy. A
description of these events and some dis-
cussion of the background of tribal discon-
tent is contained in the New York Times for
the period Sept. 21-28, 1964.
81 This program received considerable pub-
licity throughout 1962 and much of 1963. Al-
most all official U.S. comment during this
period praised the achievements of the pro-
gram. It is now widely admitted, however,
that the program was a failure and that
exaggerated claims were made for its suc-
cess by both South Vietnamese and Ameri-
cans. The program sought, in theory, to re-
settle peasants in protected hamlets, where
they would be able to benefit from improved
social services. Little attention was paid,
however, to the basic sociological factors
which were involved in such a program.
The South Vietnamese peasants in the delta
region are not accustomed to living in com-
pact settlements. They resented being moved
from their fields, the tombs of their ancestors
and the village dinh, the spiritual center of
the village. The hamlets into which they
were moved were inadequately protected,
leaving the peasants a prey to the insurgents,
while the promised social improvements did
not eventuate. On the failure of the stra-
tegic hamlet program, see in particular: the
New York Times of Oct. 23, Dec. 13,
and Dec. 23, 1963, and Jan. 10 and
12, 1964; Policy and Program of the Govern-
ment of the Republic of Vietnam as An-
nounced by Gen. Nguyen Khanh the Prime
Minister on Mar. 7, 1964 (issued by the Em-
bassy of the Republic of Vietnam, Washing-
ton, 1964), p. 3; and G. C. Hickey, "Village
1n Vietnam" (New Haven, 1964), p. 54.
cessful. The consequence was an ever-
greater alienation of the population. More-
over, in the 18 months since the assassination
of Diem the situation has continued to de-
teriorate, and the shifting combinations of
army officers controlling the government have
remained just as isolated from the Viet-
namese people."
When the United States in February 1965
began its air strikes against the north, Sai-
gon's authority in the countryside was at a
low point at the same time that the Viet-
cong was mounting a major military offen-
sive to split the country. Against a confident,
powerful adversary, the South Vietnamese
forces seemed inept and undisciplined on the
battlefield, and additional areas fell under
Vietcong control. Between mid-December
1964 and mid-March 1965, more than 120,000
refugees fled to Saigon and other coastal
areas from central highland areas recently
taken over by the Vietcong .w
Not only was the country's political lead-
ership seriously weakened because of inter-
nal schism, but also the army itself, now
seriously divided, was so absorbed in the
struggle for power that it had lost much of
its combat potential. Key units were alerted
as often for transfer to Saigon, to support
or oppose one or another of the military poli-
ticians, as for assignment to fight the Viet-
cong. In late 1964, dissension in the ranks
of the army began to accompany an in-
creased civilian disenchantment with the
Saigon Government. By January 1965, the
army was experiencing grave difficulty in
conscripting recruits, an average of 30 per-
cent of whom were reportedly deserting with-
in weeks of their enlistment 34
The rapidly deteriorating military posi-
tion of the Saigon administration coincided
with a decrease in its political cohesion and
a perceptible growth in war weariness and
in the demand for a peaceful settlement. In
Saigon itself, as well as in such Buddhist
strongholds as Hue, students and monks
advocated an end to the fighting and called
for negotiations with Hanoi35 Popular back-
ing for such a course became so great that
the Government could no longer silence the
dissidence simply by jailing all of those who
voiced these views. Preoccupied with the
Vietcong offensive begun in December in the
central region of South Vietnam, and fear-
ing a military disaster, the United States
further committed its forces to a protracted
and costly effort. Yet this move must have
seemed to many of the Vietnamese to con-
demn them to a struggle for which there was
no end in sight. Together with the existing
war weariness of the populace, it raised the
possibility that the leader of a future coup
might respond to widespread sentiment to
end the war by undertaking bilateral nego-
tiations with Hanoi. There was no evidence,
however, that American policy allowed for
such a possibility.
THE OTHER SOUTHERN REGIME
The increasing areas south of the 17th
parallel from which Saigon has been ousted
32 This is made abundantly clear in the
New York Times reporting during this period.
Also, a U.S. official report released on April 1,
1964, stated that only 34 percent of Viet-
nam s villages were government controlled;
24 percent were "neutral," and 42 percent
were outright Vietcong. In January 1964,
The Observer (American Army newspaper in
Saigon) wrote that "some four to five million
people support the NLF in varying degrees."
Both of these sources are cited in Bernard
Fall, The Two Vietnams (New York, 1963),
p. 396.
"New York Times, Mar. 16, r965.
24 New York Times, Jan. 19, 1965. The
London Times of Mar. 6, 1965, reported that
during February 1965 alone 1,450 men had
deserted.
31 For example, see New York Times of
Feb. 26 and Mar. 2, 1965.
have not become administrative vacuums.
Into most of them.has moved a fully func-
tioning Vietcong .administration " The Viet-
cong now controls more of South Vietnam
than Saigon does, and at night, when Sai-
gon's military patrols return to their bases,
the area which the Vietcong administers ex-
pands still further 3'
The Vietcong cadres are not isolated
strangers in an unfamiliar land. Most, re-
cruits and hard core alike, are southerners
with deep local roots, familiar with the area
and living in what they rightly regard as their
homeland. At least up to the end of 1964,
nearly all those Vietcong who had infiltrated
from the north were southerners" As well
as cadre and troops, the Vietcong relies upon
administrators who are native to the areas in
which they work" Indeed, the Vietcong has
consistently been far more sensitive than
Saigon to the strong regional sentiment char-
acteristic of politics throughout Vietnam.
Undoubtedly it was in part in order to
come to terms with this regional feeling
in the south that the National Liberation
Front of South Vietnam-the NLF-was
established in December 1960. Whatever the
extent of its loyalty to Hanoi, the Vietcong
has depended on southern support and has
felt obliged to give the liberation front a
distinctly southern slant=even to the point
of using a different flag from the government
in the north. The front calls on all anti-
Saigon Vietnamese for backing; while clearly
20 According to Peter Grose, writing in the
New York Times Magazine of Jan. 24,
1965, the Vietcong has developed "a stable
and orderly political machine across the
country, their cadres paralleling the Saigon
administrative structure at every level. Only
a final political shift at the top is awaited
before the entire Communist-led apparatus
surfaces and exercises its control in the open.
Under Vietcong provincial commissars and.
their central committees come district com-
missars, then the village or township cadres
and finally the hamlet committees. Where
Vietcong control is firm, the administration
functions with scarcely an interrup-
tion. * * * By conservative estimate, 8,000
to 10,000 political administrators govern
areas of South Vietnam controlled by the
Vietcong."
37 It appears that the Vietcong's taxing
authority, in one form or another, extends
over about three-quarters of South Vietnam.
Citing a U.S. Operations Mission report of
June 14, 1963, Bernard Fall notes that as
early as then, in all but three of South Viet-
nam's forty-four provinces, the Vietcong was
collecting taxes (Current History, Feb. 1965,
p. 98). On Jan. 24, 1965, in the New
York Times Magazine, Peter Grose noted
that "as much as 50 million piasters (about
$700,000) could have been collected by the
Vietcong last year in a wealthy province such
as Long An. Saigon received 17 million
piasters from Long An last year."
2 According to the New York Times of
Jan. 27, 1965, "before 1964 all infiltrators
were trained in the north but were South
Vietnamese in origin and were assigned to
their native localities." Assistant Secretary
of State William P. Bundy stated a few days
earlier (New York Times, Jan. 24, 1965) that
"'significant numbers' of trained North Viet-
namese soldiers had for the first time been
infiltrating into South Vietnam." The State
Department's white paper of Feb. 27 declares
that "as many as 75 percent of the more than
4,400 Vietcong who are known to have en-
tered the south in the first 8 months of
1964 were natives of North Vietnam." If
correct, this figure (3,300) would be a small
fraction of the total number of Vietcong.
" See George A. Carver, Jr., "The Real
Revolution in South Vietnam," Foreign Af-
fairs, XLIII, 3 (April 1965), pp. 406-407.
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
May 7, 1965 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
no acceptable exits, Mao Tse-tung's govern-
ment waits for the United States either to
back down without a settlement or unilater-
ally to overextend its military commitments
in North Vietnam. The pattern of American
policy since February has thus far coincided
with Chinese expectations, and has led to a
situation In Vietnam which conforms more
to Chinese than to American and Vietnamese
interests.
Chinese goals in Vietnam are less under-
stood than those of Hanoi or the Soviet
Union. Although Peiping does not Intend to
occupy or absorb into China the lands of
-southeast Asia, it does consider all of eastern
Asia to be within China's exclusive political-
economic sphere of influence. The Maoist
leadership believes that the presence of
strong American military power now denies
it this influence. Mao's politburo seeks to
avoid-and without unequivocal Soviet as-
sistance could not contemplate -a full-scale
military confrontation with the United
States48 Rather, it plans to erode Ameri-
can power in Asia through political means
while simultaneously working toward the
conditions under which it could regain So-
viet support on its own terms. In the long
run, it is through their influence over na-
tional revolutionary parties and the major
elements of the shaken Communist move-
ment that Peiping's leaders hope to enhance
China's global position.49
Since February, Peiping's aim of discredit-
ing American power in Asia has seemed
closer to realization than ever. In particular,
China's rulers have been able to capitalize
on America's violent reaction to the crisis in
South Vietnam. Throughout most of Asia
they have assiduously spread the belief that
in Vietnam the Americans are acting with
brutal and unjustified violence against hap-
less Asians. Following the bombing raids,
Peiping has ridiculed U.S. protestations of its
peaceful aims in Asia, heaping scorn on So-
viet Russia's advocacy of peaceful coexist-
ence, and has gained further justification for
its refusal to sign the nuclear test ban treaty
and end its own nuclear program. For as
long as the raids continue without a military
response from North Vietnam and without
any sign of actual Chinese military Interven-
tion, Peiping can expect that tli5e strains on
the Soviet-American detente and the NATO
alliance will intensify, while the American
position in Asia will be undermined. The
State Department's white paper did little to
counter the Chinese accusation that the
Johnson administration had acted irration-
ally in order to conceal the iadequacies and
failures of its program in South Vietnam.
The Chinese have thus gained political ad-
vantage from Hanoi's adversity.
In contrast to their view at the time of
the 1954 Geneva Conference, the Chinese now
see how both their local and global objec-
tives can be served by an intensified struggle
against the United States in Vietnam. The
struggle for Vietnam could reduce Viet-
namese "independence" in the Sino-Soviet
dispute, insure North Vietnam's long-term
dependence on China, and at the same time
strengthen China's influence among not only
other Communist regimes and parties, but
also among non-Communist unalined na-
tions in Asia and Africa; moreover, it could
bring the security interests of China and the
48In the period since February, the Chi-
nese have not overlooked the possibility that
further escalation might lead to an attack
on China. They have few illusions concern-
ing the amount of damage that the United
States could inflict on'their cities and ap-
parently hope to confine the arena of actual
fighting to Vietnam. See Jen-min jihpao
editorial, Feb. 12, 1965.
'8 For a more comprehensive discussion of
Chinese objectives, see the articles by A. M.
Halpern and Morton H. Halperin in the
China Quarterly, 21 (January-March 1965).
Soviet Union into closer alinement. In-
tensification of the war in Vietnam also pro-
vides a domestic atmosphere more conducive
to eradicating the "revisionist" and even pro-
American sentiments which have been
spreading among the Chinese youth, and en-
ables Chinese life to be further regimented 6D
U.B. GLOBAL CONSIDERATIONS
These considerations underscore the argu-
ment that America's policies in Vietnam
should conform to its global priorities. It
has long been recognized that we should not
pursue measures likely to undermine our
peaceful relationships with the Soviet Union,
and our tacit agreement with Moscow on the
containment of Chinese power. Yet, the es-
calation of violence begun last February has
set in train reactions outside of Vietnam
which run strictly contrary to our previously
accepted global priorities. This is the price
we pay for our policy in Vietnam.
V.S. NEGOTIATING S'rME14GTIIS
If the United States desires .a peaceful set-
tlement with Hanoi, various factors contrib-
ute to a strong U.S. negotiating position.
This position cannot be strengthened by fur-
ther escalation of military pressure. On the
contrary, such action can only destroy or
weaken this position and lose for the United
States the opportunity of dealing primarily
with Hanoi on essentially Vietnamese terms,
rather than with Peiping on essentially Chi-
nese terms.
1. Common American and Soviet objectives
in southeast Asia: The Soviet Union and the
United States have as their fundamental aim
in southeast Asia the restraint of Chi-
nese influence in the area" The new Soviet
leaders have thus far resisted Chinese pres-
sures toward greater militancy, and have con-
tinued to place a high priority on Khru-
shchev's international policies of peaceful
coexistence and amicable relations with the
United States. Moscow apparently wishes to
avoid risky commitments in southeast Asia,
but does not want to lay itself open to Chi-
nese propaganda by appearing to abandon
any revolutionary movement. Although the
Soviet Union would have to be circumspect
In approaching negotiations on Vietnam be-
cause of the capital which China could draw
from any apparent alinement between the
Soviet Union and the United States, tacit So-
viet opposition to China during.the negotia-
tions would be of particular importance in
encouraging Hanoi to take an independent
stance.
2. Hanoi's desire to remain independent
of Peiping: Hanoi hopes to arrive at a settle-
ment which will insure that all of Vietnam
remains fully independent of China. While
the Government of North Vietnam seeks na-
tional reunification, it does not want to see
this achieved at the cost of dependence on
China; moreover, Hanoi undoubtedly realizes
that it would seriously damage its appeal to
southerners if it even appeared to become
dependent upon China.
3. North Vietnam's economic position:
North Vietnam now relies much more on
China than upon the Soviet Union for food,
her most critical deficiency. As noted above,
if she were given an opportunity to trade
with South Vietnam and secure a significant
part of its rice exports for her industrial
centers, she could both reduce her depend-
"John W. Lewis, "Revolutionary Struggle
and the Second Generation in Communist
China," the China Quarterly, 21 (January-
March 1965), pp. 126-147.
s' Moscow, of course, would favor the ex-
tension of Communist Influence in southeast
Asia at our expense, although it would si-
multaneously hope to prevent the extension
of Chinese influence there. It has faced a
policy dilemma, therefore, because it has not
been easy to separate pro-Chinese and pro-
Communist tendencies in Asia.
ence upon China and abandon her own ex-
pensive and highly uneconomic efforts to
grow food in marginally productive areas.
Moreover, an end to the trade blockade of
North Vietnam would benefit the country
by enabling it to obtain items necessary for
its further industrialization. Given the con-
tinuing increase of its population upon an
unchanging base of arable land, such indus-
trialization is a prerequisite for the eco-
nomic development-and ultimately the eco-
nomic viability-of the North. Further-
more, the United States could stand ready
to dispatch Public Law 480 rice, thereby per-
mitting an immediate relief of Hanoi's de-
pendence upon Peiping, and to include
North Vietnam in plans for the economic de-
velopment of southeast Asia.52
4. War weariness: This factor is not only
operative in the South, but also affects the
North. One should not underestimate the
intense desire for an end of fighting and for
family reunions, 2 which were important fac-
tors even before the bombing began.
5. The recognized threat to the use of
greater military force: The North naturally
wishes to avoid additional damage from
U.S. air raids. However, as the raids con-
tinue, the North Vietnamese may be pushed
ever closer to the conclusion that what re-
mains to be protected in the North is no
longer sufficient to outweigh the advantages
accruing from striking southward. Further,
as long as the threat remains unrealized,
we leave Hanoi in a tenable position from
which to negotiate.
If the United States is to derive maximum
advantage from these negotiating strengths,
it must give due weight to the political real-
ities of the Vietnamese situation and recog-
nize that these set limits for all parties.
Even if the United States could win a deci-
sive military victory in Vietnam, and even if
this could be achieved without permanently
antagonizing most of the Vietnamese people,
these political realities would endure.
Washington would still have to face most
of the same problems which, since 1954, have
obstructed the achievement of its objectives.
Persistent questions remain to be answered
by Washington. Is the United States pre-
pared to acknowledge the fact that most peo-
ple in Vietnam-North and South-desire an
end of the war and the reunification of their
country? If we accept these as legitimate
aims, what would be our position if Hanoi
agreed to a cease-fire and the withdrawal of
infiltrators on the condition that the United
States and Saigon would honor the provision
of the Geneva accords calling for national
elections-particularly if it also agreed that
such elections should take place under U.S.
auspices? 54 If a military truce were achieved,
would the U.N. recognize that any political
solution in the South enforceable by Hanoi
must provide for some sort of grouping of
regional authority and administration,
whereby substantial areas would remain
under National Liberation Front control?
52 This possibility was foreshadowed in
President Johnson's statement on Mar. 25,
1965. The United States could also agree to
extend the projected Mekong River develop-
ment plan to North Vietnam (see the article
by Gilbert F. White in the December 1964
Bulletin). On Apr. 7, President Johnson ex-
pressed his hope that following a peaceful
settlement "North Vietnam will take its place
in the common effort" for regional economic
development (New York Times, Apr. 8, 1965).
GI For an indication of the number of
divided families, it was reported that in
Quangngai Province about 40 percent of the
residents have relatives in North Vietnam or
among the Vietcong (New York 'Times, Apr.
13, 1964)..
c. This would be in accordance with the
United States own unilateral declaration at
Geneva (see footnote 17 above).
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 Approved For Release 2003/10/1.4: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
May 7, 1965 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
THE U.S. POSITION IN MID-APRIL
What have been the consequences of the
policy that the United States has been fol-
lowing in Vietnam? After more than 2
months, the bombing raids above the 17th
parallel have not resulted in any significant
decrease in Vietcong activity in the south.
Hanoi has consistently demanded that the
United States abide by the Geneva accords,
and at times has seemed to indicate its in-
terest in negotiations., The National Lib-
eration Front, on the other hand, has ex-
pressed firm opposition to the Idea of nego-
tiations, a position prominently supported
by China "
The United States, for its part, has ex-
tended its bombing of the north, as well as
the south, and his accelerated the rate of
introduction of its combat forces into the
south. On April 7-, President Johnson, while
Indicating that the United States was pre-
pared for "unconditional discussions,"
evinced no willingness to depart from previ-
ous administration statements which had
called for a reestablishment of the pre-1958
status quo. He made no proposal which
could be expected to provide a realistic basis
for negotiations. In fact, the terms offered
Hanoi call upon it to compel capitulation of
the Vietcong.
PROSPECTS FOR ESCALATION
If the United States continues to increase
its military punishment of North Vietnam,
Hanoi 18 likely to send elements of its 300,000-
man army south. The decision to do this
will presumably be made at the point when
the United States has Inflicted so much dam-
age on the North Vietnamese that they will
01 Vo Nguyen Gfap, Hanoi's Minister of .
National Defense, has given what may be re-
garded as the initial bargaining position of
the Hanoi government. He stated that the
United States must correctly implement the
Geneva agreements and cease its acts of
provocation against North Vietnam; also the
United States must allow the Vietnamese
people to settle the matter of reunification
(Radio Hanoi, Mar. 10, 1965). This consti-
tuted an elaboration of,an earlier statement
by the North Vietnamese Premier, Pham
Van Dong, to A. N. Kosygin of the Soviet
Union on Feb. 6, 1965 (Radio Hanoi, Feb. 8.
1965).
Throughout the period since the first
bombings in February, Hanoi has requested
"the two cochairmen and the governments
of the participating countries of the 1954
Geneva Conference on Indochina, the Social-
ist countries, and all peaceloving countries in
the world to take timely and effective actions
aimed at staying the hands of the U.S. Im-
perialist aggressors and warmongers, insur-
ing strict implementation of the 1954 Geneva
accords on Vietnam [and] defending peace
In Indochina and southeast Asia" (Radio
Hanoi, Feb. 8, 1965).
62 On Feb. 14, for example, the Presi-
dium of the Central Committee of the NLF
"called on the entire army and people of
South Vietnam to fight the enemy continu-
ously and on all battlefields, fight more pow-
erfully, wipe out more enemy forces, destroy
many more strategic hamlets, urgently arm
the entire people, endeavor to build and con-
solidate the fighting hamlets and villagers,
[and] urgently build and develop the armed
forces" (Liberation Radio [Vietcong], as re-
broadcast by Radio Hanoi, Feb. 15, 1965).
While Hanoi continued to hark back to the
Geneva accords and to demand action against
the United States by the International Con-
trol Commission, China denounced those
bodies and echoed the Vietcong's hard line.
Jen-min jih-pao on Feb. 19 declared:
"The Johnson administration. Is neither will-
ing to accept defeat nor courageous enough
to face the consequences of an extended war.
* * * The aim of the Johnson administration
is quite clear-to get at the conference table
what it could not get on the battlefield."
have little to lose by a retaliatory attack and
little to save through compromise or negoti-
ation. Although we cannot predict with cer-
tainty what kind of a military operation
North Vietnam would attempt, it seems
likely that in view of America's vastly su-
perior air and sea power, Hanoi would deploy
its forces in ways whereby it would be least
affected by that power. It might, therefore,
send its troops into South Vietnam as small,
highly mobile, guerrilla units0 These
troops could enter the south all along the
extensive, jungle-covered western Vietnamese
border 64 The United States would still face
an essentially guerrilla war, but on a vastly
expanded scale. The accepted and well-pub-
licized formula that it takes 10 regular troops
to counter each guerrilla would still apply;
thus for each 100,000 men the Viet-
namese introduced we would have to commit
1 million. The American public has hardly
been prepared for such a high cost in Ameri-
can lives and material as would be entailed
in an effort of this magnitude. Nor is It
realistic to expect that, without some indi-
cation that this effort would yield results
commensurate with such sacrifice, the Ameri-
can public could be brought to support it.
During this phase of the fighting, China's
armies could be expected to remain out of
the conflict 65 though Peiping would pre-
sumably continue to supply heavy equip-
ment, a few technicians, and possibly some
volunteers. But China is not likely to
provide us with such clear invitation to at-
tack her as would be given by her massive
intervention in Vietnam. By remaining be-
hind her frontiers and restricting herself
to providing primarily moral support to
Hanoi, China could gain tremendous politi-
cal and psychological advantages from con-
tinued U.S. attacks on the Vietnamese (al-
though she would no doubt be uneasy about
the possibility of American escalation spil-
ling across her frontiers).
Despite the care the Peiping leadership
has taken in Vietnam to do nothing which
might invite an American attack on the
Chinese mainland, the United States may
still choose to enlarge its theater of opera-
tions to include China."' A decision to do
this would probably derive in part from the
belief discussed above that Peiping contols
Hanoi. In addition, however, there is a not
63 In the week following the first American
raids on the north, Nhan-Dan provided some
clues to a future North Vietnamese strategy.
On Feb. 13 it said: "By launching 10
battles at the same time on various battle-
fields and simultaneously promoting all-sided
guerrilla activities, the South Vietnam Peo-
pie's armed forces have shown their maturity
in all fields, command, tactics, and tech-
nique. * * * During the recent big battles,
they have also cleverly and creatively applied
the fighting tactics, striking the enemy where
and when he was least prepared and by
methods which are most unexpected to
them."
64 Given the possibility , of encountering
massive American firepower, it could not, of
course, be expected that North Vietnam
would launch a massive frontal assault across
the 17th parallel.
03 Mao Tse-tung told Edgar Snow, before
the February air strikes, that "China's armies
would not go beyond her borders to fight.
* * * Only if, the United States attacked
China would the Chinese fight." Mao added
that "The Vietnamese could cope with their
[own] situation" (the New Republic [Feb.
27] 1965, p. 22). Subsequently China has
modified its position; see (67) below.
66 An official Chinese Government state-
ment of Mar. 12, 1965, commented on remarks
in the U.T. press that China would not be
allowed to remain a sanctuary, as it did in
the Korean war. It added: "In plain lan-
guage, this means it [the United States]
would bomb China" (Radio Peiping, Mar. 13,
1965).
9541
insignificant group in America that feels that
a war with China is inevitable and should be
waged soon, before China grows stronger
and attains a real nuclear capacity.
But once we attack China-even without
nuclear weapons-the whole context of the
American effort in Vietnam would be drasti-
cally altered. China would retaliate, and she
has explicitly said that she would not con-
fine herself to the areas of conflict In which
the United States is presently engaged. On
February 9, 1965, for example, the Chinese
Government declared: "We warn U.S. Im-
perialism: You are overreaching yourselves
in trying to extend the war with your small
forces in Indochina, southeast Asia, and the
Far East. To be frank, we are waiting for
you In battle array." 6v The Chinese have
repeated this threat to engage our "small
forces" on a vast front in "Indochina, south-
east Asia, and the Far East," and have care-
fully elaborated the "dire consequences" that
would befall the U.S. forces involved 08
There are at least 10 million people in
China who are ethnically akin to the Thai,
Lao, and Vietnamese. We could expect that
China would use these people-mss regular
army troops or volunteers-in a greatly ex-
panded guerrilla war in the jungles of south-
east Asia. Such a war would not require
massive Chinese logistical support and would
minimize the vulnerability of Chinese forces
to American air and sea attack. It would
also present the United States with vastly
greater difficulties than those it now faces in
South Vietnam. The possibility that China
would use these minority peoples has been
suggested by the intensive militia campaigns
conducted with particular fervor in 1964 in
Yunnan, Kwangsi, and Kwangtung-all Prov-
inces which border southeast Asian states.
The Chinese believe that the United States
could not win this type of war and that
thereby the credibility of American power
would be destroyed in southeast Asia.60
As the Chinese probably envisage it, the war
64 See Jen-min jih-pao, Feb. 9, 1965. Sim-
ilar warnings were given during the subse-
quent 8 weeks On Mar. 25, China and Rus-
sia both threatened to aid the Vietcong if
the NLF so requested (Jen-min jih-pao, Mar.
25, 1965). These threats were made in re-
sponse to a statement issued by Liberation
Radio (Vietcong) on Mar. 23, that: "If the
U.S. imperialists continue to send their
troops and the troops of their satellites into
South Vietnam or to expand the war to the
North and Laos, the NLFSV will call on the
world peoples to send troops."
Peiping's threat to retaliate in Vietnam
has been more direct and unambiguous than
the one it made prior to entering the Korean
war in 1950. Allen S. Whiting has observed,
however, that "the problem of communicat-
ing a threat Is formidable, and in the con-
text of the Korean war It was especially dif-
ficult"' (Whiting, "China Crosses the Yalu"
[New York, 1960], p. 109).
In the present crisis, Peiping has moved
with great caution, as it did in 1950; but it
has also attempted to strengthen the credi-
bility of its threat to aid Vietnam by recalling
its intervention in Korea. For example,
radio Peiping, Feb. 13, 1965, warned: "Your
hope lies in making people afraid of you.
But you [Americans] will become ut-
terly helpless when the people resisting ag-
gression, instead of being afraid of you, dare
to fight, defy difficulties, and advance wave
upon wave. You have been taught a lesson
on this score in the Korean war. Do you
want to have the lesson repeated in Indo-
china?"
68 This was part of a thinly veiled Chinese
effort to threaten the Philippines, Thailand,
and the entire Indochinese peninsula. See
iri particular the broadcast of radio Peiping
on Feb. 4, 1965, on the Thai patriotic front,
and the Jen-min j1h-pao article of Jan. 27,
1965, on the Philippines.
"See Jen-min jih-pao, Feb. 19, 1965.
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 pp
May 7, 1965 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
the world that we believe law should rule idea, Russia, is beginning to understand the
the affairs of men, not might; that we believe industrial era, and that if it is to have a part
disputes should be settled in the courts, not in it, there must be incentive for the people.
by men shooting each other. So, under Khrushchev and still more under
But Thursday, a 19-year-old American Kosygin, the Russians are practicing the
marine shot a man in the back in South profit system. Not quite as we do, but they
Vietnam-an unarmed man who was fleeing have learned the mistake of ordered plan-
for safety. The marine shot him because, ning with no incentive for the planners. ,
in the "law" of war, a man doesn't run when And the people of Russia are no longer
he is challenged. 'fearful of the nighttime bang on the door;
And in this same area of the world an no longer afraid to look an American in the
the same day, 51 U.S. Skyraiders and Sky- eye. They no longer starve; no longer grovel
hawks rained bombs on North Vietnam in in ignorance.
1 raid, destroying 15 buildings which prob- So the failure, we might say, is in not tak-
ably were not empty of people. ing advantage of this change to persuade the
On Thursday too, we landed more troops in Russians, earnestly, to help us establish a
the Dominican Republic as that unstable real rule of law for the world. We should
nation once again was rocked with. turmoil. have made it clear to this other nuclear
The troops are there, we maintain, to protect power that our interest is in controlling all
U.S. citizens on the island, but in fact they of the world's extremists through law, not
are there in the hopes that it will discourage force.
the new revolt that finally erupted following We should have demonstrated our sin-
the coup which toppled the nation's only cerity in this respect by scrapping the reser-
elected President in 30 years. vation we have affixed to the U.N. Charter
We're a long way yet from establishing a which excuses us from responsibility among
rule of law for the world as we follow the the nations when we want to, be excused.
course of containing communism with the We should have backed wholeheartedly the
force of arms. Because communism still re- international effort to establish a workable
sorts to terrorist tactics, we must punish it code of international law, and insisted that
militarily. Because it engineers coups, we it be administered by the International
must intervene with our marines. Court of Justice. We should have insisted
There is a great debate going on in our that individuals, in and out of all govern-
country over whether this is the course we ments, be held responsible to that Court for
should take, and how far we can extend our- Infractions of law governing the rights of
selves in doing it. The young are protesting
angrily over Vietnam, marching on the
White House in demonstration against Viet-
nam. The older, and surely wiser, heads
around President Johnson are insisting that
we can't deviate from the course, else it
would encourage the terrorists to the point
that they could rule the world.
There are those who say we should quit
Vietnam and there are those who "pray"
nations.
This is what Law Day, U.S.A., should be
about. It should symbolize both our efforts
to prevent such tragedies as a 19-year-ol4
youth having to shoot a defenseless man in
the back in obedience-to the "law" of war,
It's said to contemplate on this day that
we have failed thus far in establishing Law
Day, the world.
(Barry Goldwater) for an excuse to bomb ARDMORE, PA.,
Red China. May 5 1965
9543
icy in Vietnam; the people evidently do not
support the regime, else why should there be
so many changes as have taken place in the
past year. Our first people were sent over as
military advisers; now we are engaged in more
or less a full-scale war and when will it stop?
The Evening Star has an article by Doris
Fleeson which probably expresses the
thoughts of many people like myself far bet-
ter than I could write it.
May you long continue to be the voice of
sanity and clear thinking in- the Senate.
This we need in order to preserve our free-
dom.
Respectfully,
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
LYONS, KANS.,
May 4,1965.
DEAR MR. MORSE: I Wish to take this op-
portunity to express my appreciation for
your fearless stand in denouncing U.S. par-
ticipation in the Vietnam war.
I have written letters favoring U.S. with-
drawal to President Johnson and to Senators
CARLSON and PEARSON, of Kansas. I regret
to state that none of these appear interested
in ending the bloodshed.
It appears that the militarists of our
country are in control of the Government. I
feel this is a very dangerous situation and
could likely end in disaster. Someone has
stated that the United States has the power
to destroy the world but not to conquer it.
I do hope you continue to have the cour-
age to speak out fearlessly against those who
entertain the idea that world problems can
be solved by military might, destruction and
bloodshed.
Respectfully yours,
C. A. PINKENBURG, D.C.
There are those who say we should fight DEAR SENATOR MORSE: My husband and I
actively the Communists in Santo Domingo, have long admired your independence and
and there are those who warn us that right- courage, never more than last August in your Senator WAYNE MORSE,
fists have been armed by those sympathetic to stand against the carte blanche approval the
ATHENS, OHIO,
May 2, 1965.
Washington, D.C.
the late Dictator Trujillo and to "Pappa Doc" Senate gave President Johnson on Vietnam. DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I was very much im-
Duvalier on Haiti, the iron man of the Consequently, I write to you now to support pressed by the content of the speech which
Car
The ibbean. your
coPosition on Vietnam, and to ntinue your efforts to change urge that you delivered at Ohio University during the
be Weep truth, surely, lies somewhere in you cAs Hans Mor enthau points out in the course of the mock United Nations. I hope
g p that you will continue to strive for a peace-
The truth is that, in some way, we should May 1 issue of the New Republic, our policy ful settlement of the crisis in Vietnam, and
be moving toward establishing the rule of is forcing Russia to support China, and Is I volunteer my services to you in any way
international law to handle these explosions. seriously damaging the chances for peaceful which can be helpful.
We do it at home. Rightists terrorists in coexistence. Sincerely,
the United States have their guns im- What we read about the nature of the PAUL D. BRANDES,
pounded, and if they have committed a war, in the New York Times, the New Re-
crime, they are brought into court, public, I. F. Stone's Weekly, and the New Professor of Speech.
Communists are prevented by law from Statesman, compared with the State De-
overthrowing this Government by force, and partment's concept of it, makes us wonder, NEW Yo May 4, they are brought to trial for foment riots. among other things, what is happening to at May wo1965.
rd of a
The extremists on either side are check- democracy in our country. Clearly there aeclt SENATOR
from m citizens Just a word you do
feel as you do
mated by a body of law geared to protecting d little left,that
Senators an individual citizen can about our our Governments ment's who
human rights. do, weight. but perhaps still can carry some and now on Santo Domingo. in Vietnam
These laws are upgraded by Congress to yesterday that you and In addition to good judgment, your cour-
meet new situations and new realizations of Senators FULBRICHT, CHURCH, and CLARK are age is to be commended.
need, and American liberty to enjoy life is considering some action, and we urge you to Very truly yours,
enhanced. We do not need any foreign take it. Particularly we urge you to vote Mr. and Mrs. STANLEY ROMAINE.
power to come in and help us protect our against the President's request for more
freedom. money, PLEASANTVILLE, N.Y.,
But, as the Wayne Morsel of the Senate Beyond that we urge the cessation of the
contend, we th Viet1965.
police the .world's useless, and more than criminal. DEAR SENATOR AMORSE: merican Your courageous the
right to freedom alone. We know, anyway, Yours with admiration and respect, Vietnam war the Is American involvement in the to commended.
that freedom can't be maintained by force Vietnam war It that be
soon you will be of arms alone, for force breeds counterforce. FATTH H. FATTEN, I only Senators that your you will joined 1.
We protected freedom in Korea, but it is more Senators in your fight for wi andrawad
not free, Students toppled our puppet gov- MAY 4, 1965. I also wish that your important worst
ernment there, and they still sack our li- H
U.S. Se on. Senator WAYNE MORSE, would be published in full and so the tMost
he
braries in angry demonstration over having Washington, almost apathetic A rican public that the
a divided country. Night still holds back the D.C. almost k, a and those who public will begin
dawn of freedom, in South Vietnam after for DEAR She: This letter is s commend you to think, and those who are committed to
years of our efforts there. speaking out and against the interven- President Johnson's policy will begin to ques-
Maybe aof this failure can be laid at tion of our Armed Forces in the internal tion.
the aybe all
communism. Or maybe it can be affairs of the Dominican Republic and the I am also concerned about our troops in
laid at, the sm is of anther, failure. Vietnam and the amount troops being sent to the Dominic-an this.
epublic I hope you speak
Vietnam and the bombings taking place there out about about thisa state-of evolution in daily. Sincerel
Eastern Europe. The originator of this false I don't understand enough about the pol-
Mrs. Y yours,
Mrs. E. KLEIN.
A
roved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 9544
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE May 7, 1965
BETIIESDA, MD.,
May 4, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: In the field Of for-
eign affairs, yours is one of the very few sane
voices being heard in official Washington
these days. Please continue to speak Out.
In the deepening gloom of administration
Asian and Caribbean policies, many Ameri-
cans are grateful for the beacon you are pro-
viding.
Yours truly,
DAVID SAVITZ, M.D.
CAMBRIDGE, MASS., May 5, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: I wish to congratulate you
on your forthright criticism of the admin-
istration's policy in Vietnam and now, also
in the Dominican Republic. I hope you will
continue to speak your mind.
The administration has embarked on a
most dangerous course and with very little
justification.
Sincerely yours,
WALTHAM,MASS., May 4,1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: This letter is being
written to express my full support of your
Vietnam and Dominican Republic positions.
I am one of the overwhelming majority of
'faculty members and students in this area,
who are shocked by the recent turn of events.
3 only hope that something can be done
before it is too late.
Sincerely yours,
RONALD J. BAUMGARTEN, Ph. D.
ARLINGTON, VA.,
May 5, 1965.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I am enclosing a
copy of a letter I have today sent to the
President on the subject of Vietnam and the
Dominican Republic.
At the same time, I want to commend you
for your unflagging efforts in behalf of world
pe'a,ce. You have many admirers who are
'n ft going to take the time to write You but
I think you know that they are behind you
all the way in your attempt to give thought-
ful and responsible leadership. KeZsp up the
good work.
Sincerely yours,
I do not like to criticize the President- of
the United States, especially one who had
my enthusiastic support. But also I am ut-
terly opposed to a national policy of global
McCarthyism. I support Senator WAYNE
MORBE's position on Vietnam and Oppose
American aggression in the Dominican Re-
public. (I am sending Senator MORSE a copy
of this letter.)
Mr. President, we have a war to fight here
at home-the war on poverty and ugliness-
and for that kind of war you, and your dear
lady, have my utmost support.
Respectfully yours,
Mrs. MILLIE HEDRICK.
NEW YORK, N.Y.,
May 6, 1965.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: HOW many people
will we have to kill before we make the
world safe for democracy?
We need negotiations not Marines.
Please keep up your fight for a more sane
foreign policy.
Yours truly,
Mrs. J. DELL.
PHILADELPHIA, PA.,
May 5, 1965.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Congratulations on
your firm, democratic stand.
May your reasoning on the cease-fire in
Vietnam, our removal of our marines from
the Dominican Republic, and all your valid
steps toward a true peace in the world, come
to fruition.
Let's stop giving more and more money for
armaments, and start to help people every-
where to live, through aid to the U.N.
The Goldwater philosophy that our present
Government seems to have adopted is most
frightening. Those of us who Worked so
hard to defeat Senator Goldwater are wonder-
ina and are confused these days. Cag't we
Doesn't he realize that if the people wanted
an escalation of the needless war in Vietnam
they would have elected Senator Barry Gold-
water as their President?
Wish we had more Members of Congress
who had your backbone and courage.
HAZARD, KY.,
May 4, 1965.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE;'
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: Just as an old fashioned Amer-
ican, I want to commend you for having
nerve enough to come out in the open and
tell the public what you, think about South
Vietnam.
As I understand'it the Congress alone has
the power to declare war. This has not been
done by the Congress, yet we are in a war
in South Vietnam by Executive action. We
have also gone into Santo Domingo with
more troops than are necessary.
I think the sooner we abandon the Ides,
that we have a right to dictate to other na-
tions the kind of government they ought to
have, it will be better for us.
But aside from this the man on the street,
on the farm and everywhere knows that if
the present trend of Government spending
and Government interference with the affairs
of other nations continue, that it will be
just a matter of time when we will close our
own present form of government and go
socialistic or communistic.
So far as I am concerned personally, since
I am 79 years old, it dons not mean so much
to me, but it means a lot to my children and
grandchildren.
Again. I want to commend you.
Respectfully yours,
S. M. WARD.
TROY, N.Y.,
May 6, 1965.
get our his domestic program and expand It thinking to the
world scene?
May you continue to work ever more suc-
cessfully for peace, along with our Senator
CLARK, and others like you.
Respectfully yours,
Mrs. FRANCES K. RUBIN.
URBANA, ILL.,
May 6, 1965.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Permit me to ap-
plaud and support your position on the war
in Vietnam. I admire your courage and your
analysis of the situation.
Sincerely,
ROBERT CARROLL,
Associate Professor of Mathematics,
University of Illinois.
Los ANGELES, CALIF.,
May 4, 1965.
May 5, 1965.
Ron. LYNDON'B. JOHNSON,
The White House,
Washin ton, D.C.
DEAR . PRESmRNT: When I voted for you
in 1964,'I did so because I believed you were
mincerely for peace, and Senator Goldwater
had made it abundantly clear that he was
not. At the same time, many of us hoped
that your election would serve notice on the
followers of Senator Goldwater that the
great majority, of the American people was
fed up with McCarthyism and the blight
it cast over our Nation for so many years.
I have read your most recent statements
on Vietnam and the situation in the Domini-
can Republic with some care and have con-
eluded that your decision to accelerate the
War in Vietnam is worthy of Senator Gold-
water.. Further, mixing into the affairs of the
Dominicans ,to stop a Communist con-
spiracy" sounds just like McCarthyism, even
bo playing the despicable numbers game-
but on an international scale. How, then,
does your position differ from Senator Gold-
water's or the late Senator McCarthy's?
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: Keep up your speeches against
the war in Vietnam. I feel that you are
speaking not only for the people of Oregon,
but for the people of California and the
whole United States. We must not have an-
other Korea, or even worse, a World War III
because of the inability of the U.S. Gov-
ernment to admit to its past mistakes and
change course.
Sincerely,
FRANK LINDENFELD.
CHICAGO, ILL.,
May 4, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: It is amazing that
the popularity and poll conscious President
has paid no heed to the most important and
most-accurate poll, the election of November
3, 1964.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: Thank you for your excel-
lent speech at Union College on May 4, 1965.
Please continue your sane policy on Near
Eastern affairs and do what you can to pur-
suade others to join before it is too late.
Mrs. NED FREUND,
ANGOLA, IND.,
May 4, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: I congratulate you on Your
strong stand in your Senate address of last
Monday blasting our Vietnam policy-and
calling for the- resignations of McNamara and
Rusk.
Our Government seems to have forgotten
the word "Sovereignty." Each nation should
have sovereignty-to decide what kind of
government they want, even if that be com-
munism. If we have made perpetual way
against communism we have a long, bloody,
and losing fight ahead of us.
Communism is not a cause. It is a result
of poverty, inequality, oppression, ignor-
ance. The more people waste in war, the
more poverty and hence cause for commun-
ism.
If we really want to get rid of communism,
we should find a road to peace-then slowly
but surely build a more prosperous world.
This is the one and only safeguard against
communism.
I have a feeling that most of the have-not
nations will go through a stage of commun-
ism until they find some measure of pros-
perity, then they will turn slowly to a free
enterprise system-s Russia is now doing.
We are doing the same thing in Santo
Domingo-trying to dominate their Govern-
ment. The radio just stated that President
Johnson was asking for $700 million for mili-
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 May 7., 1965
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67P00446R000300150003-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
,tary purposes. I hope it meets with a strong
fight.
Again, congratulations. Keep up the fight.
A. H. SHOLTY,
officer in the Intelligence Corps, World
War 11.
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF.,
May 4, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I have such great
admiration for you that I can't express it.
I am truly dismayed by our Government's
criminal policy in foreign affairs.
Is there anything ordinary people can do?
I've written to President Johnson very
strongly stating my beliefs-and to HUBERT
HUMPHREY-and the California Senators.
I've sent Western Union's POM's by the
dozen. All this seems to be futile.
Most Americans do not support this
trumped-up war in Vietnam-and lots of us
are ashamed of the United States. And yet,
like it or not, the war continues and grows.
Is there anything that could be done to
help to get us out of Vietnam where we have
no business to be?
I wish we could have a man like you for
President-I'm sure this also is too much to
hope for,
If I can do any good, any way, let me .
know.
Respectfully,
Mrd. EVE BYRON WYATT.
STAMFORD, CONN.,
May 6,1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: God bless you. May
you function as a Senator until you are 110.
I only wish I had the privilege of voting
for you.
As a liberal Democrat I have always been
proud that as a whole our party has cared
for the common man. What is happening
to our Government? Where Is the Senate
and the House? Our President is operating
the country like a one-man show in the area
of foreign relations-it is not quite wartime
yet. Sometimes I worry that the Republic-
ans will espouse the cause of peace but they
are probably too stupid.
. If I were a woman I would cry nights about
our foreign policy. As you know the in-
spiration for the freedom of the Latin Amer-
ican countries came from the examples set
by us and France. Why is it that over the
whole course of history we have never sided
with the common man down there? All the
most rotten dictators (no matter how much
he has abridged individual rights under law)
down there has to say is "We hate Commies"
or "Commies are behind the plot" and we load
him up with money, guns, and anything else.
Historically the percentage of Commies in
Latin America is nil. But at the rate our
Government is going we will breed them
down there faster than fleas.
Our history in South Vietnam is just as
bad, but this letter is long enough.
Let's get out of Latin America and South
Vietnam now.
You and the few that side with you in Con-
gress have a lonely fight. I am sure you and
your small group are being pressured to
conform with the sick honey being spread
around by administration aides to justify our
unjustifiable foreign policy.
Don't weaken! Don't give up the fight!
3on't let anybody muzzle you!
Republican newspaper, the Arizona Repub-
lie. Therefore, little, if any, coverage is
given the minority opinions in Congress on
such disasters as Vietnam and our present
incredible national policy in Latin America.
From brief news broadcasts on the net-
works, I gather you are once again one of
the few with courage and wisdom enough to
question the administration's actions.
We can't vote for you, of course, but I want
to let you know we are grateful for your be-
ing in the U.S. Senate. Please do what you
can to tell your colleagues our present
recklessness will do more to further inter-
national communism than almost anything
we could do.
Sincerely,
RENSSALAER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE,
Troy, N.Y., May 5,1965.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Please know that
there are many who are anti-Communists
and who nonetheless applaud your great
courage in criticizing the astonishingly
brutal foreign policy of our President.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Building,
Washington, D.C.
DOWNEY, CALIF.,
May 5, 1965.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Attached is a copy
of a letter to the Secretary of State propos-
ing a course of conduct by the United States
in South Vietnam. I do not purport to be
any sort of an expert on the problems there.
But it seems to me that we are hopelessly
engaged there in what could easily become,
at the least, a major disaster, and, at the
worst, a world holocaust.
The proposal would have the effect, I would
hope, of stabilizing the South Vietnam mili-
tary, political, economic, and social situa-
tion. If it did not achieve this, it would
allow the United States to withdraw under
honorai 1e circumstances.
A letter similar to this is going to several,
of your colleagues. Your consideration is
appreciated.
Very truly yours,
PAUL COOKSEY,
Attorney at Law.
DOWNEY, CALIF.,
May 5, 1965.
Hon. DEAN RUSK,
Secretary of State, State Department,
Washington, D.C.
MY DEAR MR. SECRETARY: The purpose Of
this letter is to propose a course of action
with respect to South Vietnam that would
have the following objectives:
1. Limit the duration of American military
participation and assistance.
2. Disengage American prestige now com-
mitted in South Vietnam.
3. Forestall the entry of China and Russia
into the conflict.
4. Promote economic, social and political
reforms in South Vietnam.
5. Promote a viable, stable political gov-
The proposal is that the United States an-
nounce that it will continue all military
assistance to South Vietnam for 1 more year
ending July 1, 1966, but will discontinue all
military assistance after that date as quickly
as it can be withdrawn.
The 1-year commitment is conditional,
however, as follows:
(a) That there will be no land invasion
north of the 17th parallel.
(b) That certain economic reforms, prin-
oipally dealing with the ownership and dis-
tribution of land, be initiated in South
Vietnam.
9545
(c) That political equality be established.
(d) That a stable political government be
formed and further military coups be
abandoned.
If these conditions are met, then the
United States would further commit itself
to a program of substantial economic assist-
ance to South Vietnam in order to help its
economic development and maintain its
political stability.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for your con-
sideration of this proposal.
Very truly yours,
PAUL COOKSEY,
Attorney at Law.
CONCORD, CALIF.,
May 4, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: We urge you to re-
fuse the unneeded extra defense appropria-
tion President Johnson is demanding as a
proof of congressional loyalty.
We are appalled at America's nakedly ag-
gressive policies in Vietnam and in the
Dominican Republic. We utterly reject the
cynical excuses of the administration.
Liberty is not defended by supporting op-
pressive governments; communism is not
defeated by brutally crushing a rebellion
sparked by genuine grievances. And self-
determination either means exactly that or
nothing at .all.
At home Mr. Johnson has been ruthlessly
gutting the democratic process. Honest re-
porters, concerned citizens, and a few coura-
geous and outspoken Senators such as your-
self have all been made to seem disloyal.
When will the witch hunt begin?
Thank you for your magnificent stand in
the face of enormous executive pressure.
Sincerely,
Mr. and Mrs. RAYMOND D. GILBERT.
PAINESVILLE, OHIO,
April 4, 1965.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE:
DEAR SENATOR: I wish to let you know that
I am just one of thousands-yes, millions-
who agrees 100 percent with your gallant,
courageous, and loyal effort by trying to save
America's prestige, good name, and sover-
eignty which we once possessed but unfor-
tunately lost by now, by our foolish behavior.
The whole world is maC at us. I hate to see
the day when the whole world gangs on us
and knocks the stuffing out of us.
More power to you, and God bless your
good work.
Sincerely yours,
BOULDER, COLO.,
May 3, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I would like to thank
you for your forthright and courageous po-
sition for calling publicly for a moratorium
on the bombing of North Vietnam and for
greater efforts towards negotiations. It seems
clear that this is the overwhelming senti-
ment of all Americans, and it is to express
this view that the original of the enclosed
photocopied letter was sent to President
Johnson by a, large number of extremely
active members of the Democratic party in
Boulder County, Colo. We are sending this
to you to indicate the kind of support your
stand has obtained; you will notice, for ex-
ample, that there are many precinct com-
mittee men and women, as well as three
members of the Colorado Democratic State
central committee, among the signatories.
I believe that you and other Members of
the Senate are in a position of crucial im-
SOOTTSDALE, ARIZ.,
May 5, 1965.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: We live in a metro-
olitan area served by only one Goldwater
No. $2--7
Approved For Release 2003/18114: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 9546
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
portance in the days ahead, and we all look
to you to do everything in your power to
effect a change in the direction of our for-
eign policy before it is too late.
Respectfully yours,
Mrs. LESLIE FISHMAN'.
APRIL 21, 1965.
President LYNDON B. JOHNSON,
The White House,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: As active Democratic
precinct captains, block workers, and inde-
pendent Republicans who worked enthusi-
astically for you during many long hours
of the 1964 campaign, we would like,to ex-
press our deep concern regarding your Viet-
nam policy, which seems to us not only to
be morally wrong, but, politically, to be sheer
suicide for the Democratic Party.
Boulder County, Colo., is normally a Re-
publican county, and yet a clear victory
went to you in November. It is our strong
belief, based on hundreds of conversations
while ringing doorbells and doing precinct
work, that the many independents and Re-
publicans who voted for you did so because
of the fear of Barry Goldwater as a trigger-
happy candidate who intended to defoliate
the jungles, bomb the villages, and generally
extend the war In Vietnam and even beyond.
The statement of one elderly Republican
widow, who lives alone in a modest frame-
house, is typical of the thoughts of most
Americans at the time of the election. When
approached by the Democratic block worker,
she said: "I am a lifelong Republican, but I
will never vote for Goldwater, and I don't see
how any American mother could. I have
grown children and small grandchildren, and
I don't want us to get into another war.
Goldwater, would get us in, but President
Johnson will keep us out."
Mr. President, the sentiment of the mil-
lions of Americans who gave you the vast
majority of votes in November has not
changed. The war In Vietnam Is the most
unpopular war In American history, for the
American people know that it is wrong. It is
even more unpopular than the Korean war,
and it was the promise to settle that one
which elected Dwight Eisenhower In 1952.
It becomes increasingly hard for us to look
squarely at our friends and neighbors whom
we had told in November: "The Democrats
are not the war party." It will be impossible,
ever again, to conviizce the electorate of this
fact, if the bombings and the acceleration of
the war are not stopped immediately, and
if some basis for negotiations is not found.
We are convinced that your astute and
wise thinking can bypass conventional di-
plomacy, as represented by the many men
in the State Department who have been
committed for too long to a Dulles' policy,
and that you personally can find an imagina-
tive and honorable way to peace in Vietnam.
Respectfully yours,
Ann P. Johnson, Precinct Committee-
woman;'Victoria Ruwitch, Committee-
woman 15th Precinct; Richard C.
Johnson, County State Delegate; Jer-
rold H. Krenz, Block Worker; Carl
Ubehlohde, Committeeman, 15th Pre-
cinct; Mary Ubheldohde, Secretary,
Second Congressional District Conven-
tion; Philip A. Danielson, Member,
State Democratic Central Committee;
Mildred P. Danielson, Committeewom-
an, 21st Precinct; Regina D. Wieder,
Member, State Democratic Central
Committee; Helen J. Wilson, Demo-
cratic Block, Worker; Eleanor G. Crow,
Delegate to Boulder County Demo-
cratic Convention; Edward Sampson,
Jr., Block Worker, Boulder; June S.
Sampson, Committeewoman, Boulder;
Gorden W. Hewes, Registered Demo-
crat; Minna W. Hewes, Registered
Democrat; Beatrice Hoffman, Demo-
cratic Block Worker; Nancy C. Krau-
shear, Democratic Party Worker; Mary
Jo Vphoff, Block Worker, Boulder;
Leslie Fishman; Delegate to Boulder
County Democratic Convention; Mal-
colm Correll, Democratic Block Work-
er; E. Victor Traibush, First Alternate
to State Democratic Convention, Boul-
der County; Jon Traibush, Delegate,
County Conv-gntion; Jean Gillette, Fer-
ris, Registered Republican; Lillian I.
Fraser, Delegate, 1964 Convention Dem-
ocratic Committeewoman; William E.
Goding, Baptist Chaplain, University
of Colorado; Deana Hersh Mersky,
Block Worker, Boulder, Colo.; Betty
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE May 7, 1965
Irene Lovelace, office manager Demo-
cratic Headquarters, Boulder, Colo.
Richard B. Wilson, Precinct Committee-
man; Robin B. Bowler, Block Worker;
Ned W. Bowler, Registered Democrat;
Virginia Hammond, Block Worker;
Annabelle Cook, Block Worker; Bever-
ly Plank, Block Worker; Ruth Kunz,
Block Worker; Eleanor Goldstein, Pre-
cinct Committeewoman; Mavis Mc-
Kelvey, Louis Phillips Hudson, Ruth A.
Loose, Joseph L. Sax, Eleanor G. Sax,
Block Worker; Sorin L. Jacobs, Regis-
tered Democrat; Marian Martell, Regis-
tered Democrat; Lonnie Codding,
George A. Codding, Jr., Registered
Democrat, Delegate County Conven-
tion; J. W. Allen, Aldithe S. Allen,
Block Worker; Clark W. Bouton, Phyliss
Bouton, Prudence J. Scarritt, Block
Worker; James R. Scarritt, Roland
Reiss, Betty M. Reiss, Block Worker.
Evelyn Rose, Block Worker, Precinct 2;
Edward Rose, Democrat; Florence
Becker Lennon, Registered Democrat;
Gary W. Bickel, Democratic Precinct
Worker and Convention Delegate; Ray
W. Alsbury, Committeeman, 7th Pre-
cinct; A. Glenn Hedgecock, former
Treasurer, Boulder County; Hardy Lon
Frank, Cochairman, Boulder County
Young Citizens for Johnson and Hum-
phrey; Marion Higman, Registered
Democrat, 25 years; Sadie G. Walton,
Registered Democrat; June P. Howard,
Democratic Committeewoman, Bould-
er Precinct 14; John L. Murphy, Reg-
istered. Democrat; John M. Major,
Block Worker; Charles Milton, Com-
mitteeman, Boulder Precinct 26; Arlene
P. McClung, Block Worker, Boulder,
Colo.; Joan R. Rowland, Block Worker,
Boulder, Colo.; Nancy B. Kitts, Demo-
cratic Precinct Committeewoman,
Boulder 24; Janet Weir, Democratic
State Central Committee; Walter Weir,
Democrat; John M. Adams, Democrat,
Party Worker; Louise V. Adams, Demo-
cratic Party Worker; Margaret B. Han-
son, Committeewoman, Precinct B4;
Jack H. Gore, County Organizational
Chairman.
Lyh Taylor, Cochairman, Boulder County
Young Citizens for Johnson and Hum-
phrey; E. D. Fraker, direct to H. H.
Humphrey; Dorothy Jay Thompson,
Democratic Precinct Committeewo-
man, Precinct 20-B, Boulder; Christo-
pher R. Broucht, Precinct Committee-
man, Treasurer, Young Citizens for
Johnson; Mayor Broucht; Margaret H.
Stahl; Robert I. Low, Finance Chair-
man, Boulder County Central Com-
mittee; Rosemary T. Low, Registered
Democrat, Club Worker; Harriet T.
Moskovit, Republican for Johnson,
Precinct Worker; Leonard Moskovit,
Republican for Johnson; -A. Frank
everlasting admiration and respect for your
truthful discussion of U.S. policy regarding
Vietnam and now, heaven help us, the Do-
minican. Republic.
I sincerely hope that you get a million or
more letters of encouragement, although I
know the American public to be lazy and
apathetic toward writing their views. Please
don't give up-each time, I pick up a news-
paper and read about you speaking in Mil-
waukee or on the Senate floor, my hope is
renewed. Many thanks.
Respectfully yours,
Mrs. DOROTHY BoxHORN.
NEW YORK, N.Y., May 5, 1965.
Sen. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: You have won my
warmest admiration for your heroic stand
on the atrocious Vietnam adventure. I only
regret that I am unable to add a vote to my
admiration. Nonetheless, I urge your con-
tinued opposition to the war, and in par-
ticular to the President's staggering request
for a new military appropriation.
Very truly yours,
COOS BAY, OREG.
DEAR WAYNE: We, the people, are back of
you 100 percent; we listen to your every
word.
We know,we did vote for L.B.J., but we are
sorry, for our President is a warmonger, and
is not a man to be trusted; in fact he should
be recalled, as well as a, few others I could
mention.
Please do not let the warmongers scare
you but stick to your guns and give them
hell, Truman style.
I know that for today a vote against L.B.J.
was would win by a big majority by the
common man of the United States.
President Johnson is setting a bad example
to the American people by his breaking his
promises, when he was running for election,
and he knows it.
My wife and I are for you, WAYNE, as well as
thousands of others.
I remain,
Sincerely,
Moco LIMrrED,
Toronto, Ontario, May 4, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: If we survive this crisis your
name will become one of the most hallowed
in American history. You are entitled to
and have my heartfelt thanks for your cour-
age in standing above the pack and telling
the truth.
You have helped me keep my self-respect.
I have three young boys at home and find
myself thinking of fathers in Vietnam, of
gas, of napalm, of fire bombs, and I know
that I am guilty, too. I am trying to do as
much as I can but the ways for most of us
to protest are so limited.
Thank you again for proving there is still
some hope for Amer".
Yours very truly,
NORMAN M. KELLY.
Knotts, Democrat, Block Worker; Mrs. Senator WAYNE MOaSE,
Frank Knotts, Democrat, Block Work- Senate Office Building,
er; Adrian D. Gibson, Independent; Washington D C
Eleanor P. Fishman, Democrat, Block DEAR SENATOR: The arrogance of Secretor
Worker. Rusk in criticizing the members of univel
sity faculties who have spoken out againo
WAUKESHA, WIS., May 5, 1965. his war-escalation policy in Vietnam is ti
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: All I can say is bless voice of the dictator, not a trusted serval
you, you're an honest man. How I wish that of the people in a democracy.
there were a hundred more of you-or that Enlightened public opinion is a necessa
a hundred more like you possessed your cour- ingredient of a government of the peop'
age and determination. You've earned my for the people, and by the people. It mu
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 May 7, 1965
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SEDATE
and I'm behind you 100 percent. We are
wrong there and we are, if possible, wronger
in the Dominican Republic. I can't under-
stand how a nation can condemn Soviet ac=
tion in Hungary then turn right around and
repeat that very action they condemn. It
is becoming pretty hard to hold my head up
and proudly say "I'm an American" today.
Sincerely,
JACK FIELDS.
P.S.-Enclosed is a picture clipped from
the local paper. When I first saw this I
couldn't help but recall a similar photograph
I had seen of another man taken 25 years
ago in Germany. He too thought that his
way was always right.
be expressed and respected by the admin-
istration in administration decisions. The
most enlightened opinion in American
classes and categories is In the academic
community. Who does Mr Rusk think he is
besides a guardian of the corporate Inter-
ests of America, and beyond the reach of the
people's influence?
We spend vast sums on higher education
and then permit a corporate-minded man
like Mr. Rusk to discredit the product. The
books being written by the so-called intel-
lectuals of the State Department at the
public's expense, are largely propaganda.
The Senate is the branch of Government
invested with the responsibility to declare
war, We are in war which the Senate has
not declared and only a handful of Sena-
tors have the understanding or guts to pro-
test.
,Sincerely,
JOSEPHINE GOMON.
MCMINNVILLE, OREG.,
May 1, 1965.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senator From Oregon,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Let me again thank
you warmly for your courageous stand
against the war In Vietnam. The conditions
that the President lays down before he will
negotiate demand that the opponents submit
to him in advance. They will not do it.
Therefore he is tying himself to a scorched
earth policy and will gain the enmity of all
Asia. Africa will ally themselves with Asia.
And already the European nations are ob-
jecting. If we brush aside world opinion,
we had better stop wasting our money on
propaganda,
It is all such folly. Thank you for being
not a follower but a leader.
Yours sincerely,
RICHARD B. GREGG.
'Coos BAY, OREG.,
May 4, 1965.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: It is certainly true
that we live in a most complex world and it
becomes Increasingly difficult to chart a
course In, it. As we attempt to chart our
course the direction of our foreign policy
becomes of dire Importance.
One of our continued vexing problems Is
that of Vietnam. Your stand has been most
courageous and perceptive. My wife and I
and many of our friends support you whole
heartedly.
The recent action of our country in the
sending of troops to the Dominican Republic
gives us great concern. The action of our
country bears an uneasy semblance to the
action of Russia in deciding on the type of
government of the satellite countries. A
fear of communism canot cause us to violate
the national sovereignty of other countries.
Law and order and mutual respect can never
)e "second" to national interest.
Perhaps it is to the best interests of our
ration and of the world if Congress would
efuse to give the additional money to the
tiiltary budget.
As you exercise your influence in the lead-
ship of our country we pray God to con-
nue to illumine and direct you.
Sincerely,
VOLV,S W. MCEACHERN.
.?.. SAN JOSE, CALIF.,
May 5, 1965.
nator WAYNE MORSE,
1. Senate,
sshington, D.C.
)EAR SENATOR MORSE: As a non-Oregonian
ould like for you to know that I appre-
te your stand on the Vietnam problem
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: You do not stand alone iii
your brave stand against the Vietnam ware
which only continues because many people
including the President, and his two war-
hawks-McNamara, and Rusk-think that
America is the only Nation that does right.
We college students know better. A1-
though I may be speaking with ideals rather
than realities In my mind, I think the time
has come when America should allow every
country-right or wrong, pro-American or
anti-American-to decide for itself whirl}
type of government it wishes to live with,
Too many times we blame the Commies for
something we began.
ROBERT STANTON, Jr.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
MrLWAUKIE, OREG.
Washington, D.C.
DEAR Sur: There are many things that
make me proud to be an Oregonian. By far
the most important of these is the states-
manship of our senior Senator.
My wife and I wish to express our com-
plete support of your couragous and intelli-
gent stands on the U.S. actions in Vietnan}
and the Dominican Republic.
Very truly yours,
L, D. SOHAMP.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Thanks for you, Raymond Brown, Robert
Engler, Carl Resek, and Harvey Swados.
SARAH LAWRENCE COLLEGE.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Thank you for your
many statements against our Government's
policy in Vietnam. I hope you will con-
tinue to make these statements and not bq
silenced.
I heard you speak at Stanford University
and was greatly impressed by your knowl-
edge of the situation and by your sincerity.
I agree with everything you say; may it in-
fluence the opinion of your colleagues and
the public at large.
Sincerely yours,
BELMONT, CALIF.,
April 30, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE.
DEAR SENATOR: We appreciate and admire
your courageous stand against tha shameful
action of our Government in Vietnam.
I am sure that if there were a couple of
dozen like you in the Senate, things could
be much better.
Unfortunately few have the moral strength
nowadays, the ability, willingness to consider
our actions with a humanitarian point of
view.
9547
Yes, we go to church, at least many of us
do, under a mantle of humble Christianity,
but a closer look will reveal ugliness to the
bottom of our souls, and hands dripping with
blood.
Our President before the election gave us
plenty of peaceful promises, and now look
what he is doing. I wonder if Goldwater
would have been any worse.
If there is a law for gangsters, why not
applying in this case? This concerns not
only our country, but the entire world.
Have we become the boss? The police of
the globe? This is the best way to get the
prestige indeed. What we need now is a
rope to keep the world from going around.
Respectfully yours,
MARY LURRY.
ARDMORE, PA.,
May 3, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: My husband and I
support your stand on Vietnam and urge
you to continue your good work.
Sincerely yours,
FLORA K. GERBNER.
ST. Louis, Mo.,
April 27, 1965.
DEAR SIR: The enclosed resolutions were
passed overwhelmingly at a public meeting
attended by more than 450 people at Sheldon
Memorial in St. Louis, Mo., April 21, 1965.
The meeting was sponsored by the St. Louis
Committee for Peace, in Vietnam, an ad hoc
organization composed of representatives
from the Americans for Democratic Action,
Citizens for Liberal Action, the St. Louis
Fellowship of Reconciliation, Public Affairs
Committee of the Ethical Society, Commit-
tee for a, Sane Nuclear Policy, Women's In-
ternationalLeague for Peace and Freedom,
and the Student Peace Union.
We urge your careful consideration of these
resolutions and that you use your most saga-
cIouS influence in helping to stop the dan-
gerous escalation of the Vietnam war and
work toward, a peaceful solution.
Most sincerely yours,
ZELDA STRICKBERGER,
Mrs. Monroe Strickberger,
Chairman, St. Louis Committee for
. Peace in Vietnam.
RESOLUTIONS FOR PRESENTATION TO THE ST.
Louis RALLY FOR PEACE IN VIETNAM
Whereas the prevention of nationwide elec-
tions by the U.S.-backed Diem regime in vio-
lation of the Geneva agreement of 1954 con-
tributed to the armed conflict which in the
past 10 years has cost the lives of more than
70,000 Vietnamese and caused widespread
devastation of Vietnamese property and ter-
ritory;
Whereas North and South Vietnam are not
two sovereign nations but are, according to
the Geneva agreement, two zones of one sov-
ereign nation;
Whereas the conflict in Vietnam is a civil
war among South Vietnamese political fac-
tions;
Whereas the United States has continually
supported a series of regimes neither selected
nor supported by the people bf South Viet-
nam;
Whereas the United States is the only for-
eign power actively engaged In this conflict;
Whereas military escalation of the conflict
increases the danger of widening the war to
involve regular North Vietnamese, Chinese,
and Russian military forces and decreases
the likelihood of negotiation;
Whereas.. the Secretary General g the
Unlted?Nations, Pope Paul and other major
religious leaders, several leading statesmen
from allied nations, and a body of ' 17 un-
alined nations, have urged convening a
conference of al l ooncernedpowers;
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 9548
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0 '
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE May 7, 19 65
We, participants in the St. Louis Rally for
Peace in Vietnam, on April 21, 1968
Do urge the U.S. Government to end the
bombing of North Vietnam, and to agree to
an immediate cease-fire by all forces;
Do urge the President of the United States
to extend his agreement to enter into discus-
sions so that all major South Vietnamese fac-
tions, including the Vietnamese National
Liberation Front, will be directly repre-
sented;
Do urge- the Congress of the United States,
and each Senator and Representative in-
dividually, to consider seriously their con-
stitutional responsibilities in relation to war,
and to consider these in the light of the
enormous destructiveness of modern nuclear
weapons.
We do, further-
Congratulate the President of the United
States for his offer of major economic aid to
such multilateral projects as that of develop-
ing the Mekong Basin;
Congratulate those Senators who have had
the moral and political courage to speak
publicly in favor of peace in Vietnam, espe-
cially Senators CHURCH, GRUENING, McGov-
FRN and MORSE;
Congratulate the St. Louis Post-Dispatch,
whose columnists and editors have presented
a clear and objective picture of events in
Vietnam;
And we do-
Recommend that individuals act with
urgency to express by telegrams and letters
to the President of the United States and to
Members of Congress their support for these
resolutions;
Recommend that individuals make every
effort to keep themselves informed about
events in southeast Asia;
Recommend that individuals join in the
efforts of such organizations as the sponsors
of this rally to continue to express their con-
cern and convictions about such events
(Americans for Democratic Action, Citizens
for Liberal Action, Fellowship of Reconcilia-
tion; Public Affairs Committee of the Ethical
Society, Committee for a Sane Nuclear Policy,
United Campus Christian Fellowship, and the
Women's International League for Peace and
Freedom) ;
Recommend that Individuals interested
form an ad hoc organization specifically de-
voted to the achievement of the goals of this
rally, a just and lasting peace in Vietnam.
AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT JOHNSON
We, residents of the Elgin area, commend
your willingness to negotiate the Vietnam
Conflict. In the nuclear age, there can be no
'victory in the traditional sense-all armed
conflicts must eventually end in negotia-
tion.
To facilitate these negotiations, we urge
that you consider a cessation of the bombing
of North Vietnam for a trial period, as sug-
gested by Senator Fm.BRIGHT:
Harold R. Bare, Margaret Bare, Edith
Barnes, John Bather, Wanda Bather,
Lois E. Baumgartner, Leland H. Beery,
Beverly Beu, Anne Booth, Douglas
Booth, Loren Bowman, Dorothy E.
Brown, Mrs. Dorothy Brown, Merle
Brown, Ethel and Everett Brubaker,
Eula P. Brumbaugh, John W. Brum-
baugh, Paul Brunnbbaugh, Wilbur
Brumbaugh, Robert L, Brunton, Edith
Cantrell, Richard Cantrell, Florence
Carpenter, Kenneth W. Clardy, Mary
E. Cline, Glen E. Cluts, Richard Coff-
Esther Craig, Ralph Custer, Fern Custer,
Paul _ Dailey, Lillian B. Davis, Pauline
Delk, Ralph M. Delk, Judith Toss, Jphn
Esker, Paula Ecker, Blanche C. Ewing,
Mr. and Mrs. Charles Flory, Mr. and
Mrs, E. Gergen, Ronald Glenn, Mr. and
Mrs. Fred Greenawalt, Robert, Greiner,
Eleanore R, Hardt, Olga Hardy, Arnold
Hartman, Clint Heckert. Mildred E.
Heckert, Emerson L. Heiman, Mrs. Elva
Hevener, Jean Henley, Marilyn Henley.
Edward W. Henninger, Cedrie C. Herr-
mann, Rebecca F. Herrmann, Elmer M.
Hersch, Sudie C. Hersch, Cinda Rib-
schman, Richard Hibschman, Blossom
Hicks, Vivian Hileman, Mrs. Helen
Hillmer, Carrie Hoffman, Marie Hof-
statter, Moritz Hofstatter, M.D., Grace
Hollinger, Ruby D. Honert, Jerry
Hoover, Jewel D. Howlett, L. Wayne
Howlett, John P. Humphrey, Ruth O.
Humphrey, Charlene Hunn, Mr. and
Mrs. Ora Huston, Lois Johnson, Ryer-
son Johnson, Don R. Jordan, Ellen S.
Jordan, Joyce Jordan, Nancy Keller,
Hazel M. Kennedy, Russell N. Kerr,
Winfield D. Knechel, Ruby Koehnke,
Bernard Land, Larry Land, J. S. LaRue,
Maud Lengel, Will E. Lengel, Nancy
Long, Ercell V. Lynn, Isabel M. Lynn,
Eugene Martin, Mrs. Ina Martin, K. E.
McDowell, Eda B. Meyer, Carol C. Mil-
ler, Leon Miller, Elmer E. Miner, Elmer
F. Moeller, Gwendolyn Moeller, Wilbur
E. Mullen, Carl E. Myers, Irene W.
Myers.
J. T. Nelson, Nancy Newcomer, Glen E.
Norris, Lois D. Norris, W. L. Giwin,
Hazel Peters, Norma Peterson, John
Post, Helen Reish, J. Elbert Reish,
Martin R. Rock, Frances Rolston, W.
Wendell Rolston, Leona Z. Row, Harry
Row, W. Harold Row, Donald E. Rowe,
Howard E. Royer, Harl L. Russell
Hazel Russell, Sue Russell, Mrs. Fern
Schauer, Linda D. Schroeder, Donald
H. Shank.
Eileen S. Shank, Ruth Shriver, Merlin
Shull, Mrs. Pearl Shull, Phi Silvius,
Revie Slaubaugh, Mary B. Smeltzer,
Ralph E. Smeltzer, Helen Smith, R. H.
Smith, Mr. and Mrs. Neil A. Swartz,
Donald Thomas, Erma Joyce Thomas,
John Thomas, Mr. and Mrs. Joel K.
Thompson, Robert Carl Tully, Mr. and
Mrs. Bruce Turner, Diane Warnke,
Elizabeth Weigle, Dana G. Whipple,
Lee G. Whipple, Stann Whipple, Roy
White, Doris L. Wilson, Leland Wilson,
Jean V. Wissman, George G. Worthen,
Wilbur Yohn,
This open letter paid for by the persons
listed above-Ruth O. Humphrey, route 2,
Elgin, Ill.
STELLA MARIS, MALIBU, CALIF.,
March 18, 1965.
MY DEAR SENATOR: Like most people I am
deeply confused and concerned regarding
Vietnam, and like some, I have a few nag-
ging thoughts as to the validity of our entry
into South Vietnam.
In a recent correspondence with Dr. Linus
Pawling, he suggested I write to you to'send
me copies of your Senate speeches and other
st..tements about the subject.
I would appreciate it very much if you
would do so.
Sincerely yours,
-MARY ASTOR.
BOULDER, COLO.,
May 4, 1965.
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Just a note to ex-
press my heartfelt thanks to you for your
courageous stand against President Johnson's
policy In Vietnam, Every fiber in my being
tells me that this policy is wrong-dead-
wrong, and that.somehow it must be re-
directed before it Is too late.
McCarthyism as, applied to domestic af-
fairs can at best destroy a country; as applied
to world affairs, can destroy the whole world.
It can destroy for keeps: Shakespeare, Bee-
thoven, Jesus, Jefferson, Confucius, Emerson,
and on and on. Eotnehow our country, must
get out of this stupid ideological rut it is in
and come up with some real answers to the
terrible problems facing mankind.
I am 38 years old, and for just about as
long as I can remember taking any note of
public affairs, the personage of WAYNE
MORSE has been on the scene. There are, I
am sure, millions of us. Don't, for God's
sake, let us down now.
Sincerely yours,
WESLEY V. SEARS.
QUITMAN, MISS.,
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: I congratulate you on your
stand with reference to South Vietnam.
Our being in South Vietnam is a mistake.
The commitment of troops to Vietnam
shall be one of the most tragic mistakes in
history, as I feel later historians will record.
With kindest personal regards I am,
Yours very truly,
BILLY E. HARRIS.
DENVILLE, N.J., April 30, 1965.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Since the McCarthy
era I have admired your adherence to the
principles of individualism professed but ab-
andoned by your colleagues. On no issue has
this independence been vital than than in
the Vietnamese war. As John Kenneth Gail-
braith hinted in the New York Times, the ad-
ministration clings to its stupid, hopeless
bombing policies not to save this Nation, but
to save the reputations of blundering bu-
reaucrats who, rather than admit they were
wrong, are not magnifying their errors in the
vain hope that more of a bad thing will some-
how prove good. From Adlat Stevenson
through moral mediocrities like- Dean Rusk,
the administration's yes men are pretending
not to notice the odor. Thank you for de-
manding that we clean up the stench.
Very truly yours,
C. W. GRIFFIN, Jr.
PENNSYLVANIA LUMBER & POST CO., INC.,
La Vale, Md., May 3, 1965.
U.S. Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I agree with your
attitude on Vietnam.
Yours very truly,
W. H. SOLOMON,
Treasurer.
GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY,
DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH,
Washington, D.C., April 30, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Foreign Relations Committee,
Washington, D.C.
SIR: May I commend you on your courage
and perseverance in opposing our immoral
and impractical policy in Vietnam.
May I implore that you do not slacken in
your purpose nor In your energy. Yours is
one of the few sane voices in the Government
that makes itself heard on this issue.
Sincerely yours,
FRANK TURAJ, Instructor.
CHRISTIAN FAITH MINISTERIAL
ASSOCIATION, INC.,
Senator MoRsE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I admire your star
against this senseless war in Vietnam.
There is only one way to stop a war. Th
is for Congress to refuse . to furnish t:
money to carry It on. The people of Unit
States do not want this war. ..
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
May 7, 1965 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
If Congress refuses to finance it it will die
a natural death, and that will be that. Why
should we lay all our boys on the alter to
be butchered by war, when we do not own
a foot of ground in Vietnam?
For whom is this war being fought? Cer-
tainly no common man stands to gain any-
thing but death over there. Stop this war
and put a new law on the books that no war
can be declared or. fought unless the people
of the United States represented by the Con-
gress in Washington give their consent, and
unless the people are willing to finance it.
Cut our income taxes so the Government
don't have so much money to throw away
on moon flights and war 'on the whole world,
and lets give the elderly people a decent
home and a chance to give their property to
their children, as the Bible plainly teaches.
Let's raise our voices against "murder in-
corporated" that's all war is, financed by the
Duponts and we are the fools who suffer
most.
Your sincerely,
CAMBRIDGE, MASS.,
April 22, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.:
You speak for hundreds of thousands of
Americans in your warning against further
escalation of war in Vietnam; your voice
sorely needed in present tragic conflict; our
heartfelt thanks go to you.
KAY BOYLE,
STATE UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE AT BROCKPORT,
Brockport, N.Y., April 26, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Congratulations on
your continuing fight to maintain free dis-
cussion of our foreign policy in the Senate.
Our war in Vietnam is immoral and unin-
telligent. Might it not be called the policy
of Henry Cabot Lodge, the jingoist son of a
jingoist father?
May I humbly suggest, however, that in
your continuing debate you accent more the
unintelligence of our policy than its im-
morality; how we have wedded ourselves to
an image in the Far East of a 20th century
Metternich, defending the plutocratic in-
heritors of the ancient regime against all re-
spectable movements toward national self-
realization. In a sense have we not been
imitating British 19th century policy in
India, cementing our power by making deals
with the maharajahs and nabobs? Isn't it
true that the patriots of Vietnam who lib-
erated their country from the French went
north, leaving the south to the rich and
titled natives of Saigon, who had prospered
under the French?
Why do we do this and why do we con-
tinue to do this, not only in Vietnam but
around the world? This fundamental ques-
tion must be faced; it is the background
question and Vietnam is only an incident.
Another fundamental element in our diffi-
culties is that we are caught in a dilemma
between two foreign policies: (1) coexistence
with communism and (2) containment of
ummunism. One way out of this dilemma
s to, return to the policy that preceded our
ntry into World War II, that is, a policy
gainst imperialism, against Japanese uni-
Lteral conquest of the Far East and German
nd Italian ditto of Europe.
Where the Communists are Imperialistic
e must check them. On the `other hand,
here spontaneous national uprisings em-
oy Communist weapons and advice, we
Ive no clear call to intervene. Shouldn't
3 ask why these national uprisings do not
rn to us for assistance? I suggest the an-
'er is that we have been willing to do bust-
ness with the reactionary regimes which the
rebels wish to supplant. Our policy has been
cynical in this respect and even worse it has
been lazy and naive. We haven't had the
energy to mount an effort to export our brand
of progress to the rising suppressed classes
of the world. (Peace Corps is an exception.)
Not having an ideology to export or a pro
gram, we have inevitably resorted to force-
money, then fleets and air forces, now the
marines. Tomorrow what?
The big thing that keeps American public
opinion uneasily but still effectively behind
the Johnson policy is very simple to identify.
It is the fear that if we retreat from Vietnam
all of southeast Asia will go Communist,
perhaps even India. In my mind no counter
argument will go very far unless we recog-
nize this fear. It is a pervasive fear and
not a totally unreasonable one. How do
we quiet this fear? I suggest that the way
to quiet the fear is to face it. Admit it. Let
us suppose that our disengagement from
Vietnam is followed shortly by the emer-
gence of Communist allied governments in
South Vietnam, in Cambodia; and that the
Malaysian will to resist Indonesia is weak-
ened. Also let us suppose India feels driven
into the Chinese orbit.
We must honestly face the consequences
of this assumedly real possibility. What are
these consequences? I suggest that they are
no real threat to our security for these rea-
sons: (1) The nations of southeast Asia are
economically and militarily weak. (2) They
will remain so for decades to come. (3) By
turning to China they will merely aggravate
their weakness by frustration. China is too
poor to be of any real help. After the hys-
teria of nationalism and anticolonialism
has spent itself, and the wine of independ-
ence has been drunk to the dregs, isn't it
highly probable that quietly, one by one,
these countries will seek our aid and to some
extent at least come back into our orbit?
Some will say that my reasoning is that
of a neolsolationist. I disagree. I think
rather it is that of a sober, intelligent, and
moral internationalist. I envision as the
goal toward which this troubled but very
dynamic and creative century is moving is
a "planetary federation of states." This goal
cannot be reached by imposition; that was
the old way of the Pax Romanum. Indeed,
all efforts on the part of particular great
powers to impose a planetary order must be
resisted, including our own. Rather, the
planetary peace must be voluntarily arrived
at, by the free will and the increasing coop=
eration of all the member states of this
planet. This can only come if the sup
pressed states achieve freedom, self-deter-
mination, and the direction of their affairs
by themselves. We want no puppet states
in the United Nations, or in any greater
unifying organization that will succeed it.
I despise negativity, but I must confess
that I fear I smell war in the air. Just al';
the events of the late thirties-Ethiopia and
Spain and all that-were preceded by the
weakening of the League of Nations, so the
current affair in Vietnam is accompanied by
a great and ominous silence in the United
Nations; 1914-39-exactly 25 years; 1939-64-
exactly 25 years. The militarists have been
rehearsing their war too long. They seek
to perform; they seek catharsis in action.
Perhaps one telling weapon against John-'
son is to accuse him of gross irresponsibil-
ity, of launching on an aggressive policy
without first equipping the country with
bomb shelters. That ought to get that politi-
cian where it hurts. In any case, I am sure
that it will do no good in this fight to be
merely morally indignant. We must be
calm, deadly logical, insultingly intelligent.
We must also-demonstrate.
This letter has, I am afraid, turned- into
a lecture. In closing, I want to stress my
uniqualifled approval of your position, and
express my encouragement and support. I
9549
am a professor in a college community of
over 2,000 students and teachers. I think
one can take hope from the situation here.
Although the milieu is mentally very middle
class and most of the students and faculty,
I am afraid also, are from small towns in
western New York, only the few hotheads are
as yet beginning to vibrate to the escalated
verbiage of the Johnson mouthpieces like
Long. Most are puzzled and perplexed, and
confess woeful ignorance of just what it is
all about. In short, I do not yet believe
we have gone over the dam.
Sincerely yours,
JOHN R. CROWLEY,
Associate Professor,
English Department.
TEMPLETON, IND.,
May 2, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
My DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I wish to con-
tribute to the long list of letters that I
know you have received commending you
for your courageous and intelligent stand
on the Vietnam affair.
The administration's "policy" if such it
may be called is not enlightened from the
point of view of the American people and
certainly not enlightened or fair to the peo-
ple of Vietnam. You are exactly right.
The strife in that war-torn country is a
civil war and since when has it become
wrong for a people to strive to right their
wrongs. Certainly we did it. The docu-
ment Which marked the beginning of our
national existence is the Declaration of In-
dependence. The right of revolution is set
for in it. I have been very attentive to it and
that position of the Declaration is never
quoted any more. It is, however, the history
of things that when a people has reached
the seat of the high and the mighty that
they become indifferent or even oppose the
efforts of others to improve their lot.
I agree with you that Johnson should
dismiss Rusk and McNamara.. They are all
mixed up in their own mental aberations.
Thanks a lot for your courageous stand.
With great respect, I am,
Sincerely yours,
NEW YORK, N.Y.,
May 3, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I am appalled at the
position this Government has taken in both
Santo Domingo and Vietnam in the use of
arms and the spreading,of war and its atro-
cities.
The use of American troops for interven-
ing in the affairs of a foreign government is
both contrary to the United Nations Charter,
which we have pledged to uphold, and our
beliefs in democracy.
I urge you to use your good efforts and
office to stop this policy.
I regret to state that at present I am
ashamed to be an American citizen.
Respectfully yours,
NORMAN LEVINE,
PHILADELPHIA, PA.,
May 4, 1965.
President LYNDON B. JOHNSON,
White House,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR PRESIDENT JOHNSON: I was shocked
to see that you sent our marines to the
Dominican Republic.
In Vietnam, it seems as though our policy
is up a blind alley, and your escalation of
the war may very well be heading us, all
toward a nuclear. holocaust. When the
Buddhist monks died in flames. They were
martyrizing themselves to stop the spread of
the war; if we and our children go up in
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67800446R000300150003-0
May 7, 19 65 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
depreciatory labels. I am shocked that a
man of RUSSELL LONG'S obvious intelligence
should stoop to such rhetorical stupidities.
One wonders if, by Longian logic it does
not follow that, since Bogalusa and the KKK
are prominent phenomena in the headlines
these days related to Louisiana, and since
Senator LONG is also associated with Louisi-
ana, that he is a Bogalusa member of the
KKK. (The principle of the Longian logic
I am relying on is: every part of everything
that makes the newspapers is fully and
accurately represented in the headlines about
the same.)
You and I will not invariably agree on
other important matters, but we certainly
agree perfectly on this one, find I am very
grateful that I and many who think like
me have such an able and clear-thinking
spokesman on Capitol Hill. Next year, when
I move to Missouri, I will still be a strong
backer Of your stand (and a strong opponent
of Senator LONG) despite the fact that my
vote will not count for or against either of
you. My vote in 1988 may very well count
against the bunch Johnson, McNamara,
Rusk, Bundy and company, however.
Yours very truly,
MALCOLM BROWN,
Assistant Professor of Philosophy.
EUGENE, OREG.,
April 29, 1965.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: We continue to sup-
port your policy concerning Vietnam. We
hope that you will continue to speak out as
courageously as you have been.
Sincerely yours,
VIRGINIA LAKE KENNEL.
E. FINLEY KENNEL.
THE METHODIST CHURCH,
Springfield, Oreg., May 5, 1965.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I am writing to say
that I stand solidly behind you in the things
you are saying relative to our Vietnam policy.
Keep it up. The matter is urgent.
Sincerely,
Ross KNOTS,
Minister.
PORTLAND, OREG.,
April 27, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE.
DEAR SIR: I'm writing in support of your
courageous stand in opposition to the Gov-
ernment's policy in Vietnam. Being a Demo-
crat of long standing, I cannot help but feel
concern over our actions which are promoted
by our President and his Cabinet. Mr. John-
son speaks so nice about his dreams, but I
and many, many people are beginning to
have nightmares. We have two sons. Each
one at 18 years went to separate wars at the
end of high school. We were then hoping it
would not have to happen again. But it
seems dreams are just that. Should we
dream our way through Vietnam? I'm sure
we will wake up having lost not only Asia
but a good deal of the rest of the friends we
now have.
Sincerely yours,
PORTLAND, OREG.,
April 10, 1965.
DEAR MR. MORSE: When you came to Port-
land to debate on Vietnam, I was there to see
you. I want you to know that I support you
100 percent on every view you' hold on Viet-
nam. i was so engrossed with your speech
: sent a registered to President Johnson
expressing my views fully. Why can't there
ie some harsh action taken quickly to stop
his war? I will keep protesting the admin-
stration's policy on Vietnam as long as we
ave a "warmonger President in the White
House." Well, I must close
the good work.
Sincerely yours,
now. Keep up
EUGENE, OREG.,
April 26, 1965.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I was greatly in
agreement with your speech at the University
of Oregon. I hope your views that we should
cease fire in Vietnam will reach as many as
possible.
I should like to protest the war in Vietnam
on the following grounds:
1. Brutality: The war seems to be carried
out against the people. I feel morally re-
sponsible for this cruelty and should like to
end it. There seems to be a parallel between
the United States in 1965 and Germany in
1939.
2. Effectiveness: We cannot justify our ac-
tions on this ground. The majority of the
people there hate America. With some jus-
tification. The strategies of Mao seem to
be more effective, and yet we refuse to learn
from him.
3. Opinions of others: The majority of the
world does not share our perspective in In-
dochina. To be seen as an aggressor by
a large part of the world is surely of some im-
portance. We are continually losing face.
4. Coexistence: We must face the fact
that we must share this planet with others
who are different in religion, government, and
belief. This elementary fact must be ac-
cepted by those who would turn to aggres-
sion. Warhare Is no longer a solution to
these differences.
Very truly yours,
JAMES C. KEESEY.
LAKE OSWEGO, OREG.,
April 9, 1965.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I want to tell you
how impressed and gratified I was with your
part in the debate with PROxHIRE on Viet-
nam. You succeeded in converting to your
point of view everyone in our party, includ-
ing some who had voted for Goldwater in the
last election. It's a tribute to your powers
of persuasion as well as to the justness of
your cause. It's a pity and a disgrace that
the Oregonian can't do the public the favor
of adequately reporting your statements.
Sincerely,
EUGENE, OREG.,
April 2.5, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: This letter is to let
you know that I greatly appreciate your
courage to make your views clear on our
policy in Vietnam. I am completely behind
an immediate ceasefire in Vietnam. I also
appreciate your part in the protest held at
the University of Oregon last Friday night
and hope that your optimism about the de-
gree to which the President will heed the
growing concern and protest of our policy
and action in Vietnam will prove justified.
I would like one or more copies of the
speeches to the Senate by MANSFIELD, .your-
self, and others. I regret to admit that these
speeches were not covered by the Register
Guard and were mentioned, to the best 'of
my knowledge, only very briefly for the first
time in today's paper.
Sincerely yours,
DEEANNE.DOEIER,
Rehabilitation Counselor, State of Oregon.
PORTLAND, OREG.,
April 14, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I have felt for some-
time that we were straying from one of the
basic premises of our country-namely, that
the people, if given the facts, are capable of
reaching sound conclusions. The lack of
distribution of such facts and the misrepre-
sentation of information given us, as seems
so common in Washington these days, is
greatly disturbing. If our governmental
leaders have assumed this premise to be
partially or totally false then we are living
in something other than a free country.
It was gratifying to hear you during your
recent appearance in Portland for many rea-
sons, the above included. I, in general, sup-
port your views on the Vietnam situation
and appreciate your honesty in discussing
the various aspects involved. A valid con-
clusion cannot possibly be drawn from in-
correct information. I find It easier to ac-
cept your statements than those of our pres-
ent administration.
Sincerely yours,
DENNIS GOULD.
PORTLAND, OREG.,
April 14, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: We want to thank
you for sending us your news reports these
past few years.
Your stand on the Vietnam situation is to
be commended. We have no business being
involved there; It would be better to "lose
face" and get out of there before we stir up
more trouble & promote an all-out war.
We have always admired your great states-
manship & will continue to supoprt you with
our votes & prayers. Keep up the good work.
Our new mailing address is above. Our
last address was 1108 S. Pine St., Newport,
Oreg.
Sincerely yours,
RICHARD B. BAKER.
VIOLET I. BAKER.
PORTLAND, OREG.,
April 22, 1965.
Hon. WAYNE L. MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
My DEAR SENATOR: I should like to express
to you my personal support and admiration
for your stand on our U.S. policy in Vietnam.
What can yet be done, and how can we
citizens help?
Sincerely,
ANDRE DIACONOFF,
Minister of Cherry Park Community
Church (Sweden-Corgian).
PORTLAND, OREG.,
April 28, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
Deeply concerned about unrealistic at-
tempted explanation South Vietnam war.
Using methods that have , consistently
brought us into former wars. Our great
President gave courageous speech and action
in civil rights. Why directly contradictory
principles in South Asia?
H. W. HEBBLETHWAITE.
EUGENE, OREG.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: We heard your mar-
velous speech Friday April 23 in the Erb Stu-
dent Union. For once I was proud of my
country-after so much mish-mosh on radio
and TV. It was a real relief to my soul to
hear plaintalk, blunt talk and hard talk
about our U.S. policy in Vietnam.
Such fairy tales are presented in our pa-
pers that I just don't buy the paper any
more. But I will buy today's and see if the
all night vigil and its many fine participants
won't get Eugene on the move.
Yours with thanks for the fine job you
are doing for us.
Mrs. JEANNE KENYON.
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP671~00446R000300150003-0
 9552
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
CONGRESSIONAL,RECOR.D - SENATE May 7, 1965
EUGENE, OREG.,
, April 25? 1965.
told, are now urging all members to write
to the President in his support.
A local newspaper column, conducted by
George Todt In the Los Angeles Herald-Ex-
aminer, today comes out for support of the
President, I am enclosing the article for
your reference. It was clipped from page
C-3, issue of April 27. Tedt has consistently
supported all Birch candidates and. has
praised the patriotism of Birch members.
He favors Joe Shell (a defeated Republican
candidate) on all issues. He opposes Sena-
tor KUCHEL. He attacked Rockefeller day
after day for his leftwing radicalism. He
hopes to elect Ronald Reagan as U.S. Senator
in place of Senator KUCHEL. I cite this since
you may have not way of placing Todt. I
am sending a copy to Senator KucHEL who
knows Todt's work and can read the column
for himself.
While it would be. an oversimplification to
say that what the Birch Society wants is
automatically wrong, there is enough truth
in such an idea to give some of us courage
to speak up In the Vietnam situation.
As you well know, Americans are very un-
popular around the world. It hurts to have
one's foreign host explain to other guests
that although you are an American, you are
not typical-that you are in fact reasonable.
This is what our present policies (supposedly
based on the Truman doctrine) have done
for us.
I believe with Walter Lippmann that we
can oppose any popular uprising anywhere
on the grounds that we do so for the con-
tainment of communism-whether such is
the case or not-and end up being right.
For, as he says, wherever we move in force
we shall attract Communist opposition.
Even more unpopular than Americans in
Asia are,the Chinese. This is nothing new.
Any half-educated person knows that the
Chinese have been hated for generations. No
Vietnam government would dare (up until
now) to Invite the Chinese In. Our conduct
in Vietnam promises, however, to change all
this.
Secretary Rusk in attempting to strengthen
his position spoke of the Ethiopian war and
the Japanese war in Manchuria-apparently
for the purpose of getting across the idea
that we should have intervened. However, it
did not come out that way in our press.
Instead it reminded persons of my age of the
aggression and made us think of our own
position in such terms. I cannot, as an
American put on paper what I truly mean.
It is too humiliating.
The Rusk position that to end the war
would invite the loss ofall Asia to the Com-
munists is of course wrong. The opposite is
true. Our warlike posture will throw one
country after another into the hands of those
who oppose us. If we would take to helping
countries throw out their crooked leaders and
with neutral help offer guidance (not a carrot
in one hand and a stick in the other), we
could be heroes and not villians.
I beseech you to keep up your good work
and I pray that you will find the health and
energy to do so.
Yours very truly,
Fashion Square. This is a live wire group
headed by attractive Mrs. Lee Gregory.
In the process of my talk before the GOP
ladies, I made it clear that in my opinion
President Lyndon B. Johnson (a Democrat)
is eminently correct regarding his present
policy of carrying the war home to North
Vietnam, via aerial bombing.
There is no absolute guarantee of success
in any conceivable form of action in this
area. But the bombing raids ordered by
L.B.J. are proving costly to the instigators of
aggression in the north. 'What will they do?
That much remains to be seen-but we
are no longer a "paper tiger."
A LAUGHINGSTOCK
If we back down now, as many perhaps-
well-intentioned appeasers and pacifists
would have us do, we would become quickly
the laughtingstock of Asia. And likely
ultimately, the whole world, too, Why give
away our marbles?
Another interesting question might be as
to why all. these weird marches and student
sitdowns are directed monotonously at our
Government, instead of the offensive Reds?
They are to blame for the present trouble.
Aren't they?
Why are such voices of protest aimed only
at the Government of the one nation which
bears the brunt of championing the cause
of the free world against the ominous threat
of Communist global slavery? Why us?
Hmm?
NOT ORGANIZED
I believe that what has happened in the
American Republic today is simply a case of
excessive leftwing organization and not
enough organization of those people who
believe thoroughly in our libertarian cause.
The overwhelming percentage of our citi-
zenry, including students, is in the later
camp, although they have largely been out-
shouted by organized militant minorities ex-
ploited by leaders out in left field. Apathy
can be extremely dangerous.
What we must do soon in our country is
organize countermovements against those
launched by questionable or Red-tinged
sources. It will take time and hard work.
But the decent and truly moderate people
must be heard from, too.
As an example, what could be done on a
down-to-earth scale to counteract the harm-
ful influence of 15,000 "beat the draft" stu-
dent types that besieged the White House re-
cently in a vain and disgraceful effort to
cause L.B.J. to withdraw from Vietnam?
The Republican ladies I mentioned earlier
in the column took an exemplary action after
I finished talking to them in Sherman Oaks.
They unanimously, passed a resolution to
send President Johnson a telegram, with all
their names attached as Republicans, letting
him know they were 100 percent behind him
in his Vietnamese policy and to keep up his
courageous fight.
Let me suggest that m,~ readers take pen
in hand now and complete the same kind of
action to L.B.J. White House, Washington,
D.C.
Let us encourage him for doing what is
difficult-but right-in Vietnam,
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I want to congratu-
late you on the excellent speech you gave at
the University of Oregon on Friday.
Though generally favorable to your point of
view on Vietnam, I had not, understood the
whole structure of your arguments until
Men. You are to be commended for speak-
ing up on this issue before" the rest of us,
and I hope you continue to do so.
Sincerely yours,
ARTHUR , CURTIS,
Graduate Student in History,
P.S.-And thanks - for coming_ to Eugene
just for our meeting.
WALTERVILLE, OREG.,
April 26, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: We wish to let you know
we are with you in your protests against our
action in Vietnam. We do not like the brain-
washing President Johnson and his aids are
trying to give the people. Anyone with any
sense at all would know this is all wrong
and can only lead to a world disaster.
Please advise me if there is anything we
can do to try to stop this before It is too
late. I can get many, many signatures on
a letter of protest if you think it would do
any good. To whom would I address it?
We are Democrats, but I don't think Gold-
water could have done, much worse.
Sincerely,
MARGARET RAE JONES.
PS.-The following people who live close
concur In this: Mr. and Mrs. Carl V. Wilson,
Walterville;. Rose Wilson, Walterville; Jim E.
Jones, Walterville; Mr. and Mrs. William C.
La Shot, Walterville; Carl Wilson, Sr., Wal-
terviile; and Nir. and Mrs. Ted D. Phibbs,
Myrtle Creek.
HAROLD J. SCHULMAN ASSOCIATES, INC.,
Chicago, 111, April 30, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
$ONORABLE SIR: Just a word of encourage-
merit and heartfelt thanks for courageous
actions you are taking in trying to bring
this country back to a path of peace and
justice.
We were searching for the name of the
man who could be the fit subject for a "Pro-
file In Courage" in a future TV program.
And your name- is the only one we could
think of.
Our thanks and prayers go with you.
Sincerely,
HAROLD J. SCHULMAN..
Los ANGELES, CALIF.,
April 27, 1965.
IIUM. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: I am a Republican who
voted for Rockefeller in our primary and
then cast my vote for President Johnson, al-
though not with any strong conviction. You
might rather say I voted against Goldwater
(not as a man but as a puppet of the radical
right).
I want you to know that I support your
position in our war against Vietnam. I also
believe it Is illegal, unmoral, and reflects
godlessness. Igo a bit further. I fear it re-
fleets military thinking based on training
which has exulted Prussian (or Nazi or what-
soever) military tactics.
I am not a letter writer but today I feel
impelled to give you a bit of disheartening
news. The Birch Society groups, I have been
[From the Los Angeles (Calif.) Herald-
Examiner, Apr. 27, 1985]
L.B.J. NEEDS OUR HELP
(By George Todt)
"Light is the task when many share the
toil.'"-Homer, "Illiad."
Whether we are Democrats or Republicans
is not nearly so important as to rise above
party considerations and stand for what is
best where our beleagured Republic of the
United States may be concerned.
Recently I addressed the San Fernando
Valley Republican Business & Professional
Women's Club In Sherman Oaks at Bullock's
NEW YORK, N.Y.,
May 5, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
As active members in the democratic and
as firm believers in democracy we support
your stand and your statement on the for-
eign policy of the United States.
Mr. and Mrs. SAM SHAIM.
CAPITOLA, CALIF,
May 5,1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE.
DEAR SENATOR: I wish to highly com?
mend you for your long and consistent stand
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
May 7, 1965 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
for negotiation, withdrawal; and peace In with China.
Vietnam.
In the recent call for an international con-
ference which failed to materialize, the NLF
of South Vietnam was not included. It
seems to me that could be the chief reason
why the proposed conference did not meet.
The; evidence shows that only recently any
substantial support in men and arms have
been received by the NLF of South Vietnam.
These are the people we are fighting and
should be represented in any conference.
The rightful experiences of the Vietnamese
people as a whole for an interminable time
should spur us to the conference table if we
have any humanity left.
Copy of this letter has been sent to the
President.
Yours sincerely,
DUNCAN MCINTYRE.
Subject: Vietnam.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: What's the use. I've
written my Senators and Representatives in
Washington protesting against our presence
in Vietnam but what happens? Nothing.
Yourself, Senator GRUENING, of Alaska,
CHURCH, of Idaho and a few others have the
courage to speak out. I've followed a good
many of your speeches which are reprinted
in the Post-Dispatch and agree with every-
thing you say. The attached letter could just
as well have been written by myself. I too,
voted for L.B.J. but am I ever sorry. What
is left for the voter? We are asked to do
our duty and vote but a deal such as this is
no encouragement.
Now It's the Dominican Republic. Who
next? Are we supposed to force our politics
down the throats of people all over the
world?
Perhaps if you receive many letters like
mine it may do some good but I doubt
it.
Sincerely,
ALBERT J. MILLER.
GAINESVILLE, MO.
P.S.-World War II veteran.
[From the St. Louis (Mo.) Post-Dispatch,
Apr. 29, 19851
A READER DISENCHANTED
May I propose the formation of the Legion
of the Disenchanted? Membership require-
ments: Simply a sense of betrayal and some
nausea among those who voted with some
enthusiasm for L.B.J. Be betrayed those of
us when he promised: "No war," and who can
help a feeling of nausea when reading or
hearing those mealy-mouthed, sanctimo-
nious, Bible-quoting statements of "love,"
"justice," "brotherhood," etc., by a man who
unleashes escalation of a war in which we
have no business and no just cause?
And behold this humble, God-fearing man.
He gets piqued at the Prime Minister of
Canada, piqued at Shastri, piqued at Paki-
stan, and rudely brushes aside the advice of
7 Thant. Get out of the way, you little crit-
ers; we have the planes; the bombs, the
hips, and the napalm, so don't butt in while
,e settle this our way. Later, we can talk of
m among nations, of the importance of the
.N., of the sanctity of treaties, of the horrors
'war, of our unalterable devotion to peace;
ter, boys, later-now we are too busy show-
g how mighty we are.
Could Goldwater have been a little right?
did call L.B.J. a "faker." Likely, he knew
:n better than we- did. My son came of
ding age last September. He asked my ad-
e: I said: "Do not vote for the man who
ties the qq e,." So he voted for the man
o is now dropping the bombs around the
,k and is headed in the direction of war
DISENCHANTED.
SACRAMENTO, CALIF.,
April 30,1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: Iwish to express my apprecia-
tion as an American citizen who believes in
the rule of the Constitution rather than
decree for your fearless stand on Vietnam.
No occidental can understand the mind of
the oriental. We cannot buy friendship
aRd we are wrong in trying to force these
oriental primitives into our form of gov-
ernment. They have not evolved of this
point yet.
Your stand on this matter and your cour-
age in speaking out deserves praise.
All of your remarks are true.
Take care of yourself and may God bless
you and guide you always.
LEXINGTON, S.C.,
May 4, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Please get out of
Vietnam and stop that bombing before World
War III gets started.
sincerely,
Mr. and Mrs. THOMAS E. Sox.
9553
policy in southeast Asia. In addition; I look
forward to hearing what you will have to say
about the administration's current adven-
tures in the Dominican Republic.
You will surely be remembered as a voice
of candor In an era when real debate is being
snuffed out by consensus..
Yours gratefully,
P. W. ANDERSON.
WATERTOWN HIGH SCHOOL,
Watertown, N.Y., May 2, 1965.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I wholeheartedly
support your admirable effort to clarify the
facts and reveal the dangers of our present
policy concerning Vietnam. It seems appar-
ent that the American public has been mis-
informed and even purposely deceived by
most of the mass media. Certainly both the
State and Defense Departments must shoul-
der much of the blame for this. The inevi-
table consequences of this practice of self-
delusion can lead only to the slow erosion
of our vitality as a free nation. It is regret-
ful that only a few other Senators have had
the courage to speak out against such an un-
justifiable misuse of power.
The current involvement of the United
States in Santo Domingo is also appalling
and entirely inconsistent with the ideals for
which this country stands. I hope you will
point out that U.S. Intervention in the in-
ternal affairs of any Latin American country
beyond protecting the lives of our citizens
in time of danger 1s both contrary to inter-
national law and Pan American relations.
Sincerely yours,
J. BRUCE DUDLEY.
SYDNEY, N.S.W., AUSTRALIA,
April 30, 1965.
DEAR SIR: May I, as a British subject, tem-
porarily residing in Australia, say thank
goodness there are such men as you, and
Senators FULBRIGHT, MANSFIELD, GORE, and
GRUENING, in the United States.
It is men like you who help restore one's
flagging faith in the basic goodness of your
great country.
I utterly deplore the Australian Govern-
ment's decision to send troops to Vietnam.
But I'm not Australian.
Nevertheless, that is not to say that I'm
at all happy about my own Prime Minister,
Mr. Harold Wilson's role, regarding Vietnam.
I admire the man greatly, supporting many
of his policies, but not the one on Vietnam.
At least, he has sent no troops in. Let us
hope he keeps it that way.
Good luck, and God support you and the
above-mentioned Senators.
Yours faithfully,
G. A. ATHANS.
EAST HAVEN, CONN.,
May 3, 1965.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: You have done a
valiant job of alerting the American people
to the dangers of their Government's policy
in southeast Asia. At a time when very few
people were concerned with this problem, you
s ke out. Your action was in the finest
tradition of an elected representative: you
led rather than followed at a time when it
was far from popular to do so. Nor that your
position is yet popular, for we are still in
great danger-but you are no longer alone.
A great many people, including myself, have
come to see the futility of continued war in
Vietnam-and we applaud your continued
dedication to finding solutions for this prob-
lem.
DANIEL W. CROFTS.
BOSTON, MASS.,
May 3, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Please keep up your
efforts to bring legitimacy to our foreign
STONY POINT, N.Y.,
May 2, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: We wish to make
known to you our admiration, our gratitude,
and our continued support for your position
on Vietnam.
It is our belief that our foreign policy
Is fast becoming as ludicrous and unpopular
at home as it is abroad. We trust that you
will continue to voice your logical and
humane opposition, even though you may
at the present time be Isolated.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
LEO F. and MARY W. KOCH.
Copies to: President Johnson, Secretary of
State Rusk, and Ambassador Stevenson.
SARASOTA, FLA.,
May 2, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: My strong feeling is
that you are entitled to all the moral support
you can be given in your stand on the war in
Vietnam. I have again written the President
and Dean Rusk in a way that respects them,
and their good intentions; but finding them
wrong. Perhaps I may have felt too strongly
over too much of time recent. This is partly
for confession to you. For one, I have never
seen any future in fighting ideas with a stick,
feel that after the war we wilted before an
anti-Communist barrage, and that this has
made enemies for us among distant peoples
where it.may have been unnecessary to do
that.
It seems to go back to the time when we
continued support of Chaing Kai-shek after
it became clear that he could not lead China.
Of course I feel very contrary to fighting
communism without U.N. support, and be-
ginning it at the antipodes. I feel that our
,Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 9554
Approved For Release 2003/10/44: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
present policy overlooks the tendency of Com-
munlsts'> when left alone, to become some-
what livable with or at.,1east less fiery in
Criticism of us and more Aware of the simple
needs of their own people-including in those
needs not only more consumer,. goods and a
certain amount of. the co> xnoa freedoms but
some "capitalistic country" features in their
system. I might possibly go too far for you
on some of this. I don't know.
I feel sure we have been wrong in keeping
real China out of the U.N.., No other place for
them to go to school wit4 others. It seems
as if we might be immensely better off right
now if they could be reached as members.
The sooner they get to flting their natural
problems at home and pearby, instead of
having us for a foreign devil, the better--one
feels. I am of course vegy particularly and
anxiously behind you now in the effort to
keep from extending the war in Vietnam.
You awakened me to the point about using
gas in war.
An old schoolteacher, more or less like
yourself.
SIDNEY S. ROBINS.
OCCIDENTAL LIM INSURANCE CO..,
Senator W. MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
Olf CALIFORNIA,
May 3 1965.
DEAR SENATOR: It is not psual for me..to be
stirred sufficiently to write to anyone about
the world situation, but I consider the prob-
lem In Vietnam so grave that I have taken
the liberty of writing the President.
I would like you to know that in spite of
the lukewarm appearance of the Canadian
Government in this regard there are Canadi-
an's who care very much about the survival
of the human race and we wish you well on
your stand on Vietnam.
,I sincerely hope that enough voices will be
raised in the United States and elsewhere
to persuade the administration that its for-
eign policy should be radically altered and
that the only hope for the survival of the-
world is negotiation and the belief in the rea-
sonableness of all men.
Yours truly,
DE' Is KAL1}MAre,
*ranch Manager.
MAY 3, 1965.
White HouseWashington, D.C.
DEAR MR. PRESIDENT I know that I ani only
one voice among millions, but I hope that I
am one of millions to express to you the
following views:
The human race has nevgr before possessed
the power to completely destroy itself and
its environment. Therefore, the waging of
even a limited war is no longer a feasible
answer to present to those whose ideas, and
Ideals may conflict with ours. Our only path
has to be negotiation. Our only hope is the
belief in the reasonableness of all men,.
I urge you to put an end to the Vietnam
conflict by withdrawing now, before the whole
thing escalates into adisaster where nothing
will matter anymore. This is the only sane
solution to the problem, and i am moved all
the more strongly to write because i am ex-
tremely disappointed in the lack of clear
voice from the Canadian _-0overnment..
I know that Senators MORSE, GRUENING,
and"CHURCH are urging you to do the same
as this letter and I am also writing them to
encourage them to continue their attempt
to influel7.ce you in this matter.
In closing,I would like to emphasize that
this is the first time that, I have ever been
moved sufficiently to write to a head of state.
I sincerely believe that today's world sltu-
ation may be more complex and serious than
your advisers realize.
Yours truly,
Copy to: Senators W.
and F. CHURCH.
Senator WAYNE ,MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
bENIS KALMAN.
MORSE, E. GRUENING,
DEAR SENATOR Moasr: I send you once again
my congratulations for your continuing stand
on Vietnam. You have my every good wish.
Also, I wish to register my protest for U.S.
actions in the Dominican Republic. Such ill-
advised unilateral action reveals the lack of
maturity in foreign policy that has plagued
our country and the world for so many years.
I urge you to do all in your power to rein-
state the U.S. Senate as"an active partner in
the formulation of U.S. foreign policy. I am
unhappy, as I am sure you are, with the cur-
rent arrangement wherein the Senate is pre-
sented a fait accompli and then has the un-
comfortable task of supporting an unfortu-
nate position merely because a crisis situation
seems to offer no alternatives. This unsatis-
factory arrangement could not continue
without passive Senate approval.
I maintain that many of our interna-
tional problems stem in large part from this
Government's internal structure as operative
today.
I commend this area to your attention.
Yours truly,
WILLIAM C. MOYER.
EAST LANSING, MICH.,
May 3, 1965.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I fully agree with
your attitude toward the conflict in Viet-
nam, and believe a peaceful settlement should
and could be worked out, possibly in con-
formity with the Geneva agreement of 1954.
It is of the utmost importance, I feel, at
this crisis-ridden time that our country re-
spond with political maturity rather than
force to those peoples of the world who may
not share our views, but are 9s inhibited to
their own as we are to ours.
Sincerely yours,
Mrs. THOMAS WALLACE.
MONTEREY, CALIF.,
May 1, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: May I please tell
you how much my wife and I agree with
your sensemaking proposals regarding Viet-
nam.
I thought the enclosed advertisement,
taken out by the Friends Committee on Leg-
islation, might interest you.
Respectfully yours,
SCOTT A. HEATH.
MR. PRESIDENT: THE WAR CONTINUES
Though we approve your excellent pro-
posal of a billion dollars for the develop-
ment of the Mekong River Valley, your words
are made 'meaningless by each raid that
sends our jets with tons of bombs and
napalm spilling over North and South
Vietnam.
You have said, "It is a war of unparalleled
brutality * * * small and helpless villages
are ravaged by sneak attacks, large raids
are conducted on towns and terror strikes
in the hearts of cities." .
You have said you will negotiate uncon-
ditionally with any government.
You have said, "The guns and bombs, the
rockets and warships are all symbols of hu-
man failure.
human folly."
May 7, 1965
Why continue the bombing,
napalm, the indiscriminate
women and children?
the use of
killing of
Why exclude the National Liberation
Front which is fighting the "governments"
we support in South Vietnam and which
is the de facto gove nment of more than
one-half of South Vietnam's territory and
people?
We agree, it is tragic folly.
Why continue a war and a policy which
sinks us in ever deeper and tends to create
an atmosphere which precludes negotiations?
When so many experts (among them U
Thant, Hans Morgenthau, Walter Lippmarm)
have pointed out that the military approach
produces results exactly opposite to those we
wish, why continue and intensify the war?
Secretary General U Thant, speaking of
insurgency in Burma in 1948, recently
stated:
"The Burmese Government dealt with this
internal problem by its own means, without
asking for any outside military assistance
* * * [and] there has not been a single In-
stance of outside help to the Burmese Com-
munists * * * In the last 17 years * It *
Burma has over 1,000 miles of land frontier
with mainland China. If only the Burmese
Government had decided at some stage to
seek outside military assistance to suppress
the Internal insurrections and revolts, then
I am sure that Burma would have experi-
enced one of the two alternatives: either the
country would be divided into two parts or
the whole country would have become Com-
munist long ago * * *. Not one American
life has been lost in Burma. Not one Amer-
ican dollar has been spent in the form of
military assistance * * *. We must ask the
great question: Why?"
Are you committing our young men to
murderous attrition in a ground war which
may last a generation? Are you going to
make the fatal mistake of bombing China?
The Religious Society of Friends have tra-
ditionally rejected war for any reason. A
modern expression of this position is found
in the United Nations Charter which says,
"All members shall refrain in their interna-
tional relations from the threat or use of
force against the territorial integrity or po-
litical independence of any state, or in any
other manner inconsistent with the purposes
of the United Nations."
And yet the war still goes on. You can
stop it.
We respectfully recommend:
1. An immediate end, to the bombing.
2. No more U.S. troops be sent to South
Vietnam.
3. The United States call for a 4-week
truce and an invitation to all concerned to
bring about negotiations for a peaceful
settlement.
4. Negotiations which include:
(a) Provisions for peaceful settlement of
future differences in Asia by establishing
working relationships which include the
the United States, all Asian nations and the
U.N.
(b) A phased withdrawal of United State
and all other outside forces from Sout:
Vietnam with full recognition and willing?
ness to accept the results of free election
5. The immediate implementation of yoi
proposal for a billion-dollar U.S. grant fS
economic aid to southeast Asia under U.
auspices.
6. No withdrawal of aid, even if the voti:
should go against us.
We can win with aid and peace what
cannot win by war.
Write a letter to President Johnson a
to Senators KUGHEL and MURPHY, and to yc
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67BOO446ROO0300150003-0
 Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67800446R000300150003-0
May 7, 1965 . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-.SENATE
Congressmen expressing your concern about
the Vietnam war.
FRIENDS COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATION,
ROBERT GRUNSTED, Chairman,
ROBERT MANIC, Executive Secretary.
2160 Lake Street,
San Francisco, Calif.
^ I wish additional copies of this ad at:
10 copies 25 cents; 60 copies $1.
13 I enclose $ to cover the cost of this.
ad.
Name ---------------------------- ---
Address ---------------------------------
City ------------------- State ----------?
Submitted as a public service by the
Friends Committee on Legislation.,
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
The Senate,
Washington, D.C.
MONT tuL,
April 1, 1965.
MEDFORD, Was.,
April 29, 1965.
9555
LABINDUSTRIES,
Berkeley, Calif., May 3, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. MORSE: We deplore our immoral
military invasions of Vietnam and of the
Dominican Republic, entered into in the
name of anticommunism. Our Nation is be-
coming the most hated nation on the face
of this earth. In our evangelical zeal for
democracy-or is it power-we are sacrificing
all devotion to human principles. We are
sacrificing the lives Of thousands in a false
crusade.
We urge you to continue your campaign in
the name of all human decency and to use
your influence to get us out of Vietnam and
to abandon military intervention in the
Dominican Republic.
Very truly yours,
MARION H. SHAPIRO, Coowner.
PHILADELPHIA, PA.,
Senator WAYNE MORSE, May 2,1965.
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
We want to let you know that we support
your fight for an end to the war in Vietnam.
We wish that more of our leaders felt like
you.
Sincerely yours,
Mr. and Mrs. MICHAEL SH.OLEN.
Vice President HUBERT H. HUMPHREY,
Capitol Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. VICE PRESIDENT: An old warrior,
Senator WAYNE MORSE, spoke very true words
when he criticized the Secretaries of Defense
and State and demanded their Ouster.
I agree with that old warrior because I
have become alarmed at the dangerous
growth of the power of the military in the
United States.
I agree too because, as the old warrior
pointed out, McNamara is consistently
wrong. As far as Secretary Husk is con-
cerned-who cares? He is virtually ineffec-
tual and has abdicated to the Secretary of
Defense anyway.
I call for the ouster of Secretaries Mc-
Namara and Rusk. I call for the appoint-
ment of J. W. FULBRIGHT as Secretary of State
and Clark Kerr as Secretary of Defense.
I call for the removal of General Taylor
from his position as Ambassador (a mis-
nomer for a post more akin to Governor
General) and the appointment of a promi-
DEAR Sin: The eyes of the people of 99 na-
tions look upon you, their ears listen to your
eloquence, and their hopes rise for the sur-
vival of the human race and the alleviation
of the suffering of the peasants of Vietnam.
Many must be the pressures brought to
bear on you to toe the line of the present
administration; constancy and a great cour-
age must be yours to withstand them. May
you somehow feel the desire of thousands of
humble people around the world-although
of less courage and eloquence-to be by your
side to give you added strength to uphold
those principles, which you have so ably
fought for.
May your voice and those of your courage-
ous compatriots (Senators GRUENING, FUL-
BRIGHT, JAVrrs, MCGOVERN, and CHURCH) be
persuasive enough to turn President Johnson
away from the course set by such evil coun-
selors as McNamara, Rusk, McGeorge Bundy,
General Taylor, and their like in the Penta-
There must be much sadness in the hearts
of many young Americans who have been
shipped off to Vietnam to fight in a war of
which they understand little, and to be called
upon to commit acts of barbarism with the
horrible weapons that modern science has
fabricated.
Robbie Burns' poem "Man Was Made to
Mourn" comes to mind:
"And man, whose heaven-erected face
The smiles of love adorn-
Man's inhumanity to man
Makes countless thousands mourn I"
The respect and gratitude'of many thou-
sands around the world muse be yours. May
your efforts and those of your friends divert
the course of events away from a path that
could eventually lead to the extinction of
mankind, and upward to the day,
"When man to man the world o'er
Shall brothers be for a' that."
With deep admiration,
ALLAN. FINDLAY.
MEDFORD, Wis.,
s Vi etnam ' April 29, 1965.
.
orator WAYNE MORSE,
nate Office Building,
Ishington, D.C.
TEAR SENATOR MORSE: Congratulations on
Ir wonderfrl and courageous demand for
+ ouster of Secretaries Rusk and Mc-
nara.
support you all the way on this. A copy
my latest letter, to the Vice President is
losed.
on't stop. Give em hell, more hell and
1 some more hell.
Yours truly,
nent nonmilitary Hawaiian of oriental
heritage to that position.
And just in case you or your office staff are
going to send me another release which, in
effect, tells me to be more loyal to my coun-
try, I just want to point out that I am a
paratrooper veteran of the 82d Airborne
Division, U.S. Army, and no public official is
going to insinuate, directly or indirectly, that
I am of doubtful loyalty mcre than once and
get my vote the next time around.
I will continue to support Johnson and
HUMPHREY, but Taylor, Rusk, and McNamara
must go. This trio of tragic efficiency ex-
perts has been so consistently wrong on
Vietnam that I cannot for the life of me
understand how they continue to have
weight as Presidential advisers.
And last but not least, I should point out,
as a makeweight, that I am the only Demo-
cratic attorney in this county of 19,000 in
north-central Wisconsin. I don't think the
administration realizes how the tide of pub-
lic opinion is moving on Vietnam.
Yours truly,
Roy T. TRAYNOR.
..~ MAY 3, 1965.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Please, please, please,
don't allow your voice and conscience to be
silenced as concerns Vietnam. There must
be some sane voices left to speak out against
the mad policies that our President and his
policymakers are forcing upon the public.
As it is, the press seems to have fallen di-
rectly in line behind the "hawk" propagan-
dists.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
PALO ALTO, CALIF.,
May 2, 1965.
DEAR SIR: Even without the facts sup-
posedly held by the Departments of Defense
and State, it is obvious. that our foreign
policy as to Vietnam is bankrupt. The course
being followed is one of mistake compounded
by tragedy. How long can we afford to
continue?
I urge you, as a courageous Senator, who
has demonstrated in the past the courage to
dissent from prevailing political opinion,
to continue to speak out'in thoughtful op-
position to the present course of events.
Your voice is needed if the current policy is
to be reevaluated. The crisis is now. Wise
men cannot remain silent.
Respectfully,
JAMES J. NOVEkLI.
President LYNDON JOHNSON,
The White House,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR PRESIDENT JOHNSON: A little more
than a week ago I wrote to you and said, in
part, "I protest in the strongest way possible
the escalation of the war in Vietnam. I ad-
vocate the immediate cessation of hostili-
ties. The weapons of war being used by our
troops and airmen are inhuman. Phospho-
rus and napalm and dart-scattering bombs
are bringing down upon us hatred and con-
tempt. They are not winning the war; they
are losing us the world." I continued, ask-
ing for an immediate cease-fire and actual,
active opening of negotiations, a difficult task
but one we cannot put off.
I deleted from that letter most of the fol-
lowing statements, which I now send, for I
cannot In conscience refrain from voicing the
sentiments the deleted sentences contain.
"Most of my friends and acquaintances feel
as I do. You are losing the trust and sup-
port of the one group that is essential to your
continuance as an effective President, the
liberals, the presidentmakers in many a past
election. I would not have voted for you had
I known you were a warmonger. I will not
vote for you again unless you show that the
Christianity you profess is a reality to you.
The Vietnam war is canceling every wonder-
ful accomplishment of your remarkable and
productive term as President of the United
States."
Since that earlier letter you have invaded
the Dominican Republic in order to crush
the successful and democratic revolution in
progress there. Juan Bosch is not and never
was a Communist. Most of his revolution-
aries are not and never were Communists.
You are using this civil strife, in my opin-
ion, as an excuse to restore to power the
military and economically powerful reac-
tionaries who, 2 years ago, overthrew the first
democratically elected government the Dom-
inican Republic has had since the United
States last invaded their country and forci-
bly upheld a repulsive dictatorship.
I repeat from my last letter: I am a white,
53-year-old woman, a lifelong Democrat, and
up-to now, proud of it. I am more sorry than
ever that President Kennedy was murdered.
Unless something brings you to the realiza-
tion that your actions are endangering the
Approved For Release 2003/10/14 :'CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 9556
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE May 7, 1965
world and destroying the good name of the
United States, we are in terrible danger in-
deed.
Sincerely,
ROBERTA N. GOODRICH.
MANHATTAN, KANS.,
May 3, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE.
Bravo. How desparately we need your voice
of sanity. Keep it up.
Sincerely,
Mr. and Mrs, ERNEST GOERTZEN.
ITHACA, N.Y.,
May 2, 1965.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE : This is to express to
you my gratitude and admiration for the
honest and courageous position you have
taken on the recent turn of events in the
Vietnam war. It has been practically your
voice alone out of all those emerging from
Washington which has left me with the feel-
ing that there is anybody at all left in the
Government with any decency, honor, or
commonsense.
I want to assure you of my warm and ad-
miring support, and to express my confident
hope that you will continue to act as the
voice of good sense until the administration
regains theirs.
Sincerely yours,
N. DAVID MERMIN.
CHARLESTON, W. VA.,
May 1,1965.
DEAR SENATOR: Your address on the floor
of the Senate last week was very Impressive.
We are deeply concerned about ' Johnson's
present policy on Vietnam. Your thinking
as expressed on TV last week with refer-
ence to southeast Asia makes sense. Your
party crucified Goldwater with the 'appella-
tion of "trigger happy." And as he stated 4n
Paris a few days ago: "Now you're a states-
man when you do that." Add to our south-
east Asia headaches we are fighting in the
Dominican Republic. Why must we try to
keep peace in every country in the world?
We are afraid your party is leading us down
the road to destruction.
W. S. BEECHART.
EVANSVILLE, IND.,
May 'I, 1.965.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEARSENATOR MORSE: I feel sure I speak as
one among many when I say that your ef-
forts in behalf of world peace are appre-
ciated.
May you continue to receive courage and
strength for the great work you are doing.
Sincerely yours,
Mr. and Mrs. GEORGE HESSENAVER.
RIDLEY PARK, PA.,
May 3, 1965.
any U.S. soldier. But I can't stomach Viet-
nam; it's not worth a single soldier's life.
It's ideological, not a vital U.S. interest.
Playing footsie with Goldwaterites is no way
for the administration to hold my loyalty, a
loyalty to the Democratic Party of 30 years.
What's happened to the President? Now
Santo Domingo. It's nuts, plain nuts. I
can't understand it-interfering with other
people's rights, including the right of revo-
lution, a right proclaimed in our Declaration
of Independence.
Please keep sounding off.
the Democratic lawyers committee. I gave
you and other Democratic candidates my
time because I believed what you were saying
in your campaign speeches about the role
of the United States in world affairs. I be-
lieved you when you condemned your op-
ponent for his willingness to go to war, and
commit American troops to fight for what
were at best dubious causes. Now it is he
who is gloating, and :i and many like me who
are disillusioned and apprehensive. Perhaps,
Mr. President, instead of Insulting the mem-
ory of your late and beloved predecessor by
oblique references to his rocking chair, you
would do well to sit in a rocking chair awhile
yourself and ponder where you are leading
this great Nation of ours. Ponder, Mr. Presi-
dent, just what has happened in the last 6
months. The great "detente" has been
shattered and the cold war rages hotter than
in the darkest days of Dulles and Vishinsky.
Our military leaders in Hawaii blithely talk
of using nuclear weapons against North
Vietnam and China. "Lazy Dog" bombs and
napalm obliterate the lives of those we claim
to be saving in the name of "freedom." In
Latin America, the hopes and aspirations of
a continent which were aroused by the Al-
liance for Progress have been dashed by our
brutal suppression of the Bosch rebellion.
Students are dying In the streets down there,
students like myself, whose only crime was
to take arms in the defense of democracy.
Why are we killing them, Mr. President?
Must people die because someone in the
State Department or CIA says if Bosch re-
turns to power he'll be soft on leftist ele-
ments in the country? A little reflection
would have told you that nothing would
help Castro more than our sending In the
Marines. Will we send the Marines into
Venezuela, Colombia, Brazil, and Argentina
in the name of freedom, too?
So I would ask you to sit in your rocking
chair with your hands crossed awhile and
ponder. Because the students in the
Dominican Republic and the peasants in
Vietnam don't have the votes to return you
to office, they're as much human beings
and their aspirations as noble as those poor
farmers in the Pedernales Valley you're so
BERKELEY, CALIF.,
May 4, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: We want you to know
we fully support you in the stand you have
taken in the Senate protesting the role of
the United States in Vietnam and In the
Dominican Republic. It takes great courage
to be in such a minority and to stand up for
the things you believe in.
We believe you will go down in history as
a true patriot and that time will show you
were right and that President Johnson and
his administration are doing incalculable
harm to this country and the world.
Our best wishes go to you In your coura-
geous fight and we hope many new voices
will be added to yours.
Sincerely,
Mr. and Mrs. GILBERT MINES.
PHILADELPHIA, PA.,
May 5, 1965.
Senator WAYNE L. MORSE,
The Capitol,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Dismayed by the re-
cent course of American foreign policy, I
have written a letter to the President today,
a copy of which is enclosed. You may use it
for any purposes you see fit. If nothing else,
take it as an expression of support for your
courageous and forthright opposition to those
policies. History will certainly remember you
well for the position you now take. You have
my deepest respect.
fond of.
Sincerely,
DETROIT, MICH.,
May 4, 1965.
University of Pennsylvania Law School.
Hon. LYNDONB. JOHNSON, .
The White House,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: I have been deeply
concerned for some time over the way in
which you have been conducting the foreign
affairs of my country. I believe the course
you are pursuing in Vietnam is completely
unjustifiable either from the standpoint of
international morality, which the United
States as the richest and most powerful na=
tion in the world Is obligated to uphold, or
from the standpoint of sheer "Machtpolitik".
You have, in the brief span of 6 months
since you no longer had to worry about
popular support for your policies, completely
undone all the good will and respect for this
country which your far more worthy pre-
decessor had diligently cultivated. You
have completely abandoned the noble idea
that my country must work to further
freedom and social Justice around the world,
and substituted a policy of gunboat di-
plomacy add military missile-rattling. I
am ashamed of you, Mr. President, and you
can not write me off as simply another of
those "beatnik-pacifists." I am a graduate
of Yale University and presently a student at
the University of Pennsylvania Law School.
Last fall I spent many hours working for
your election as a member of the Young
Democrats here atPenn and as a member of
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: I'm with you all the way
on this Vietnam bit. If there was some way
of getting Rusk and McNamara to resign, it
would be the best thing for our country.
Sincerely,
H. D. LECONRIGHT.
NEWPORT BEACH, CARTS.,
May2,1965.
MY DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I told my son, 22,
attending the University of California, to go
to jail 15efore being drafted for war in Viet-
nam.
I have been in two 'Wars in the Pacific. I
volunteered for Korea, where as a forward
observer during the actions of 1561 I was
instrudieiltaI in killiing naor"e Chinese than
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senator From Oregon.
SIR: I have no reason to hurt the Presi-
dent's feelings, but he classifies the war in
Indochine as a bully in a schoolyard. Well,
that sounds well enoughfor simple-minded
people and he may be one himself.
But it is purely a race war. The little
yellow men do not want white man's military
power in their own country.
President Johnson is leading our countr
into a mess that can end up to be worse tha.
Truman's Korea.
There seems to be no reaction from oi
military men. Are they even more simp
minded than Johnson?
It has now, after his death, it has be"
proven that General MacArthur was rea
and willing to have all our boys slaughterf
if he could bring military prestige to himsc
How different he was from General Wa:
ington or General Pershing.
We do not want any Hitlers or Napole"
in our country and. the Congress better w
up, as what Johnson talks about and w
he thinks about are very different deals.
President Johnson Is not a man of g:
experience, as he has been tied down
Washington, D.C., almost his whole li:fet:
His success, while it has given him a g
title, his own experience has been very
row and it surely has shown he has overr
himself a great deal.
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 May1 7, 1965 Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67 00446R000300150003-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD SENATE
And as. I said before, he looks at it as a terization of the conflict that rages in South
bully in a schoolyard. I had in my years as Vietnam. To insist that the war in Vietnam
a boy much experience with these bullies, is simply an instance of a greedy Communist
but I would not use that know-how in Indo- nation attacking its freedom-loving neigh-
china. bor-that the Vietcong are no more than
General de Gaulle well knows we are a agents of the North-is to preclude the pos-
bunch of fools trying to be a world police- sibility of meaningful negotiations. This
man. But, of course, he doesn't use tough view of the Vietnamese conflict may provide
words for us. He just says we will go it a rationale for our present policy of military
alone. I like any (swellhead, the White bombardment of North Vietnam, but it does
House) believes it, getting a bum deal. not enhance the likelihood of a satisfactory
President Wilson, no one knows just what settlement at the conference table. Nor does
his deal would have been like, if he had got bombing set an example of responsible inter-
it, but it would surely been a world police- national action we would expect other na-
man's deal as time went by. tions to follow. In the past some in the
There is so much loose talk about Chamber- United States have criticized the Chinese
lain Act, well those countries except Poland, Communist Government for attempting to
were easy 50-percent German. They were al- "shoot its way into the U.N." Are we now
ready in Hitler's pocket. Chamberlain gave attempting to shoot our way into a Vietnam
him nothing that he did not already have. conference? We oppose the violent tactics
But the dishonest story is great stuff for the adopted by all parties-acts of terrorism,
U.S. warmongers, the name Chamberlain ap- torture, napalm, and other bombings. Mass
pear with our General Washington at Valley violence must be foresworn by all parties so
Forge and also in Civil War of 1860. I can as to achieve the objective of protection of
prove it. In this world police idea, the great the Vietnamese people.
profits go to du Pont. Corp. and other war- Mr. President, we urge you to follow up
mongers. And whenever Johnson orders a your recent speech with unequivocal actions
shot fired, he does only one thing make war- in the interests of peace. The negative Com-
mongers rich. munist response to your proposals should not
This country can do no trading with Indo- dissuade you from this course. There are
china, as long as shooting is going on, and it definite indications that negotiations may
won't stop until we get out our military be possible if the United States matches .Sts
bases in the yellow man's country. expressions of willingness to negotiate with
What's going to happen when our buss- concrete manifestations of its desire to
nessmen wake up to our bum-steer Johnsoon achieve an honorable and realistic settle-
has cooked up for us, ment,
a
, Kenneth
Mr. Rusk talks school-boy stuff no buss- Senator FuLSRIGHT has suggested breaking Wodthke, Florence Yarnall, Gladys and
ness-man is going to believe his talk-ex- the present stalement by a brief pause in the Wilbur Zelinsky, Rima Zimmerman.
cept warmongers. aerial bombings of North Vietnam, challeng- This open letter has been sponsored and
I think Johnson is like old Bill Bryan, he ing the Communists to reciprocate by agree- paid for by the signers. It was written
talked too much never did any real thinking, fng to a conference while the Vietcong halts shortly after President Johnson's speech at
Yours, its military action in South Vietnam. This John Hopkins University. Subsequent
AN OLD TIMER. suggestion, which we commend to your at- events indicate that all the parties involved
tention, is only one of several alternatives in Vietn
am are maintainin thi
ger collision
STATE COLLEGE, PA? available to us if we are determined to main- course. Let us do all that we can to avert
May 4, 1965. tain the initiative for peace. We urge you, disaster.
DEAR MR MORSE: I a
Mr. President to:
l
m enc
osing a copf
y o, a recent open letter to President Johnson 1. Initiate actions leading to an immediate
which appeared in our local paper. I trust cease-fire and an eventual end to the hostil-
that it will confirm what I am cur" is very hies in Vietnam.
apparent to you; namely, that in your stand e' Support the establishment within South
on Vietnam you spear: for many Americans Vietnam of a government that is truly and
throughout this land. fairly representative of all the people.
Sincerely yours, 3. Support the establishment of a united
~( MARVIN E. RozEN. Vietnam through free elections, to be held
AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT JOHNSON ON under the auspices of the United Nations
VIETNAM within a reasonable time period.
We wish to commend and support '4. Help convene, upon the successful res-
We of those olution of the Vietnamese problem, a further
Parts your recent speech on Vietnam in conference to settle other international issues
Which you expressed a willingness to under- in Asia.
take unconditional discussions toward a To do all this, Mr. President, will not in-
peaceful settlement While engaging in a bold dicate weakness but rather the strength that
program, through the United Nations, of eco- flows from doing what is right and just. Can
'iomic development. We are troubled, how- the ingenuity we now lavish on waging war
our, by other views in your speech which, be put at the disposal of peace? Is it too
f unchanged, will surely jeopardize +v e
We do not believe that the history of the
ietnamese war begins in 1966 with the cre-
:ion of a sovereign and independent state
South Vietnam. Does not the present
nfliet have its roots in the efforts of a sub-
gated people to overthrow their French
lonial rulers? Does it not draw sustenance
en the failure to bold, and our complicity
'rein, free elections in all of Vietnam, as
wided by the Geneva accords of 1954.
3essed with the threat of communism, did
not intervene in w fundamentally civil
flict in support of a repressive and un-
tocratic government? Must we persist in
rnpting to retrieve unwise political com-
nents by ever-stronger military action?
tressing the independence of South Viet-
do we mean to deny the eventual politi-
mification of Vietnam?
i believe, Mr.-President, that your mov-
rision of peace and prosperity in south-
Asia is likely to be fatally compromised
I oversimplified and misleading charac-
Viola Flores and William H. Adams, John
M. Anderson, Alice and Elton Atwater,
Christine and Raymond Ayoub, Joseph
D. Ban, David S. Bell, John Bellanti,
Mrs. E. L. Bergman, Mrs. Lillis Berry,
Cynthia and Robert Boyer, Jan and
Fred Brown, Ed and Margaret Budd,
Barry Clemson, Alan R. and Gloria
Cleeton, Irene L. and Paul Cutler, Carl
G. Davidson, Chloe and Louis Delia-
port, Peter Dooley, John Downey,
Lydia and Sam Dubin, Frank and Julie
Ehrenthal, Trudy and Alfred Engel,
Miriam and Herbert Ershkowitz,
George A. Etzweiler, Grant Parr, Irwin
Feller, Joseph Flay, Margaret and
Ernest Ferund, James Fritz, Karen
Gellen, Heinz and Liza Gewing, Hel-
mut J. Golatz, Bruce Goldberg, Leon
and Avia Gorlow.
Joe Graedon, Lowell K. Haynes, Jim
Grant, Philip Henning, Alice and
Howard S. Hoffman, Olive and Art
Hoogenboom, Paul. Hornack, David
CARMEL, CALIF?
May 6, 1965.
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: It is with a grateful heart
that I thank you for lifting a voice against
the duplicity and evil that stems from the
White House and State Department these
days. Vietnam is but one disgrace against
all of us who live in this land, because of
their machinations.
Now we are faced with the disgrace of
the Dominican Republic. And the President
uses the same disguise used by the Kluxers,
George Wallace, the Birchers, et al.: "The
Communsts are taking over." Shades of Joe
McCarthy.
I'm not dumb and know there are Com-
munists there, of course, and I know there
are Communsts and Fascists right here in
this holy land of ours. But I didn't think
the President would stoop to the gutter to
brainwash us with this idiocy.
So we went down to protect our nationals.
Then came the denoument: we're digging in
deep for munitions; not to be used against
the criminals who have caused increased suf-
fering to the poor after Trujillo was
dumped, but against the poor themselves
who are seeking to cast off their very heavy
and painful yoke.
Thank you, Senator. Most of us fear that
some cruel actions might again be taken
against us for not approving of the evils from
Washington.
Sincerely,
WOODLAWN, N.Y?
Senator WAYNE MORSE. May 5.
DEAR SIR: I read with much interest your
article in Daily News today headed "Johnson
9557
Houston, Mr. and Mrs. Merwin Hum-
phrey, Barton L. Jenks, Shirley and
Wells Keddie, Emil Kazes, Margaret
and Philip A. Klein, Joe Kransdorf,
Elizabeth and Charles Marsh, Mr. and
Mrs. J. D. McAulay, Carol McClure,
Betty McCorkel, Herbert A. McKinstry,
Gerald and Ingeborg Moser, Helene and
Frank Mulvey, Kathy and Gary Noll,
Janet and Richard Olson, Hans Panof-
sky, Margaret Ann Panofsky, Ruth
Panofsky, Warren D. Parbour, August
L. Peastrel, Elizabeth and Roger Pen-
nock, Jr., Antoinette Peters, Martha
and William Rabinowitz, Anne and
Robert Radlow, Jeffrey Reiman, Maria
Pilar, and Hugo Ribeiro.
Jane Richey, Richard Rosenberg, Frieda
and Marvin Rozen, Sam Sabean,
Michael A. Santulli, Owen Sauerlender,
Cythia Schein, Marcia and Robert
Scholten, Mrs. Caroline Seitz, Carol
and Jeffrey Shapiro, Mary D. Shaw,
Dorothy P. Shemick, Rosemary Shraer,
Rose Marie and Charles J. Slonicka,
Mae and Warren Smith, Lotte Steele,
Anne Straus, Helen Striedleck, David
B. Tanner, B. J. Thompson, Laurence
I. Thompson, Thomas and Barbara
Thwaites, Rosalind and Robert R.
Tompkins, Arthur Townsend, Betty
and Alan Trachtenberg, Mr. and Mrs.
K. Vadam, Katherine and Joseph Van-
DerKar, Deborah Ward, Jose W. Ward,
Lynn and John With
ll
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 9558
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0 l 1965
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD SENATE May 7,
Violates Constitution" and am glad there are the defense and preservation of the
a couple of Senators who know the true invasion of the Dominican Rep
story. I always thought that the Senate and fend a military junta which usurped power
Congress were the only ones who could sd de- bent ousting Juan Beschmately withou elec t dogovern-
Clare war and no matter what anyo
we csrthat are men, in Asia.
It most could have ibeen perpetrated tsthis jjuncture.
seems that three men, Johns nson,-Rusk, and
McNamara, are taking too much leeway in Latin America, and the uncommitted na-
sending our boys around the world in great tions of the world, cannot possibly fail
numbers without the consent of Congress to grasp the full meaning of this action.
and the people. Please accept by profound respect and
rm admiration.
Sen-
wa
As It Is now, about 90 percent of our
ate and Congress are just puppets pulled on Yours very truly,
strings and having their arms twisted, not EDWARD SCHINDELER.
the
using their own thoughts and minds, or
will of those who they represent, and follow
these men, by being called to the White
House for a breakfast or a dinner. Surely
America is in a bad way on account of this
situation and we are being burried fart as
Khrushchev said they would do. It Is about
time America woke up and instead of just
destroying parts of railroads and bridges in
North Vietnam, the bombs should be wiping
out Hanoi, Red China, and North Vietnaun.
Believe me the Reds, China and Russia are
in no position now to fight back on account
of economic conditions in those countries.
They are buying their food now all over the
world. They could not engage in a war at
this time. If we wait too long it will be too
late, as we saw in Cuba, and seeing now In
Santo Domingo.
Our Supreme Court, that has gone soft On
communism, is the fault of our trouble in
the South, on our college campuses, and in
our labor organizations, and unless you who
are leaders and representatives don't do
something soon, not only will New York and
other larger Cities, that'are becoming jungles
because of the Great Society (great give-
away), America will see the Red takeover,
rioting and unrest that we as citizens have
never Seen. As a world war vet when we
fought for peace and democracy we sure are
not going to have It.
I am sending a copy of this to Senator
DlaxsEN. (I wrote him some time ago but
never received an answer or acknowledge-
ment. Also sending copy to New York News.
"Let's have America for Americans."
Very truly yours,
A. J. SCHOUDELMRIER.
American planes drew Light weapons fire, and
pilots reported seeing black puffs of smoke
indicating antiaircraft fire.
U.S. military officials in Saigon reported
Wednesday that government forces last week
compiled one of their best marks of the war,
killing 605 Vietcong while losing only 100 of
their own troops.
But 18 Americans died during the week,
8 of them when 2 helicopters were hit by
bullets and collided while airborne. Twenty-
three other Americans were wounded, and a
pilot was missing on a raid over North Viet-
nam.
(A Cambodian communique monitored in
Re immoral and godless war. South Vietnamese planes violated airspace
Hon. WAYNE MORSE, Wednesday and bombed the village of An
n
)
L
g.
o
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: Thank you for supplying
me with such appropriate descriptive adjec-
tives, in describing the present U.S. military Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
action in Vietnam.
Newspapers print the following, "Sweat- U.S. Senate,
f " Washington D.C.
1
DANVILLE, ILL.,
May 5, 1965.
Soaked Marine Kills His First Red Guerr
a. DEAR SIR: Thank you for your constancy
By Gen. Wallace Greene, Jr.: "The Job I
neie _am esituation.
want them (marines) to do is to find the o the
mbarked on a Deutschland
Vietcong and kill them." Uber Alles route and have bypassed the
$o American boys are taught the fine arts
of murder. Though the administration is United a Nations concept.
ept. precinct captain I
using all the wily devices to whitewash and
brainwash, the American public will not be ant all but speechless at the role of Presi-
fooled forever. dent Johnson. I guess he is so determined
It is good to know that at least, in our to "facsimile" F.D.R. who truly had a prob-
Congress of the United States there are still lem on his hands pre the exposing of Hit-t facts.
rewrite
American citizens who dare to give out with ler, that he terrible thing.
What ahterrible What the truth. tragedy for humankind.
For the American way of life, But one more thing bears mention: In
Yours very truly,
PAUL M. SMITH. seeking national solidarity President John-
_ son has allowed the southern U.S. concept to
[From the Alhambra (Calif.) Post Advocate, betray the commonsense we so desperately
Apr. 80, 19651 need just now. The southern U.S. concept
"I FELT KIND OF SORRY FOR HIM"--SWEAT- sees all the North as Communist-inspired.
SOAKED YOUNG MARINE KILLS HIS FIRST RED What a terrible thing. What a terrible
GUERRILLA tragedy for our democracy.
(By Peter Arnett) Sincerely,
Mrs. JOHN T. BAUSCH.
HoI Vuc SOUTH VIETNAM.-The sweat- p S _In my opinion President Johnson
soaked young marine stood over the torn threw away the United Nations concept to
body of a Vietcong guerrilla with mixed emo- appease the thinking of men like Senator
tions flitting across his face. RUSSELL LONG.
For Cpl. Pleas David, of Tuscaloosa, Ala.,
it was a day he would never forget. David
had, just killed his first man.
I stood
"I felt kind of sorry for him as
there," said David, $ lanky 19-year-old who
entered the Marine Corps after he left high
school last year.
? And he didn't even have a weapon," ' he
added.
[From the Los Angeles (Calif.) Times, Apr.
29,19651
MODERATE DAMAGE
HOn. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Millions of Ameri-
cans thank you and look to you to repre-
sent them as one of the few legislators who
try to keep America's conscience.
As little evidence as exists to indicate that
some of the Vietnamese people may desire
our presence. I see absolutely no justifica-
tion for our invasion of the Dominican Re-
public. Yet I feel unrepresented and In-
articulate in `the current climate of con-
formity and hysteria, except for your lone
voice.
Respectfully yours,
NORMAN E. HENKIN.
NEW YORK, N.Y.,
M'ay 5, 1965.
HOn. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. 5,onator,
Washington., D.C.
your colleagues in the U.S. Senate are the -.The one job I want them to do is to find
Only men of vision, courage, and self-reliance the Vietcong and kill them," Greene said
in at abysmal collection rubber stamps. at a Da Nang news conference before his
I thannk you for defending the to- de arture for Hawaii.
tlon bl reminding the President, , the the so- The marines were moving out into an area
called legislators of the Senate and House,
and the people at large, that it is in the 10 to 15 miles west of the Da Nang complex.
Congress that the right to make or declare There were reports, unconfirmed by Marine
war is vested. officials, that more Leathernecks soon would
join the 10,000 stationed at Da Nang, situ-
No ththe Vietnambrutal, ated 850 miles northeast of Saigon.
and d bloody y violation lation are of f North engaged
.
and at, a time while we keep_ telling the The attack was carried out by two A-4
world that we are solely concerned with Skyhawks and two F-8 Crusaders. The
U.S. officials reported "moderate damage"
had been inflicted on the bridge, located
about 100 miles north of the 17th parallel in
a narrow valley running up the center of the
country.
The size of the Marine force which struck
out from the Da Nang missile and air base
was not known, but it was believed several
companies were Involved.
Gen. Wallace Greene, Jr., Commandant
of the U.S. Marine Corps, declared the
Leathernecks would extend their operations
s out of the Da Nang base as far as necessary
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I just had to sit
down and write this note of praise and en-
couragement on your recent stand in re
South Vietnam and the Dominican Republic.
Yours is truly the voice of America. Please
do not stop. I know it must be terribly
lonely in the Senate; but truly great men
fight for principles--not for popularity.
Yours, for a successful campaign for peace.
MATTHEW CHAVES.
MINTON Co.,
Mountain View, Calif., May 3, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I want you to know
that you have my support in your outspoken
and courageous criticism of the Johnson,
McNamara-Rusk afar policy in Vietnam
Keep it up.
Sincerely yours,
HAYWARD, CALIF.,
May 3,1965.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate office Building,
Washington, D.C.
MY DEAR SENATOR: I write to give you V
qualified support for what you have been :
cently saying on the Vietnam Issue.
It is, to me, almost unbelievable that
should be so grossly deceived by our Mgt
leader. I rejoice every time I hear you
it what it Is.
The pity seems to be that-while there
millions who feel as I, and millions who
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 SENATE6R000300150003-0
May 7, 1965 Approved FGQr VRESSIONAL /RECORD RDP67BOO44
even march, enough certainly to bury the
war mongers in a landslide-there is no one
to get them together and make them articu-
late.
I would gladly see such a movement orga-
nized around you. I thought it was lacking
in courage to see the French philosopher,
Jean-Paul Sarte, refuse to come to Cornell to
speak, because he thinks it would be futile.
The current step in the President's well-
Madisonized campaign seems to be getting
big names to endorse his product. Can't we
get out the little people?
I remember with joy and pride, Senator
MORSE, coming to know you in Sacramento,
Calif., several years ago. So I send personal
greetings, if I may.
Very sincerely,
? CORRELL M. JULIAN.
APRIL 29, 1965.
The PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES,
The White House,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: You have appealed
for the people to follow you in the Vietnam
situation.
I am writing to say that I am not following
you. And of course I join millions whom
you do not seem to recognize.
The constant deceit of the people, first con-
cerning the very reasons for the situation,
then regarding the number and functions of
men whom you sent in, then concerning your
methods-poison gas, brutality, etc.-has but
increased with your new and recent stepup.
It was all too apparent to the discerning,
however, that you were preparing a good seg-
ment of the press for mass deceit. Then
came a picture campaign, in which two or
three Americans were pictured being brought
home as casualties, with never a word about
the hundreds of other casualties. Then
came the white paper. Probably an occa-
sional proposition in it could be believed.
Then came private correspondence. I wrote
you, but the State Department stepped in
and answered the letter, with a little white
paper, which was no more successful than the
big one. I understand this method is being
widely used.
So I make one more appeal to my President,
that you embrace the opportunities which
are still open-for deeds, not just words-to.
arrive at understandings, and pull out.
Sincerely yours,
CORRELL M. JULIAN.
WAYNE, MICH.,
'
Senator WAYNE MORSE, May 5,1965.
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I understand the
President is asking the Congress for a "vote
of confidence" on his Vietnam and Domini-
can policies. I further understand you plan
to vote against his request for $700 million.
I support your position. As you are well
aware, this is unpopular, at the moment, but
it is the right position.
It seems to me we have violated interna-
tional law and the whole tradition of the
past in our Dominican intervention. It is
interesting that Bolivia and Uruguay have
opposed our intervention.
Our position in Vietnam is somewhat
similar except that here we originally went
in on an advice and training basis. Now,
since an election in which Mr. Johnson posed
is the opposite of a trigger-happy candidate,
1r. Goldwater, we suddenly find ourselves
)ombing North Vietnam.
It seems to me we have embarked on a
langerous and tragic course since January 1,
965. It further seems to me that the 1964
residential winner, waged a completely dis-
onest campaign. Barry Goldwater may be
'rang but, at least, he was honest.
an all-powerful President, but one can hope
that reason and observance of international
law will eventually return as a basis for
American policy.
Yours truly,
JOHN R. RYAN.
MAY 1, 1965.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: May I applaud you
for your vigorous and courageous speech at-
tacking U.S. policy in Vietnam and denounc-
ing Secretary Rusk and Secretary McNamara
and the President for their efforts in esca-
lating the war there? American policy in
Vietnam is indeed godless and immoral, as
you point out, for it is causing untold suf-
fering in that unhappy country and grave
anxiety everywhere else in the world. This
reckless fanning of the flames of war will.
at best lose America the friendship of Japan,
and at the worst spark a world conflagration
that will incinerate us all.
The day after your speech appeared on
page 1 of the Arabi Evening News, an ex-
cellent English language newspaper in Japan,
there appeared in this same paper the cen-
sored testimony of Undersecretary of State
George Ball and Douglas MacArthur II before
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (a
clipping which I am enclosing) in which they
claimed that the reason why Japanese news-
papers are so critical of U.S. policies in Viet-
nam is that there is a large number of Com-
munists on their editorial staffs.
What is amazing about the statements of
Ball and MacArthur, and even the subse-
quent interrogations by Chairman FUL-
BRIGHT, is the ignorance they reveal of the
state of mind of the Japanese, and these
persons total inability to comprehend how
anybody, least of all the Japanese, could be
critical of American policy in Vietnam.
The Asahi Shimbun (the Japanese lan-
guage paper) and the Mainichi, the two pa-
pers accused of Communist Infiltration, vig-
orously dented the charges of Ball and
MacArthur, as you will see from the clippings
which I am enclosing, and responsible Jap-
anese with whom I have spoken likewise
agree that the editorial policies of these
newspapers are free from Communist influ-
ence. Indeed, the extensive coverage of the
Vietnam war in Japan includes magazines,
TV, and radio, as well as the daily newspa-
pers. These media are on the whole critical
of U.S. policy in Vietnam, and in this, I think
it is fair to say, they reflect the feelings of
the average thoughtful Japanese.
As an American Buddhist priest who has
been living in Japan for almost 15 years, I
can honestly say that in all that period this
is the first time I have been able to discern
strong anti-American Government feelings
among the Japanese. But they have good
reason to oppose present American policy in
Vietnam. They themselves have been
bombed, so they know the suffering and
destruction it causes. But they are also
fearful that if either China or Russia or both
enter the war, as is very likely if the war con-
tinues to escalate, they will be targets for
attack by these powers.
Dear Senator MORSE, I pray that you be
granted the strength to continue to oppose,
with all your forensic skill, the madness of
our Government's policies in Vietnam, not
only for the sake of the decency and self-
respect of the United States, but for the sake
of the suffering Vietnamese and peoples
everywhere who are worried and anxious lest
Vietnam erupt into the third world war.
Respectfully yours,
PHILIP KAPLEAV.
KAMAKURA, JAPAN.
[From the Asahi Evening News, Apr. 30,
1965]
ASAHI SHIMBUN DENIES INFILTRATION BY
REDS
I have little confidence, although one can The Asahi Shimbun issued a statement
ways hope, that this Congress will become today denying charges made in the U.S. Sen-
lything more than a subservient agent of ate Foreign Relations Committee that the
95.59
newspaper is infiltrated and influenced in its
editorial policies by Communists.
A censored transcript of the testimony of
Undersecretary of State George Ball and
Douglas MacArthur II, Assistant Secretary
of State for Congressional Relations, in
closed-door hearings in the committee April
7 was made public in Washhington Wednes-
day.
Mr. Ball was quoted as saying that the
Mainichi Shimbun has on its staff. "quite a
number of Communists * * * and has taken
a critical attitude" toward U.S. policy in
Vietnam.
Mr. MacArthur, former American ambas-
sador to Japan, was reported to have said,
"They both are infiltrated. Asahi had over
200 members of the Community Party on the
editorial staff."
The Asahi Shimbun issued a denial in the
form of a statement by managing editor
Isami Suzukawa, which said the charges
were utterly untrue.
"It is extremely regrettable that high of-
ficials of the U.S. State Department gave
testimony in the Senate implying that there
are Communists on the editorial staff of the
Asahi Shimbun and that the editorial policy
of the Asahi Shimbun is influenced by these
Communists. This testimony is absolutely
contrary to the truth," Mr. Suzukawa's state-
ment read.
"The Asahi Shimbun is published on the
basis of its traditional policy of impartiality
and nonpartisanship. It maintains its own
viewpoint of fair reporting and editorializing
and is not influenced by Communists or any
other outside pressures.
"The Asahi Shimbun reflects public opin-
ion and has always criticized and will con-
tinue to criticize, when necessary, the poli-
cies, not only of the United States, but of
other countries as well.
"However, these criticisms have always been
made from a spirit of friendship and there
are no ulterior motives. We especially hope
that the American Government and people
will listen frankly to our friendly criticism,"
the statement concluded.
[From the Asahi Evening News, Apr. 29, 1965]
BALL, MACARTHUR SAY PRESS HERE
"INFILTRATED"
WASHINGTON, April 28.-Two high-ranking
State Department officials have told Congress
one reason Japanese newspapers are so criti-
cal of V.S. policies is that there is a large
number of Communists on the editorial
staffs.
Under Secretary of State George Ball and
Douglas MacArthur II, Assistant Secretary of
State for Congressional Relations, testified
on the subject recently in closed-door hear-
ings of the Senate Foreign Relations Com-
mittee. A censored transcript of their testi-
mony was made public today.
Committee Chairman J. WILLIAM FUL-
BRIGHT asked why the newspapers of Japan
were so critical of the United States despite
,the fact that Japan is "supposed to be our
strongest ally in that area."
He quoted a story in the Tokyo Mainichi
about an interview with a special envoy,
Shunichi Matsumoto, who had been sent by
Premier Sato to survey the situation in Viet-
nam.
Mr. Ball replied: "That Mainichi, which is
the largest newspaper in Japan-in fact I
think it is the largest newspaper in the
world-has on its staff quite a number of
Communists and has taken a critical atti-
tude."
Mr. FULBRIGHT remarked that Asahi had
also been critical, and Mr. MacArthur said:
"They both are infiltrated. Asahi had over
200 members of the Communist Party on the
editorial staff."
Mr. FULBRIGHT remarked that Mr. Matsu-
moto is not a Communist, and Mr. MacAr-
thur agreed that he was not. "He is a former
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 9560
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD SENATE May 7, 19615
diplomat turned politician," Mr. MacArthur
said.
?What has happened here is not an ex-
pression of the view of the Japanese Govern-
ment," Mr. Ball said. -This is an expression
of a man who went on a f-detfinding mission
and has come back."
He added that it was "not clear" whether
the mission was an official one.
AMERICAN BAPTIST CAMPUS MIN-
ISTRY IN NORTHERN CALIFORNIA,
Berkeley, Calif., March 30, 1965.
President LYNDON B. JOHNSON.
DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: During this month
a number of us have engaged in fasting,
each for 48 hours, as (1) in repentance for
our share, unwilling though it is, in the
brutal, barbarous, illegal, and immoral war
in Vietnam; and (2) as a deep expression of
our concern that negotiation and economic
and social aid may take the place of military
escalaton there.
Sincerely yours,
GORGE L. COLLINS.
This Is why many folks today axe question-
ing the function of a Congress, that rubber-
stamps laws dictated by the executive de-
partment. So, I want to thank you when
you fight for a principle regarding the Viet-
namese affair. Those of us who fought in the
First World War have learned how wrong
we were when we believed we were fighting
to end all wars.
Yours very truly,
FRANK J. KRACHA.
WARSON WOODS, MO.,
May 5, 1965.
Senator STUART SYMINGTON,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR SYMINGTON: I want to reg-
ister a strong protest against the $700 million
war-appropriation measure, and the steam-
roller tactics by which it is proposed to rush
it through Congress. In the name of heaven,
let Congress stop and consider the signifi-
cance of what it is being asked to do. The
President admits the money itself is not
needed and announces that he wants the
measure passed as evidence of popular sup-
port his policy In Vietnam and
Dominican Republic. Then why the haste?
Why not take time to debate his policy?
The fact is that millions of Americans think
that Johnson is pursuing a terribly wrong
and dangerous course of action. If the Presi-
dent wants Congress to endorse his policy,
he should not use this devious device but
should ask for a vote directed to the policy
itself. Moreover, before Congressgives such
an endorsement it should be extremely care-
ful to define precisely what policy it is ap-
proving. As I understand him, Johnson has
stated that he wants to tell the world that
we are determined to pursue his new policy
no matter what the cost and no matter what
the risk. I, for one, would give him no such
blank check. The new policy appears to be
pose, after killing off a lot of the American
soldiers and others.
I cannot understand why President John-
son didn't acept the offer Secretary General
U Thant to let the U.N. mediate the trouble
and build up southeast Asia with the Mekong
project. Though I really do believe it was
the military-industrial combine insisted that
their stockpile of weapons should be used so
they could say they needed more. '
Our WSCS had a study "The United States
and the New Nations" by Vera Micheles
Dean, and in that book she stated that 30
percent of the money for foreign aid stayed in
this country. And a pamphlet came at the
same time telling how much the AID orga-
nization was going to do for needy nations,
and. it made the same statement that 80 per-
cent of the money would stay in this coun-
try-implying that because of that more
people in our country were in favor of the
foreign aid program. At the same time this
clipping was sent to me which I intended
to send you. For I have heard you advocat-
ing less aid for the military and more for the
people.
Several years ago I wrote you a very explo-
sive letter to which you replied kindly that if
you had a chance to get acquainted with me
you could make me change my opinion. So
I must tell you that ]: admire your courage
in standing for the right things on so many
issues. Of course, one of the main ones is
on the liquor question. If you visited Jack
Travis' cattle when you were in Oregon, you
were right across the road from my house.
I wonder how long it will take President
Johnson to bankrupt this country.
Very truly yours,
Mrs. H. A. SYLVESTER.
Los ALTOS, CALIF.,
April 23, 1965.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
V.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. MORSE: After seeing you on to-
days newscast; I am thankful that we still
have a few statesmen in Congress who are
ready to stand up to be counted. When the
executive branch of our Government dele-
gates the enormous powers to Cabinet head
men like Wirtz, McNamara, and Katzenbach;
who are immune to constructive criticism
but are willing to gamble with our citizens'
lives; we at home wonder why we have a
Congress.
Mr. McNamara estimated that the tab for
our interference in South Vietnam, will cost
us about $11/. billion in the 1985 fiscal year.
Just how did Congress face up to accept
this decision of the Pentagon? We are in
war. Yet, who declared this war; without
the sole decision of you, the representatives
of the people?
On February 11, 1963, I had written your
colleague Senator MARGARET GFIASE SMITH.
I was much disturbed because a son of my
friend in southern California was killed in
Vietnam. I asked her two question:
1. For what cause has this man and others
.given up his life?
2. What is the Government telling the
unfortunate parents and relatives' She
sent my letter to the Defense Department
and returned a two page brief from Mr.
Arthur Sylvester in which he states;
"U.S. assistance to the Republic of Viet-
nam is of limited nature. This is a Viet-
namese war. They are fighting it, and they
are directing it. In February of last year,
President Kennedy noted that We have not
sent combat troops to Vietnam. That is
still true. Our role is limited to furnishing
the Vietnamese with advisory, logistical, and
technical support." This is the excerpt from
the Assistant Secretary of Defense in his
This morning
1963
23
b
.
,
ruary
letter of Fe
a reporter at a news conference referred our the, immediate or remote future.
t Vietn m a McNa- Verv truly yours,
_ c...
u
atRaccepting this label. We now have per- HENR P iM ~s MARGARET gM'rrHaJ W. gated to itself-the responsibility of poll,
haps 30,000 men in Vietnam. Ing the world (3 days ago U.S. marine
Again today, it is reported that the Gov- FULBRIGHT, MICHAEL J. MANSFIELD, WAYNE landed in the Dominican Republic in suI
ernment will sanction (?) raises In steel MORSE, ALBERT GORE, FRANK J. LAUeGHE, port another puppet government). Wh.
prices, I suppose if they grant labor's de- FRANK CHURCH, GEORGE D. AIKEN, CLIFFORD porrt of another puppet under pressure from tl
wands. This will mean another snowball- P. CASE, and editor, Post-Dispatch.) the U.S. is President now trying to achieve is nothtl military,
rincreased costs living. Being a HOOD RIVER, OREG., less than a new form of colonialism whip
retired individual, not destitute, but feeling May 3, 1965. 'must be utterly rejected.
me pinch that has affected those of us who A withdrawal from Vietnam would indice
to pay live inch static income and ernut Senator WAYNE MORSE.
to ag our way; I feel that the Government DEAR SIR: I have e been intending to write the acceptance of the facts of internatior
has let us clown In not stabilizing the dollar to you for some time to commend you for life, leaving non-Western peoples to we
purchasing power. It has permitted infla- your stand about fighting in southeast Asia. out their own destiny, and this would or
tion and In many cases we are creating a It seems absolutely criminal for our Gov- the way for a more realistic and beneficic
Front-cal
to create o wealth out of those who haven't tried ernment to o In and shoot up that n a shambles like Korea, I sup- as fort efNtheir ational poLiticeoonomic
to t-cal
creatte through production. leaving B it i
DENVER, COLO.,
May 4, 1965.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: I want you to know that my
wife and I agree wholeheartedly with your
stand on Vietnam.
This bombing of North Vietnam seems
senseless, immoral, and cruel-yes and costly.
We had no business getting mixed up in
this Vietnam situation in the first place.
Sincerely yours,
SHERLEY N. BuscH.
this: to intervene with military force to
whatever extent deemed appropriate by the
Defense Department, wherever there is a
revolutionary outbreak which the Presi-
dent's inner circle of advisers-presumably
including the Secretary of State--concludes
is or might be "Communist dominated."
To what ridiculous and suicidal end will
this new policy lead us? Suppose China
decides to intervene in Vietnam? Will the
President then approve the use of nuclear
weapons? He may well do so, relying on
Congress overwhelming approval of an ap-
propriation measure. Suppose the Soviet
Union then is impelled to resort to its nu-
clear arsenal. Who will accept the awful
responsibility for pushing the red button?
The President of the United States-or Con-
gress?
I urge you and the other Members of the
Congress at the very least to somehow limit
the appropriation measure so that its passage
would seem inevitable and not fairly be
treated as a blanket endorsement of the
President's policy as it has developed to date,
or certainly not as a blanket endorsement
of what other steps in the process of escala-
tion his advisers may see fit to recommend in
ALBERTA, CANADA,
May 2, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: -I am sending a copy of my recent
letter to our Prime Minister, Hon. Lester
Pearson, for your interest, to which I re-
ceived a friendly reply.
The 1954 Vietnam agreements have not
been lived up to by Britain, the United States
of America, and but feebly by Canada.
President Eisenhower's words (August
1953): "Indochina and the whole of south-
east Asia are essential to the United States,
both for strategic and political reasons," to
which I would add material reasons, provide
no valid excuse for interference in internal
strife in other countries with which you will
surely agree.
Now 2 years later, the United States o
America seems to have assumed-or arro
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 May I Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
y 7, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE 9561
Vietcong by the U.S. advisers-far from being
a group of Communist terrorists, it was a
broad organization including almost all po-
litical and religious opponents of the Diem
dictatorship. Its 31 members central com-
mittee Is headed by a non-Communist lawyer
who had spent years in Saigon prisons for his
defense of civil rights. Represented are lead-
ing Buddish priests, Catholic priests, Protes-
tant clergymen as well as businessmen and
representatives of the three leading opposi-
tion parties. Its program is far from Com-
munist in tone; it calls for peace, withdrawal
of U.S. Armed Forces, democratic elections
and eventual reunification for the whole
country-prevented from taking place in 1956
by none other than the democratic United
States of America and its puppet Diem.
Please use your influence in restoring the
good name of the United States by helping to
bring an end to this cruel and unjust war.
I read heartening things about you.
Sincerely and deeply concerned,
Mrs. RETA G. M. ROWAN.
(Copy to President Johnson, Senators
ERNEST GRUENING, and FRANK CHURCH.)
ALBERTA, CANADA,
April 6, 1965,
Prime Minister of Canada,
House of Commons,
Ottawa.
DEAR MR. PEARSON: It was indeed hearten-
ing to know that you had received the World
Peace Award of Temple University in Phila-
delphia, and that in accepting it you spoke
for the majority of Canadian people in your
proposals to President Johnson regarding
Vietnam.
In my view it is a case of the old quotation:
"For what is a man profited if he shall gain
the whole world and lose his own soul?" and
that the very existence of the whole world
as we know it is risked at the present time for
political reasons, it is true that through
very . efficient mass communications media
we are made aware that something in the na-
ture of a world revolution is taking place
today, but it is also true that the United Na-
tions Charter, in article 2, No. 7, states that
there shall be no intervention in matters
which . are essentially within the domestic
jurisdiction of any state-and surely this
holds good as a moral precept for any mem-
ber state.
That the United States Intervention in
South Vietnam was or is) on behalf of the
Vietnamese people is sheer sham, for we all
know that those governing that small coun-
try at the time were not democratically
elected, nor even popular with the masses
of the people (as is also the case with the
three subsequent coups).
We have to accept that change is synony-
mous with life itself, and we have seen great
changes even in a life time, as for instance
In our powerful neighbor, the U.S.S.R., and
we surely have no moral right or excuse to
try to Impose our will by killing, upon other
experimenting nations. We have only to put
ourselves in their place to sense the result-
ing outrage for any such action.
I would like to thank you for having the
Under Secretary of State reply to my last
letter to you, of February 13, and for sending
me your addresses to the Ottawa Canadian
71ub and the United Church Board of Evan-
;elism. I trust you will use your influence
.n Prime Minister Wilson toward ending the
rar in Vietnam.
Respectfully and sincerely,
BETA G. M. ROMAN.
SLINGERLANDS, N.Y.,
'nator WAYNE MORSE,
:nate Office Building,
ashington, D.C.
our blunders in Vietnam. It was this kind move. The aim should be to revitalize the
of foreign policy I thought I was rejecting United Nations, so .that it could stop the
when I preferred Mr. Johnson over Mr. Gold- escalation of the Vietnamese war before it
water last November. reached the point of no return, My plan
I am particularly incensed by the superior had to be initiated by the smaller nations; I
tone of the Secretary of State in referring proposed that Canada take the lead.
The State Department has become the-pur-
veyors of myths to support an indefensible
intrusion into the internal affairs of an un-
fortunately divided country.
Our actions cannot but deal a heavy blow
to the U.N. as well as to our own image
everywhere. i hope and pray that you will
continue your struggle for sanity to a suc-
cessful conclusion. I shall urge my repre-
sentatives in Congress to give you their full-
est support.
Respectfully yours,
ALBERT MORRISION.
P.S: Enclosing copy of recent letter to the
President.
SLINGERLANDS, N.Y.,
May 3, 1965.
President LYNDON B. JOHNSON,
The White House,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: This is to inform you
of my profound distress over our military
Intervention in the Vietnamese civil war.
The white paper which purports to justify
thi
s intervention has been described as "a
dismal failure" by an eminent historian and
poltical scientist, Prof. H. G. Morgenthau, of
the University of Chicago. On the contrary,
this document tends rather to support the
earlier official view of the civil nature of the
military struggle wracking the Vietnamese
people.
We have thus violated the Geneva Pact of
1954 in support of a dubious South Vietnam
Government which not only failed to carry
out the election mandate of the pact bit in-
stituted the reign of repression which pro-
voked the present rebellion. I, therefore,
take my stand with Senators MORSE, GRUEN-
ING, CHURCH, MCGOVERN, FULBRIGHT, and
others in their sharp dissent with our pres-
ent harsh military venture in Vietnam. I
am appalled by the bombing, burning, chem-
ical, and other weapons with which our mili-
tary have been experimenting in that un-
happy land. I plead, nay, demand an end
to such barbarities for so they are no matter
who unleashes them. I ask that you convene
forthwith an assembly of the Geneva Pact
powers to fashion a viable, representative
Vietnamese state. Once a cease-fire is estab-
lished, it should be maintained by a U.N.
military force and American troops with-
drawn.
Mr. President, you must lead, not follow on
the way to the conference table if we are to
regain our role as the leader of the demo-
cratic way.
Sincerely yours,
ALBERTA, CANADA,
May 5
1965
,
.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
The Senate,
Washington D,.C., U.S.A.
SIR: About a month ago, when events in
the Vietnamese war began to be escalated
to a new high pitch, I wrote a letter to Prime
Minister Pearson, the substance of which is
given In the enclosed duplicated letter. (This
letter is a copy of the one I sent to Canadian
newspapers and others to try to get support
for the idea contained in it.) I felt that
some practical method had to be worked out
to replace the vacuum left when the United
Nations Assembly was paralyzed last session.
This method would need to bypass both the
positions of the Soviet Union, France, and
the other nonpaying nations, and that of the
United States, so that neither side would
"lose face" or pride, and paralyze the new
During the last 2 weeks or so, the names of
Santo Domingo, India and Pakistan, and
Southern Rhodesia have been added to the
list of those nations where war, or threatened
war is going on. The world is increasingly
full of nations whose boundaries are guarded
by military forces under cease-fire agree-
ments, some with peace-keeping forces un-
der the United Nations to try to prevent open
war. Some nations, such as Indonesia, are on
the edge of open war. The widespread sale
or gift of modern military weapons by the
older industrial powers to the new nations
for the purpose of security, has not produced
security, but is producing the opposite. War
Is no longer formally declared against a na-
tion, but is suddenly used to gain some ad-
vantage when a nation can supposedly get
away with it. Very few peace treaties have
been made since 1945 to end these local wars;
instead, these wars end only in cease-fire
agreements (or in no agreements) which can
be broken at any time to continue the wars.
The whole situation is fast growing In un-
stable equilibrium, or in no equilibrium.
The longer these "brush-fire" wars are al-
lowed to simmer away, according to my ob-
servation, the more difficult will be the ef-
forts required to settle them, and the more
likely they will involve other nations. The
fear of atomic weapons seems to have little
effect on preventing war. It may even en-
courage the smaller nations to use the war
method, since they can probably get away
with no intervention from the atomic na-
tions, on the assumption that they dare not
use their atomic weapons. Even the civil
war, which began locally (perhaps ?), end
up by being in fact wars between the atomic
nations.
The one organization that should be avail-
able at such a time as this is the United Na-
tions. But it is paralyze.i by the promise
of the United States to challenge the default-
ing nations on their right to vote in the As-
sembly. This paralysis has lasted a whole
session, creating an enormous power vacuum.
The longer the United Nations stays para-
lyzed, the greater this power vacuum will be-
come. The more chance the People's Repub-
lic of China will have to woo the nations
of Africa and southeast Asia from the pres-
ent defunct United Nations into the counter
"united nations" it has recently proposed.
Communist China should have been taken
into the United Nations in 1960-61, during
the time of the food shortage, when the
country had lost much of Its aggressiveness.
It would be much better to fight by words in
the United Nations than by bullets, or bombs..
This does not ignore the intransigeance of
the days of Vishinsky. Delegates could be
trained for that as Dr. Martin Luther King's
followers have been trained to meet the sav-
age onslaughts of the police in Alabama by
nonviolent methods.
Until the United Nations is restored as
the power center of the world, based essen-
tially on moral power, the huge and growing
forces of disintegration will continue to grab
control, with the growing threat of escalating
war into world war III, with the use of
atomic weapons to destroy mankind. I trust
this letter will be of some real use to you in
trying to stop this escalation.
Yours sincerely,
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
MARION, IowA,
May 4, 1965.
DEAR SENATOR: Please accept my very warm
anks for your efforts to extricate us from
No. 82-9
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Have just finished
reading Drew Pearson's article "Sees Big War
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 9562
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE May 7, 1965
Danger Intensifying." As a result I sent the
following telegram to President-Johnson: "DO
not drag us into world War. Get rid of Rusk
and McNamara." I write regularly to John-
son every week. and occasionally to Rusk and
McNamara. It is most discouraging. Thanks
for all you are doing. Why can't America
wake up? Best wishes.
Sincerely,
IRENE G.000M13ES.
EVANSTON, ILL.,
May 4, 1965.
Senator FRANK CHURCH,
Senator ERNEST GRUENING,
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
GENTLEMEN: I have just heard the news
that President Johnson has asked Congress
for an immediate appropriation of $700 mil-
lion, to show American determination to re-
main in Vietnam and the Dominican Re-
public. He went on to indicate that the Gov-
ernment of the United States is determined
cost of work, struggle and blood, President
Johnson's new foreign policy must be vig-
orously and successfully opposed.
To prevent the ramming through of this
appropriation before the people have had
time, to realize what is happening and to
express their opposition, we ask that you
and your colleagues who have done such
noble work on Vietnam lead an extensive
and intensive debate on the appropriation
and the policy behind it. If it is necessary
to prevent this measure from being rammed
through, I would even suggest a filibuster.
Though I dislike filibusters, it would be justi-
fied in this case to prevent an unpopular and
disastrous course from being forced on our
country.
Yours for a decent foreign policy,
ARNOLD F. BECCHETTI.
NORTHAMPTON, MASS., May 5, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Although not your
constituent, I write you knowing that our
views on the military adventures of the
administration are similar. I am sure you
will do everything you can to avoid in the
Senate the haste with which the House had
apparently given the President the money he
requested. There is no emergency, no crisis,
no Pearl Harbor here. You owe it to the
large number of Americans who share your
views to see that hearings and a full debate
are held. -
Secretary Rusk has answered me and my
academic colleagues with insults. Can it be
that he does not think his own arguments
sufficiently good to answer us with reason?
Keep up the good fight.
Sincerely,
BRUCE HAWKINS.
to put down any revolution anywhere which
it does not like. Thus our country has come
full circle-from being the first successful
anticolonial revolution and champion of
the self-determination of people, to being-
if Johnson has his way-the main suppressor
of revolution, and the right of self-determi-
nation of people.
It seems clear to us that President John-
son, by word and deed, has announced a new
foreign policy for the United States-pre-
cisely the Goldwater policy which he pre-
tended to oppose during the recent presiden-
tial campaign. He has announced a policy
of putting down any revolution which he does
not like, justifying this by labeling It "Com-
munist," thus in effect saying that only the
United States has the right to determine the
legitimacy of any revolution. We thereby
become judge, jury, prosecutor, policeman,
and jailer for the world. This tears up the
Atlantic Charter, which recognizes the right
of people to self-determination, and substi-
tutes a right of U.S. determination for all
countries of the world-a policy akin to Hit-
ler's in concept and similar in result, flies in
the face of the United Nations Charter, which
does not recognize the right of any nation
to interfer- in the internal affairs of another
country, and tramples on international law.
Such a policy can have only disastrous con-
sequences, at the very best bringing about
universal hatred of our ccuntry, killing, and
maiming of untold persons, both American
and foreign, the vast destruction of property
(which we would presumably rebuild, accord-
ing to Johnson's southeast Asia plan), great-
ly increased arms expenditures, all of this
resulting in leading the United States down-
ward toward becoming a second-rate power
by squandering our natural resources and
what remains of our good name. At worst,
this policy could lead to the total disaster
of thermonuclear war.
You have been providing splendid, leader-
ship in opposition to the administration's
policy in Vietnam. Now that the underlying
logic of the U.S. position there has been made
the basis of American policy everywhere, we
look to you to take the lead in opposing this
appropriation_ and in exposing the logic of
President Johnson's position.
The President, undoubtedly realizing the
strong opposition of a major segment of the
American people to this policy, has adopted
the tactic of presenting us with an accom-
plished fact, then giving his "explanation"
as to why, which he clearlythinks no one
has the right to question. (This reminds
me of McCarthy.) He then demands blind
acceptance--indeed, automatic support-
from Congress and the American people. If
we are to preserve world peace and the good
name of our country, if we are, to build a
great society at home and maintain the free-
dom our forefathers brought forth at great
SEATTLE, WASH.,
May 5, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building.
DEAR SIR: Do appreciate your strong state-
ments and the position you are taking on
both South Vietnam and on the Dominican
Republic.
We must prevent the military and the CIA
from taking over complete control of our
Government. Your statements and actions
are most important.
Please keep up your battle.
tlonal people in Oregon, as well as in the
rest of the United States, by voting against
the President's request for more funds to
support these acts of Outright aggression by
our "peace-loving Government." Please do
your part to stop our Nation from rushing
headlong into war under the pretense of
'saving the world from communism," or soon
other nations will be waging war to save
themselves from us. We wish you Godspeed
in your courageous endeavor.
Sincerely,
Mr. and Mrs. COLEMAN BEGHTOL.
THE FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH,
Scottd.ale, Pa., May 5, 1965.
Hon. Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I thank God for your
"voice crying in the wilderness" opposing
the senseless foreign policy of our Govern-
ment in Vietnam and now in the Dominican
Republic. I am with you 100 percent in
crusading for peace-not for war.
Several weeks ago a Canadian newspaper-
man raised the following questions about
Vietnam:
1. Where do we stand on the U.S. bomb-
ing of North Vietnam in violation of the
1954 truce accord?
2. How much of a civil war is going on in
South Vietnam?
3. If the Chinese and North Vietnamese
are guilty, why not an all-out U.N. action?
Similar questions can now be raised about
our intervention in the Dominican.
During the election campaign, Senator
Goldwater was caricatured as being "trig-
ger happy." Many of us are raising the
question, "Who is trigger happy now?"
You may be assured of my continued in-
terest and support. And may your tribe in-
crease in the days ahead that we may be
spared the horrors of another Korea.
Cordially yours, -
GORDON S. WILSON.
OLDCASTLE, ONTARIO, CANADA,
May 3, 1965.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: This small item on
your stand on peace was in our "Windsor
Star:
"SENATOR URGES TOP MEN GO
"WASHINGTON.-Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Democrat, of Oregon., wants Defense Secre-
tary Robert S. McNamara and Secretary of
State Dean Rusk to resign to help bring -
an end to 'this Nation's outlawry in south-
east Asia.'
"In a Senate speech Monday, MORSE bit-
terly attacked U.S. policy in South Vietnam
and said if a change is not made 'a couple of
months from now there will be hundreds
of thousands fighting and dying in Asia.'
"The Senator singled out the two Cabinet
members for the brunt of his criticism. He
said he was shocked by Rusk's speech Sat-
urday night in which he said the Secretary
of State called administration critics mod-
ern-day appeasers."
We also saw and heard Secretary of State
Dean Rusk on his Saturday night speech an(
could hardly believe our ears.
We commend you for your courage i
speaking out for peaceful negotiations, an
all the rest.
Yours sincerely,
MYRTLE CUSHMAN BROWN.
P.S. We have also written to Senator
WILLIAM FOLBRIGHT and Senator GEOR
AIKEN.
JOHN E. MAGRAW.
TOLEDO, OREG.,
May 5, 1965.
Senator MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
What you say makes good sense to me and
I'm writing Johnson to this effect.
J. E. WRIGHT.
FLINT, MICH,
April 26, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE.
DEAR SIR: This is to advise you. I am
flatly against our procedure in Vietnam.
I feel it is time for the conference table,
rather than bombing that small country,
before we lose the opportunity.
Your truly,
Mrs. KARIN THORNGREN.
P,S.-I have written my Senators my feel-
ings.
MILWAUKIE, OREG.,
May 5, 1965.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: As ardent supporters of your
views on foreign policy in the past, we would
like to commend your opposition to the war
being waged by President Johnson in the
Dominican Republic and in Vietnam. We
earnestly hope that you will speak for ra-
WICHITA, KANS.,
May 5, 1965
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
-
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I uneasily remem
that in their fear of communism, the pee
of Germany turned to a dictatorial and n
taristic Hitler. I am deeply concerned I
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 May 7, 1965 Approved F O NGKa SI0ONAL RECORDDP SENATE 8000300150003-0
my country is backing military junta in
South Vietnam and Dominican Republic. I
am also disturbed that it is being hinted that
mounting military spending could offset an
economic recession caused by added medi-
care costs. Like you, I wonder that the Pres-
ident can go ahead and start wars without
advice and consent of Congress. I also
worry about alienating India, Pakistan, Cam-
bodia, and now countries in our hemisphere;
about going against U.N. and OAS.
I also feel that those who voted against
Goldwater, fearing his views on foreign
policy, have been ironically betrayed by our
present militaristic foreign policy.
Sincerely,
MARGARET BANGS.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
our protests do not produce a change in pol-
icy, we will not subside, but rather find new
ways of expression. I personally am consi-
dering nonpayment of income tax as one
such possibility. There are undoubtedly
many others. The ingenuity and resource-
fulness with which dedicated young people
can develop new ways of dramatizing their
views have become apparent during the
struggle over civil rights. They will demon-
strate the same sort of creativity in this
cause.
Sincerely yours,
LEONA E. TYLER, Ph. D.
THE SUPERIOR COURT OF Los ANGELES,
Los Angeles, Calif., April 28, 1965.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I think every earnest
citizen in the United States owes you a vote
of confidence and support in your dedicated
efforts to sustain the integrity of this coun-
try in matters of fiscal solvency and from
present foreign military intervention in
southeast Asia.
The suggestion often made that by some
divine ordinance this country must under-
take the responsibility to engage continually
in global fighting and military intervention
in foreign countries rests upon emotional,
irresponsible propaganda, and appeal that is
befogging the American public with the
thought that "An aggressive war is wicked,
but a defensive war is righteous."
To suggest that a man is an isolationist
because he opposes this type of global mili-
tary intervention is both irresponsible, un-
principled, and vicious.
I am sure there is a great bloc of the
American people who are In back of you 100
percent.
May I congratulate you upon your em-
phatid`and gainful efforts.
Very sincerely yours,
JOSEH L. CALL,
Judge.
LAMONT, CALIF.,
ESTEEMED SENATOR: I support your Viet-
nam stand. My only regret is that you do
not represent my State.
Yours truly,
ANDREW SCHWEFEL.
EUGENE, OREG.,
April 25, 1965.
President LYNDON B. JOHNSON,
The White House,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR PRESIDENT JOHNSON: I am a professor
at the Unj,versity of Oregon, one of the or-
ganizers of the all-night protest session
against the war in Vietnam held here last
Friday. I think you should know some
things about this protest movement that do
not show in newspaper reports or in official
statements. In the first place, the students
who took part here were among the most
able that we have. A disproportionate num-
ber are graduate students, highly selected
for intelligence and intellectual achievement,
and many of the undergraduates are of equal
ability. They are persons whose contribu-
tions are essential to the continued progress
of our society. In contrast, the supporters
of the present Vietnam policy who showed
up at Friday night's meeting gave no evi-
dence of such intellectual quality either in
the somewhat naive questions they asked or
in the boisterous heckling in which they in-
dulged at times. Only a few of them were
enough interested to stay through the after-
midnight discussions and express their views.
The second factor to which your attention
may not have been drawn is the character of
these all-night sessions. They are not sim-
ply protests, but a very concentrated form
of education. By the time the participators
have spent 12 hours listening to speeches,
asking and answering questions, and exam-
ining prepared discussion materials, they
know a great deal about such things as the
Geneva 1964 agreements, the history of our
involvement in southeast Asia, and other
relevant matters. The plan announced last
week by the State Department to step up
their public information activities is not
likely to have much influence on this group.
They know why we are in Vietnam, they are
convinced that our presence their has no
legal or ethical justification, and they will be
impressed only by policies that are directed
toward extricating us rather than involving
us more deeply. Statements like the one in
this morning's paper that the United States
is "retaining the option of using small nu-
clear weapons" solidify the opposition in
that they serve to confirm our worst fears-
,lamely, that forces in the administration are
trying to provoke a preventive war with
Ihina.
The third point I wish, to make is that the
,pposition to present policy is extremely in-
ense and serious. It grows out of a profound
sorai conviction similar in quality to that
xpressed in the civil rights movement. If
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.:
You are to be commended for your efforts
in trying to bring peace to southeast Asia,
Maybe there are those who are trying to solve.
the difficult problem of population explosion;
but perpetual war is a poor solution.
Sincerely yours,
EARL BENHAM.
[From the Bakersville Californian, Apr. 26,
1965]
CALIFORNIA DEMOCRATIC COUNCIL LEADERS
VOTE To QUIT VIETNAM WAR
Directors of the California Democratic
Council, at Its closing session of its 2-day
conference Sunday at the newly opened Holi-
day Inn, passed a resolution reaffirming a
stand in favor of a negotiated peace In Viet-
nam. The resolution also commended the
view of Senator WILLIAM J. FULBRIGHT and
Senator GEORGE AIKEN which called for A.
cease-fire in Vietnam in order to enhance
the possibility of discussions for settle-
ment.
The board turned down a more radical
resolution on Vietnam which called for street
demonstrations and political action.
The California Democratic Council con-
vention in Sacramento in March also passed
a resolution concerning the settlement of
the conflict in Vietnam in which it urged
the President of the United States to stop the
widening of the war by ordering a halt to
further bombing of North Vietnam. It also
asked that the United States seek a cease-
fire through the United Nations or an inter-
national body preliminary to negotiating a
diplomatic settlement, with guarantees
9563
against foreign intervention for an inter-
nationally supported economic and social
program of reconstruction and development.
The board also passed a civil rights reso-
lution in support of "the people fighting
for their recognition of basic rights and hu-
man dignity In Alabama."
In another resolution the board voiced
support of the AFL-CIO farm labor orga-
nization.
The board also went on record as "oppos-
ing nondisloyalty oaths for candidates."
The California Assembly recently passed a
measure requiring a loyalty oath of candi-
dates and the bill is now before the State
senate, it was reported.
In the discussion on this resolution, the
directors said they did not object to loyal-
ty oaths but did object to one that called
for declarations from a caniiidate or oth-
ers "that they had never been connected
with an organization or movement deemed
disloyal."
Another resolution called for the restora-
tion of the proposed 10-percent cut in sala-
ries of State college teachers; and another
calling for the legislature to reduce the
vote required for the passage of a school
bond measure in a school district from a
present two-thirds majority to one of a
simple majority.
Another resolution called for an investi-
gation into the decline of the fishing Industry
in the State and to check into water pollu-
tion problems.
Simon Casady, of El Cajon, near San Diego,
a retired publisher and newspaperman, told
a reporter of the Bakersfield Californian, that
"any division within the Democratic Party
seems to have healed over." Casady report-
edly had recently attended a meeting in Sac-
ramento in a conference with Gov. Edmund
G. Brown and Assembly Speaker Jesse D.
Unruh.
"At present, everything is sweetness and
light and that will be the story until after
the election," said Casady.
"The party will be unified and of one
mind in recognizing the job for the next 2
years is to keep control and hold tight against
the extreme rightists from taking over the
State."
Tom Carvey, immediate, past president of
the CDC, in a short speech on Saturday saw
the role of the CDC "as the conscience of the
Democratic Party" and "its strength will
lie in its idealism and practical purposes
in politics."
Garvey was presented with a large brass-
banded gavel as a memento for his longtime
service as State leader.
Horace D. Massey, of Bakersfield, region III
vice president, who arranged for the board
meeting invited the directors to look over the
facilities of the civic auditorium late Satur-
day as a preparation for the 1966 convention.
The convention which will bring an esti-
mated 8,000 CDC members to Bakersfield,
February 18, 19, and 20, 1966, will be one at
which all endorsements for State offices will
be made preliminary to the June primary
election.
The directors voted Sunday also to hold
the 1967 convention in Fresno bypassing a
bid of San Diego for the convention. Long
Beach had also bid for the 1967 meeting.
Bakersfield Attorney Gabriel Solomon was
named as State legal counsel for the CDC.
Solomon just returned from Sacramento
where he also was appointed vice chairman
for Northern California Negroes for Political
Action.
Solomon was also named by George Simp-
son, of Tulare, 18th Congressional District
director, for CDC, to the post 18th Congres-
sional District chairman for CDC.
VIETNAM EXPERTS PETITION PRESIDENT
Hundreds of the country's leading ex-
perts on Vietnam, China, and Asia attending
the national meeting of the Association for
Asian Studies, in San Francisco, petitioned
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67800446R000300150003-0
 9564
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0 g65
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE May 7, T
President Johnson to take the lead in calling:
for peace in southeast Asia. The petition
reached the White House during a 8-day in-
tensive deliberation on Vietnam policy.
The petitioners fear that the present policy
of escalation will cause the U.S.S.R. to
abandon its policy of peaceful coexistence
and (to) reassume its nuclear shield over
China. Other points in the petition to the
President stressed:
Current U.S. policy is forcing Hanoi (North
Vietnam) to depend increasingly on Com-
munist China;
The Vietcong In the south benefit from the
cruelty, impotence, and selfishness of the
so-called governments In South Vietnam that
have alienated the peasantry;
There are both doves and hawks in policy
circles in Hanoi, Peiping, and Moscow. Argu-
ments of their doves are weakened by fear
of America's implacable hostility.
The petitioners conclude that a strong
gesture from President Johnson for a peace-
ful resolution in. Vietnam could establish that
ours is the just cause and thereby win for
us the allegiance of the poor countries of
the world.
Prominent among the signers are:
From University of California: Gerald
Berreman, Delmer M. Brown, George De Vo:a,
Joseph R. Levenson, Herbert M. Phillips,
Henry Rosovsky, Franz Schurmann, James It.
Townsend.
From Harvard University: Robert Bellah,
Jerome A. Cohen, John K. Fairbank, Ezra
Vogel.
From University of Michigan: Albert
Feuerwerker,Rhoades Murphy, David Stern-
,berg. .
From Yale University: Harry Benda, Robert
J. Lifton, Mary Wright.
Jackson H. Bailey, Earlham College.
Robert A. Burton, University of Kansas.
Claude A. Buss, Stanford University.
Paul A. Cohen, Amherst College.
Stanley Lubman, Columbia University.
H. Y. Tien; University of Illinois.
G. William Skinner, Cornell University.
Stanley K. Sheirib'um, Center for the
;Study of Democratic Institutions.
PETITION
with only the prospect that Communist intent would help create the conditions for
China, like the Soviet Union in the wake of terminating the insurge:acy in the south on
World War II, would emerge stronger than terms satisfactory to the south. Above all,
before. It would run the grave risk that the we believe that such a declaration will make
Soviet Union would abandon its policy of possible steps toward peace in Asia such as
peaceful coexistence and reassume its nu- already have been achieved in Europe.
clear shield of China. This would not only 6. The course of events is in your hands.
once again pose the issue of total war, but We ask you to use the great power for moral
undo those laborious steps toward world good, political justice, and economic prog-
peace that have been achieved over the past ress which America has, and for which, be-
years, cause it has always used that power, it is
3. The present policy of increasing esca- respected throughout the world, to attack
lation rests on three questionable assump- for peace rather than for war. Power comes
tions. First, it assumes that the Soviet from bombs. but greater power comes from
Union will, in a showdown, not support Com- a just cause. Like .ll men, the men of
munist China, and that, therefore, American Peiping and Hanoi feel. that theirs is the
power can punish China with impunity. latter. It is in your hands to take that
The Sino-Soviet dispute has gone through from them and so give America access to
many fluctuations. The Soviet leaders are the allegiance of the poor countries of the
individual men making decisions. No one world.
can predict what they will be. No expert can 7. With all respect we stand ready at any
state flatly that they will abandon China in time and in any number to consult and
the moment of extreme crisis. advise if you believe we can make a con-
Second, It assumes that China and North tribution toward the resolution of this criti.-
Vietnam, when confronted with punishing cal problem.
destruction, will surrender to force. The
history of these two nations indicates just
the opposite. When attacked by the Japa-
nese and the French respectively, the Chi-
nese and the Vietnamese struck back fierce-
ly, made opportunity of the war to
strengthen their social organization, and
finally triumphed stronger than ever before.
Third, it assumes that the existence of the
war will create conditions for stability in
South Vietnam, strengthen the South Viet-
nam army, and create better conditions for
winning the war in the South. The Viet-
cong are powerful because of broad support
from the Vietnamese peasantry, and be-
cause the latter have been alienated from
the government by cruelty, impotence, and
selfishness. The succession of governments
in Saigon promises to further widen the
chasm between it and the people. That if
anything, will strengthen, rather than weak-
en, the Vietcong.
4. We firmly believe that a further escala-
tion can only lead to an even greater catas-
trophe in eastern Asia. America will then
be enmeshed in a land war on the Asian
mainland with the prospect of short-term
success and long-term defeat. America's
inevitable withdrawal from eastern Asia
would occur in a context of defeat and ha-
tred, just as was the case with imperial
Japan.
5. We firmly believe that there is an alter-
native decision for peace which is more than
just a negative decision against war. There
are "doves" and "hawks" in Hanoi, Peiping,
and Moscow. just as in our own country.
There are men in Hanoi who fear Chinese
domination as a consequence of war. There
are,men in Peiping who'fear loss of China's
painful recovery in the wake of its great
economic crisis 4 years ago. There are men
in, Moscow who would go a long way to pre-
vent a recurrence of the disaster that be-
fell Russia in the last war. What weakens
the argument of these men is the fear of
America's Implacable hostility against them.
We believe that an- open declaration of
America's determination for peace in east-
ern Asia would increase the chances of a
favorable response from the other sides and
from third parties. We respectfully call
upon you to express this determination by
calling off the bombing of North Vietnam
and taking the lead in convening the Ge-
neva Conference or the appropriate meeting
u deem at We call unon you to declare
o
THE CRISIS IN VIETNAM
(Remarks of Senator WAYNE MORSE, Joint
University Forum Chicago, Ill., January 15,
1965)
The title of my remarks would indicate
that I came here to talk about our problems
in Vietnam. But events of recent hours
make it evident that the problems in Viet-
nam are really those of the entire peninsula
of Indochina, now divided into North and
South Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia.
Refusal of the Administration to explain
what our planes are doing in Laos means
that the American people are getting a for-
eign policy of concealment in that part of
the world. They are entitled to know what
is being done in their name in Laos and
Vietnam. They are entitled to know whether
the United States is escalating the war
in Asia, and if so to what extent and for
what purpose. They are entitled to know
whether this violation by us of the Laotian
agreement of 1962 means we have junked
that agreement as the basis of our policy in
Laos and what is being substituted for it.
If they do not demand and receive such
an explanation, they could wake up some
morning and find that their Great Society
has dissolved in an Asian war.
That is how seriously I view our situation
in Asia. What little we in Congress are told
about the activities of our Armed Forces in
Asia is told in confidence. But it is you the
people, who fight, and you the people who
pay the bill. Today, neither you nor I
know what the Administration is doing in
Asia, to what it has committed us, what its
objectives are, and how much it is risking
to achieve them.
On one point there, is much agreement
among members of Congress and Adminis-
tration officials-that getting involved in
Indochina after the French got out was a
great mistake. Yet they are now under-
taking to compound that error by increasing
our involvement and commitment. Where
it will end and how much it will cost the
American nation they have not discussed
with the people nor with the Congress.
That is why I say we have a foreign policy
of concealment in southeast Asia.
But I would like to go back to the end of
World War II and examine the history of
American relations with southeast Asia to see
just how our policy led us to the present
perilous situation.
To the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:
1. We, the undersigned, professional schol-
ars in the field of Asian studies attending a
conference concurrent with your White House
deliberations on Vietnam policy, respectfully
call upon you to use the awesome power and
responsibility that rest in your hands to de-
cide whether our country will br the world
leader for peace and progress, or for War and
destruction. Politics is the work of individ-
ual men , `not the production of the forces of
history. In every crisis, ` a great leader of
men, by his decision alone, determines the
fate of the world. Whatever the outcome of
that decision, he bears full responsbiliity
for it.
2. When a decision involves war or peace,
the moral leader only opts for war because
he believes that an ultimate greater good
will be attained, or because he sincerely be-
lieves that his country's enemies are uncle-
-viatingly determined to have war. We, as
students of Asian affairs, firmly believe that
neither of these is the case. We believe that
all three great powers: the United States, the
Soviet Union, and Communist China, in one
way or another, use both the sword and the
olive branch to protect and to extend their
interests. It is not the force of history but
single events produced by individual deci-
sions which determine which shall be used.
We have, taken a dangerous step forward
through our policy of increasing escalation of
the war, one 'which puts us on a direct col-
lision course with China. This could be the
ultimate tragedy in Sino-American relations.
War with China would not win the predomi-
nantly guerrilla war in South Vietnam. It
would wreak vast destruction in eastern Asia
y
to Peiping and Hanoi our fundamental will- Twenty years ago almost to the very month.,
ingness to coexist peacefully with them as the subject of postwar American policy it
we are trying to do with the Soviet Union. southeast Asia came in for study in the high
We do not believe that such a magnagimous levels of Government. A State Departmen?
declaration would be regarded as a sign of memorandum to President Roosevelt sug
American weakness. Peiping and Hanoi are gested that positive announcements shouk
well aware of the immense power that Amer- be made of American policy toward the for
ica commands, can use, and has used. We mer colonial areas of southeast Asia bein
believe that such a declaration of peaceful liberated from Japanese occupation. It sup
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 May 7, 1965
Approved
I
found by the International Control Commis-
For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67Bi00446R000300150003-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
gested that specific dates for their self-gov-
ernment be set as objectives of American
policy.
We know from Cordell Hull's memoirs that
President Roosevelt heartily endorsed that
policy. He believed that French dominion
over Indochina should not be restored. At
the Cairo and Teheran Conferences he urged
that it be placed under an international trus-
teeship as a final step toward independence.
Cordell Hull records that only Prime ? Min-
ister Churchill disagreed, and he quotes
Roosevelt as saying:
"The only reason [the British] seem to op-
pose it is that they fear the effect it would
have on their possessions and those of the
Dutch. They have never liked the idea of a
trusteeship because it is, in some instances,
aimed at future independence.
"Each case must, of course, stand on its
own feet, but the case of Indochina is per-
fectly clear. France has milked it for 100
years. The people of Indochina are entitled
to something better than that."
Today we are paying the price for our
failure to carry out that policy. Within 10
years of the end of the war, the British, the
Dutch, and the French largely recognized,
after years of war and the expenditure of
billions of dollars, that colonialism is a thing
of the past. It is the United States that
has failed to recognize what Mr. Roosevelt
knew to be true: the era of white rule in
Asia is finished, whether it takes the form
of economic exploration through direct rule
or the form of manipulating governments to
protect what we regard to be our interest-
the postwar American form of colonialism.
Roosevelt's policy died with him. Our
primary Interest became one of bowing to
French wishes in all international matters
to guarantee her support and participation
in NATO, and we began financing the French
effort to recapture Indochina. We put over
$1 %4 billion into that futile struggle. And
when the French finally gave up, we took
It over ourselves.
WANTED: A WESTERN FOOTHOLD
All in all, it has cost American taxpayers
$6r/y billion, exclusive of the cost of our
own forces, to try to keep a Western foothold
in southeast Asia. Some writers are working
hard to convince the American people that all
we are doing is maintaining a historic Amer-
lean policy. Journalistic spokesmen for the
Defense Department are vehement in de-
claiming that to lose our foothold in Viet-
nam is to lose all we fought for in the Pa-
cific in World War II.
Nothing is further from the truth. Never
in our history have we had any kind of foot-
hold on the mainland of Asia. Before World
War II, the most we ever had was the Philip-
pines, which we voluntarily relinquished in
1935 and formally freed in 1945. Since 1945,
we have maintained base rights in the Philip-
pines, as in Japan; and we have kept a base
in Okinawa, won by conquest. Our present
foothold in South Korea is a legacy of World
War II, not its objective.
What these Defense Department spokes-
men really have in mind are not the strictly
American footholds and bases in that part
of the world but the whole network of
French, Dutch, and British possessions that
in World War II were freely used by Ameri-
cans in the prosecution of the war against
Japan. The possibility that these staging
areas should no longer be available for use
at our pleasure vis-a-vis China is for many
of them so unthinkable that they believe it
is worth a war to retain at least one of
them.
When France finally gave up the struggle
In Indochina, the United States refused to
>ign the Geneva Accord of 1954, which ended
the war. And we prevailed upon a new gov-
=ment we had chosen to back in South
rietnam not to sign it either. We began
o send military aid early in 1955, and we,
long with South and North Vietnam, were
Sion to be in violation of the treaty.
The sad truth is that the threats by lead-
ing American officials to make war on Chin&
and the present war crisis, are the logical
end of the dismal road in Indochina thair
John Foster Dulles set us upon in 1954,
After failing in his efforts to keep the French
fighting on in Indochina, despite American
aid to their war effort and the promise of
direct U.S. military action, Dulles refused to
put the signature of the United States on
the Geneva agreement of 1954 which marked
the end of French rule there. South Viet-
nam also declined to sign. The most the
United States said about the 1954 agree-
ment was that we would recognize it as in-
ternational 14%w and regard violations with
grave concern and as seriously threatening
international peace and security.
Among the provisions of the 1954 accords
was article 16: With effect from the date of
entry into force of the present agreement,
the introduction into Vietnam of any troop
reinforcements and additional military per-
sonnel is prohibited."
An exception was made for rotation of
personnel, meaning French, already there.
Article 17 provided: "(a) With effect from
the date of entry into force of the present
agreement, the introduction into Vietnam,
of any reinforcements in the form of all
types of arms, munitions, and other war ma-
terial, such as combat aircraft, naval craft;
pieces of ordnance, jet engines, and jet weap-
ons and armored vehicles is prohibited."
Again, an exception was made for replace=
ment on the basis of piece for piece of the
same type and with similar characteristics.
Article 18: "With effect from the date of
entry into force of the present agreement,;
the establishment of new military bases is
prohibited through Vietnam territory."
For 10 years we have claimed that North
Vietnam was violating the accord by sending'
in help to the rebels against the South Viet-
namese Government. But our solution was
not to go to the parties who signed the
agreement and who were responsible for its
enforcement. Nor did we go to the United
Nations, the sole international body with
jurisdiction over threats to the peace.
Instead we multiplied our own violations
by joining in the fighting. Each time we
increase the number of American boys sent
to that country to advise the local troops we
violate the Geneva Agreement of 1954.
Every jetplane, every helicopter, every naval
vessel we furnish South Vietnam or man
with American servicemen is a violation,
and so is every military base and airstrip
we have constructed there.
Yet we hypocritically proclaim to our-
selves and the world that we are there only
to enforce the Geneva agreement.
Part of the 1954 agreement established an
International Control Commission of Poland,
India, and Canada to investigate complaints
of violations. As early as its report covering'
1956, this Commission found both North and
South Vietnam had violated the accords of
1954, the latter in conjunction with the
U.S. military aid activities.
Immediately upon the signing of the 1954
agreement, the United States began to sup-
port the new government of South Vietnam
in a big way. In the letter President Eisen-
hower wrote President Diem, a letter still
serving as the basis for our policy in 1964,
aid was pledged to Diem, and in turn, "the
Government of the United States expects
that this aid will be met by performance on
the part of the Government of Vietnam in
undertaking needed reforms."
NO FREEDOM OR DEMOCRACY IN SOUTH
VIETNAM
In 1965, President Johnson refers to
that letter as the basis for our aid, but
the part about reforms has long since been
forgotten.
In the decade following 1954, the United
9565
States for all practical purposes made a pro-
tectorate out of South Vietnam. Its new
government immediately became financially
dependent upon us; as rebellion against it
grew, our level of aid was stepped up. By
1961, we had to.send 15,000 American troops
as "advisers" to the local military forces.
Today, the figure is 23,000.
When the Diem government diverted itself
from fighting rebels to fighting Buddhists, a
coup by military proteges of the United
States overthrew it. Within a few weeks,
another coup replaced the Minh junta with
what American advisers considered a more
efficient military junta under General Khanh.
In turn, the Khanh government has been
succeeded by a series of coalitions, the cur-
rent one being headed by Tran Van Huong.
At no time have the people of this un-
fortunate country had a government of their
own choosing. In fact, the Khanh junta
justified its coup with the excuse that some
Minh officers were pro-French, and might
seek some way of neutralizing the country.
Just how these various creations of the U.S.
Government differ from the old Bao Dai
government which served as the French
puppet, I have never been able to see. Yet
American leaders talk piously of defending
freedom in South Vietnam.
We say that one of our objectives is the
enforcement of the 1954 agreement. But it
has never been explained why we have any
business enforcing by force of arms an agree-
ment to which neither we nor our client
country is a signatory.
Nor is it explained why enforcement can
only take the form of massive violations by
ourselves of articles 16, 17, and 18 of that
agreement.
SIMILAR PROVISIONS GOVERN LOAS
In the case of Laos, we did sign the Geneva
accord of 1962, along with 13 other nations,
which sought to neutralize that country.
Hence, we claim that the violations we have
committed ourselves were undertaken only
after North Vietnam violated the accord first.
Our violations have taken the form first, of
sending armed planes flown by American
pilots over Laos for reconnaissance purposes
and more recently to carry out armed attacks
within the country.
The 1962 agreement permits military equip-
ment to be brought into the country at the
request of the Laotian Government. But
article 4 of the Loatian accord reads: "The
introduction of foreign regular and irregular
troops, foreign paramilitary formations and
foreign military personnel into Laos is pro-
hibited."
Today, we know the United States has
violated article 4 by sending our military
personnel into Laos. That they fly over the
country and bomb it from the air rather than
from the ground does not alter the case.
Our air raids in Laos are every bit as much
a violation of the agreement as the viola-
tions we believe North Vietnam has com-
mitted.
That is why I said at the outset that
neither you nor I know whether this coun-
try considers itself bound by that agreement;
nor do we know what policy in Laos may have
replaced it,
One of the speculations in Washington?
and speculation is the most we have to go on
about our policy in Asia-is to the effect that
the raids were undertaken to convince North
Vietnam and ultimately China that we would
not be pushed out of southeast Asia and were
prepared to expand the war if North Vietnam
did not stop her alleged encouragement of
rebels in South Vietnam.
If this is in fact the purpose of the raids,
which have been. going on since last June,
what have they accomplished?
Has anyone heard North Vietnam ask to
negotiate? Has anyone heard of a Viet-
cong surrender? To the contrary. The
Vietcong raids have become more daring and
more successful in the last 6 months than
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 Approved For Release 2003/10/14 :CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE May 7, 1965
at any time since the French underwent very the shots in all the Pacific without involving case in connection with Mr. Sukarno's ag-
much the same experiences we are now itself in war, this time not against only an gressions against Malaysia.
undergoing. island outpost of Asia, but against a third Third, the "fight now, negotiate later" line
iMIN1SA6ANSHIP IN ASIA of the world's population. is based on the wholly illusory assumption
The air raids are a brinkmanship fully I am satisfied that this would be true if that Red China and North Vietnam will do
communism had never been invented. There what we refuse to do--negotiate when they
as dangerous as John Poster Dulles ever never has been a time since 1954 when it was are losing. Can we really expect that when
practiced anywhere in the world. possible for this country to Impose a govern- China is in the same situation in which she
We are trying tobl bluff But we over- ment upon the people of South Vietnam was in Korea, she will negotiate instead of
look the fact that the rebellion in South without constant fighting to keep it in power. pouring her hordes into the fray? I know
Vietnam is carried out by South Vietnamese The war there will never end on our terms no reason to justify either this wishful
people primarily with weapons captured and because our very presence and our domina- thinking or the head-in-the-sand attitude
obtained from Government forces. tion of its affairs is a target for rebellion. that if we kill enough and bomb enough,
Not once have I heard an official advocate IGNORING THE U.N. CHARTER North Vietnam and Red China will yield.
China" policy state tate t that t the Vietcong Vietcong Vietnam would and If we expand the war into Laos, North UNITED STATES ISOLATED IN ASIA
collapse without outside support. All the Vietnam, or China, in the name of protecting There is yet another element to this prob-
evidence presented to the Foreign Relations our investment in South Vietnam, it will be lem that has largely been ignored. That is
Committee is exactly to the contrary. The an outright American aggratldizement of the isolation we would create for ourselves
State Department and the Pentagon continue the kind we have not embarked upon since in Asia.
to admit up to this very minute that the the Mexican War. We will not only he in- There is no evidence that any other na-
body and muscle and weapons of the Viet- viting disaster but will be flouting every tion would join us in expansion of the war
tong are local and not foreign. principle of international policy we have into Laos or North Vietnam. Although a
The result is that we are not going to make espoused since World War II. spokesman for Thailand recently proposed
any progress in South Vietnam by bluffing Not the least of these is our signature on that military forces from other Far Eastern
China. We only run the terrible risk that the the U.N. Charter and our support of its ac- nations join the United States in the fight-
decision of how far to go will be taken out tivities. If our signature means anything, ing, not even Thailand has actually sent any.
of our hands as it was in Korea, when we be- it requires us to observe article 2, section 4: There are no British, New Zealand, French,
lieved we could engage in acts of war a few "All members shall refrain in their interns- Filipino or Pakistani. forces in Vietnam,
miles from Chinese borders without her doing tional relations from the threat or use of either, yet all are members of the Southeast
anything about it. The massive intervention force against the territorial integrity or po- Asia Treaty Organization, under whose terms
by China in Korea took place only 2 or 3 litical independence of any state, or in any we claim we are acting in Smith Vietnam.
years after the Communists had taken control other manner inconsistent with the purposes Prime Minister Wilson has rejected a re-
of the country. Thirteen-years later they are of the United Nations." quest by President Johnson that Britain
much better prepared to fight a land war in Other charter provisions are specific as to send troops to join ours. But so did the
Indochina than they were in Korea. the duty of nations when they find them- President reject Wilson's request that the
Our brinkmanship with China flies in the selves involved in a dispute. Article 33 United States help fry Britain's fish in Ma-
laysia. Apparently each country will act uni-
face of
one ized the a facts of tlif(-. we he o et Union. long states: parties any p laterally in those places with a moratorium
since a Bred as will Soviet U"Section I. The an dis dispute, on critcism of any illegalities or threats to
It 'is that at a great power r will not tolerate hos- the continuance of which is likely to endan- an world peace that may: result.
tile governments or the bases of hostile na- ger the maintenance of international peace Of pEATO members, only Australia has
'Lions on Its immediate borders. Is there any and security, shall, first of all, seek a solu- sa token fee. It now yYnountS Australia 'ha-
doubt that the United States will not tion by negotaition, enquiry, mediation, con- sent e s 60 token 70 mce. ttn a few air t to per-
tolerate a Soviet base in Cuba? Or that we ciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, re- 1 nes and crews promised for the future-
to take whatever steps were necessary sort to regional agencies or arrangements, p es theme pro a se how our SEATO
to evict such a base? Or that we will use all or other peaceful means of their own choice." ,hallieseat tees about asur io n Vt our
the economic, political, and covert means Notice that the controlling verb is "shall." O orgorganization, in the first meet-
government our disposal to get rid of that hostile This is not an option but a directive. So Thinge a its f SEAT n ministers anon, in the f i adopted
government just 90 miles away? Perhaps it is far, it has been ignored by the United States. of eign in 1955,
s to a bylaw requiring that all
not worth war to us to get rid of it; but we It is commonly said both in and out of what
action the treaty requiring organization shall
mean to limit the extent of threat it poses government that the U.N. is a waste of time be b n uagreement. Flat op shall
and to work for its downfall and that the Communists understand noth- be and Pakistan has Flat opposi-
d
The Soviet Union accepted that premise, ing but force. However, the line continues; tion by unanimous ani formal military nd action in has fonam ed
just as we had accepted it in 1956 when the maybe at some future date we will find It to Sany
EATO.
Soviet Union took what steps it considered our interest to go to the U.N., This supposed- Indeed, the largest newspaper in Pakistan,
necessary to prevent a hostile regime from ly sophisticated argument ignores several Jang, recently editorialized:
coming to power in Hungary. We deplored points. n las the United States is allowed to
sir action and we wrung our hands. But First, it may not be left to us to decide remain long the area she will continue to fn-
e have conceded that Russia will not whether and when the issue should go to volve countries of the area in war. This is
Aerate hostile governments on her borders that body. Article 35 provides that "any because the United States is out to encircle
and we have accepted the premise as part of member of the United Nations may bring any and destroy the People's Republic of China."
our policy in. Europe. dispute, or any situation of the nature re- Even Australia is expressing alarm about
It is hard for us to apply that premise to ferred to in article 34 (threats to interns- the possible escalation of the war. The
China, not only because it is a Communist tional peace), to the attention of the Securi- Dail Mirror of S hat a relat el conserva-
nation more, virulent in its aggressive ty Council or of the General Assembly." This Dar AM ror of ydneysai on November cone va-
policies than the Soviet anion of today. We means that if we wait for another country tin have the additional emotional and historic to invoke article 35, we can be sure it will "DON'T BOMB HANOI
ballast of generations of American domina- not be under conditions most favorable to "There are ominous signs that renewed ef-
tion of whatever part of Asia we cared to US. forts are about to be made in Washington to
dominate. It is as hard for many Americans Second, the assumption by administration stampede the Johnson administration into
to see Asia emerge into full industrial na- Spokesmen that someday, sometime, somehow agreeing to bomb North Vietnam.
tionhood as it was for Sir Winston Churchill and under some other circumstances we will "This would be the last throw in an effort
to'preside over the liquidation of the British seek U.N. action is an admission that the to end the civil war that has racked South
Empire. issue is really one of U.N, jurisdiction. What Vietnam for so long.
It was we who opened Japan to the west they are saying is that to adhere to the Char- "Any such reckless action could well prove
against her wishes; it was we who Insisted ter now would not serve American interests: to be disastrous. At the best it is not likeic
upon an "open door" for all western nations The time to negotiate is when we dominate to achieve its objective. At its worst, i
to exploit China equally; it was we who the battlefield. could start a Korea-type war, with Chines
seized and eventually released the Philippines This amounts to saying that any treaty intervention, which might spread nobod
from colonialism; and it was we who bore the obligation that does not serve our national knows where.
battle against'Japan when she undertook to interest is just a scrap of paper. These offi- "Two of the most influential British new:
make Asia a Japanese colony Instead of a cials take the view that we may one day res- papers, the Guardian and the Times, col
white colony. urrect the Charter from the wastebasket demo the proposal to extend the war. Ti
The Pacific has historically been an Aineri- but not until we think it serves our inter- Guardian says that even if the present pro
can lake., 'While other 'Western nationr con- ests. iaganda campaign is merely designed to p
trailed large reaches of it, we were Satisfied If this is to be our policy, then we are help- the United States in abetter bargaining poi
with their presence. But never have we ex- ing to destroy the United Nations and all the tion. it still does not seem a good idea.
perienced{a Western Pacific controlled by the advances in the rule of law in world affairs "The Times says that the dangers `scalcc
people who lived there, except for the brief that it represents. This will undermine our need pointing out., One of the risks, it as
period of Japanese supremacy. moral position and seriously compromise our is of Chinese intervention, and it adds: 'C
Within a very few years, however, the capacity for calling others to account for of the fallacies of the past 5 years in Sot
United States is going, to find it cannot call breaches of the peace. This is already the Vietnam has been that the guerrillas in
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 May 7, 19 65
pproved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
CONO iESSIONAL RECORD = SEDATE 9567
south were a creation of the north and not
a genuine revolt against misgovernment.'
"The French, who have bitter cause to
know more about the situation in Indochina
than anybody else, also oppose bombing
North Vietnam.
"After 16 years of ruinous civil war surely
commonsense would dictate to Washington
that a political, not a military solution, is the
answer."
Although India is the one country of Asia
most threatened by China, even India has no
desire to see a war break out, because in con-
ditions of war between the United States and
anyone in Asia, nuclear weapons would be
used sooner or later. Moreover, like Aus-
tralia, India knows that in war, nations lose
control of events. Nations are controlled
by wars, and not the other way around.
Prime Minister Shastri of India has just
recently renewed his request that the United
States seek a negotiated and not a military
solution. And Prime Minister Sato of Japan
has closed his talks with President Johnson
without committing his country to an en-
dorsement or condemnation of anyone in
southeast Asia. That is the most sym-
pathetic view of our position among any of
the leading nations of Asia.
How much further do we want to dig our-
selves into this pit, started by the Eisenhower
administration and deepened by the Ken-
nedy administration?
FUTURE OF UNITED STATES IN ASIA UP TO
PRESIDENT JOHNSON
That question is going to have to be an-
swered by President Johnson alone. It is too
bad that all these chickens have all come
home to roost on his doorstep; but there
they are.
The resolution passed last August by Con-
gress gave the President a blank check to
use force in Asia. As a legal statement it
means little; but it was sought and given as
a political backstop. On two other occasions,
similar resolutions authorizing a President to
use armed force in given areas led right
straight to war. One was with Mexico in
1846 and a second was with Spain in 1898.
Those resolutions, like the current one, were
supposed to prevent war by warning an ad-
versary of our Intentions. But both had to
be followed by declarations of war.
The question now is whether President
Johnson can bring himself to do the only
thing that can be done in Asia to escape an
expanded war: to bring other Interested par-
ties into a multilateral political agreement
for southeast Asia.
This could take the form of a United Na-
tions jurisdiction along the lines proposed so
wisely by President Roosevelt; or it could
take the form of seeking a SEATO action
that would police South Vietnam while a
political solution is developed; or it could
take the form of a new 14-nation conference
among the same nations that arranged the
1954 Geneva accord. '
The further we go In expanding the war-
the more agreements we violate and the more
people we kill in the name of peace-the
more military opposition we harden against
us in North Vietnam and China-the more
we alienate ourselves from the now-Com-
munist nations In that part of the world-
the more impossible any peaceful solution
becomes.
In the last 10 years, we have learned that
we are not masters of events in Vietnam,
despite our billions of dollars and our thou-
sands of troops on the scene. It has not
been shown that any stepped-up investment.
of blood or money will make us masters.
It still is not too late for President John-
son to lead the American people out of this
morass. Whether he leads us out or further
in, will be the first great test of his admin-
.stration.
IDEA FOR SEA-GRANT COLLEGES
Mr. PELL. Mr. President, this Nation
is convinced that going to the moon is
a worthwhile objective and the Federal
Government is spending billions of dol-
lars for this purpose. As it should have
been, this decision was reached after
considerable public and private study
and debate. Now, I think it is time that
national recognition be given to a rela-
tively unexplored frontier right here on
earth which holds countless riches and
the key to solving many of the problems
posed by a mushrooming population. I
speak of the oceans, which many scien-
tists claim we know relatively less about
than the surface of the moon. In view
of the recent camera probes of the moon's
surface, these scientists may be right.
Yet, the oceans cover two-thirds of
the globe's surface. In a world where
at least 500 million humans suffer from
extreme critical deficiencies of animal
proteins, the seas contain untapped sup-
plies of fish, shellfish, and crustaceans.
The oceans also contain most of the
earth's minerals. Many of the nations-
faced with searing droughts-are washed
by these same mineral-saturated waters.
In connection with problems of the
scope of the oceans and our mastery of
them on an international basis, I well
recall how much we have yet to learn
from my experience as an American dele-
gate to the initial meeting of the Inter-
governmental Maritime Consultative Or-
ganization-IMCO-in London in 1959.
The seas also present some unique
problems to us as a nation. Marine
pollution in terms of chemicals, sewage,
water temperatures, and-in some case-
radioactive materials is a growing threat
to the fishing, shellfishing, and recrea-
tion industries. As the- population ex-
pands and new industrial complexes rise,
these problems will become more press-
ing.
Meanwhile, our fishing fleets face the
prospect of being forced from the high
seas because of economic pressures and
unnecessary technological lags. Once the
second largest fishing nation in the world
we now stand fifth after Peru, Japan,
Red China, and Russia.
Other leading nations of the world are
becoming increasingly conscious of the
oceans and their potentials of research
and development in food supply, mineral
resources, and military application.
President Johnson, in his idea for the
Great Society, I am sure, thinks in terms
of the contribution to be made in the
years ahead by the mighty seas. Presi-
dent Kennedy stated in a message to
Congress:
Knowledge of the oceans is more than a
matter of curiosity. Our very survival may
hinge upon it.
These are some of the problems and
challenges, but what are we doing about
them? As a nation, are we doing
enough? What should we be doing that
we are not? Specifically what benefits
can be realized from greater efforts in the
marine sciences? I would like to try
and answer some of these questions to-
day, not only because of Rhode Island's
long heritage as a marine-oriented State,
but also because of the benefits that the
Nation and the world can realize.
Fortunately, the economic potential of
developing our marine resources has been
documented very carefully by a distin-
guished committee of the National Acad-
emy of Sciences-National Research
Council. This group reported that with-
in the next 10 to 15 years oceanographic
research could bring benefits-either in
annual savings or new annual produc-
tion-worth $5.7 billion. The areas where
these benefits could be realized are in
fisheries, the development of ocean-floor
mineral deposits, improved long-range
weather forecasting, improved near-
shore sewage disposal methods, expan-
sion of near-shore recreational oppor-
tunities, and lower shipping costs to the
United States. These benefits are in
addition to those that would accrue to
our national defense effort. This factor
should not be overlooked, since past ex-
perience has shown that ocean conditions
and processes influence all phases of na-
val activities.
There is also every indication that
given the proper assistance and the right
atmosphere, many private companies
will step up their marine research and
development activities, creating signifi-
cant new industries and jobs.
Keeping what I have said in mind, it
is apparent that steps toward tapping
these vast ocean resources depend-at
least initially-on Federal and State sup-
port of research in the marine sciences.
The Federal Government has partially
recognized its responsibilities in this re-
spect with sharply increased budgets for
oceanographic research. In fiscal 1958,
the first time the Government surveyed
its spending in this field, it was deter-
mined that $23 million was being spent.
In 1963, the total had climbed to $124
million. The projections for 1972 are
that the Federal oceanographic effort
may have a $350 million budget or more.
The Federal plans are fine as far as
they go, but I believe there are some big
gaps in our thinking. Let me explain.
Some interesting parallels have been
drawn between the state of agriculture
in our country and the slow decline in
the fishing industry.
I am particularly conscious of the role
that fish and ocean products can have in
fulfilling human protein requirements
from my role as Coast Guard officer in
charge of the restoration of the Sicilian
fishing industry at the end of World War
II, when our objective was to feed the
hungry Sicilian people as quickly as pos-
sible.
In 1820 one American farmer was pro-
ducing enough food, fiber, and related
products for himself and four other peo-
ple. Today, this farmer's descendants
produce enough food to feed himself and
31 others, including 5 persons in for-
eign countries.
On the other hand, fishermen-par-
ticularly in this country-are hunters in
an environment they don't understand
too well. Seventy-two percent of the
American fishing fleet was from 11 to 50
years old in 1962, according to statistics
Approved For Release 2003/10/14.: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
9568 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE May 7, 1965
gathered by the Bureau of Commercial
Fisheries. This agency,, reported that
the average medium-sized trawler asY.--
ing North Atlantic watgrs was built., in
1941. Small trawlers are even older--
the average vessel having been built in
1938.
Meanwhile, we are faced by increased
foreign competition. J4, April 1964? the
Bureau of Commercial F%sheries reported
that for the first time imports provided
over half the U.S, supply of fishery
products. Nevertheless,, the fishing ItL-
dustry employs-either directly or indi-
rectly-over 500,000 people and fisher-
men received, according to the latest
available statistics, over $370 million for
their catch. It can be conservatively
estimated that you should multiply, the
latter figure by three or four to get the
true value of the catch to the American
economy. In this case, we are talking
about an industry worth in excess of $1
billion which Is slowly being eroded away
by foreign competition and lagging tech-
nological progress.
The answer, I believe, is something
that has been called sea-grant colleges,
similar in concept to the land-grant col-
leges which have done samuch for Amer-
ican agriculture. Within the sea-grant
universities could ;he colleges of aquacul-
ture, marine aquacultural experiment
stations, fishery extension services, and
seagoing fishing port agents.
At first glance, this whole idea may be
a .bit startling, but it has been advanced
by, and knowing marine scientists.
I think the Congress should do its part
in advancing the idea, and I intend to
explore this concept further. It is' evi-
dent that this idea is already evolving
and taking form because it makes sense
and is in reality a` necessity for the sur-
vival of the fishing industry.
I am happy to report that Rhode Is-
land has already taken the leadership
in this direction. The nucleus for- this
leadership is at the University of Rhode
Island which has been doing basic re-
search in oceanography and the marine
sciences since 1937, when it established
a small laboratory at the mouth of t ar-
ragansett Bay.
In the short span of less than three
decades, this small laboratory has groom
into a $7 million marine' research com-
plex that includes Federal, State, and
university facilities. It is also the head-
quarters for. the University of Rhode
Island Graduate School of Oceanggra-
phy, one of the finest in the Nation and
the home port for the 180-foot research
vessel, Trident. Here within a few years
at least 400 persons will be working in
the marine sciences. were too will be
trained a significant number of the new
generation of oceanographers, since the
university is one of only six in the coun-
try that trains scientists in all aspects of
oceanography. ,
This brief background and a bit more
bears on the point I want to make.
ways this was done, but significantly the and tying up a boat and crew for days.
college has directed some of its attention How many fishermen can afford this?
to the fishermen who were very obviously Where do they turn for help?
in desperate need of help. Another illustration involves the so-
Today, the university has a depart- called deep sea red crab which is found
ment of food and resource economics in in abundance along the continental shelf
the college of agriculture that works from Nova Scotia to Cuba. Catches of
closely with fishermen and other marine 3,000 to 4,000 pounds of these crabs have
interests. A universitywide marine sci- been obtained by deep-sea lobstermen in
ences program has promoted research 1-hour tow. However, these crabs are
in waterfront development, shore stabi- considered a nuisance and are dumped
zatio , sand dune control, fishery mar- back into the sea,
keting, the production of pharmaceuti- Scientists at the Woods Hole Oceano-
cals from marine organisms, fishery pop- graphic Institute have known about these
ulations and managem3i.t, pollution, and crabs for years. A Bureau of Commercial
radioactive contamination of the marine Fisheries taste panel said the quality,
environment to name a few areas. texture, and palatability of crabs cooked
In addition, the faculty members in- at sea and frozen was "good."
volvedin this work have sought to make Although you can't purchase these
their lrnowledge and findings available crabs in your grocery store, you can find
by serving as consultants to industry and plenty of similar frozen and canned
government agencies, by -peaking before products from Japan and other foreign
interested groups, by articles and papers, nations. Yet successful marketing of the
and by a series of annual forums for New American red crab, is a definite pos-
England fishermen. sibility, according to a University of
The university is now studying the idea Rhode Island scientist. The problems
too of initiating a program in fisheries of how to preserve the crab catch and
technology to train novice fishermen. how to process it cheaply-once it gets
In pay office, there are two maps de- ashore-are being investigated.
picting the last physical frontier on our There is considerable room for ex-
planet. One shows the ocean deeps of the pansion of imaginative university-based
North Atlantic, the other Narragansett programs of this nature, but I don't be-
Bay and the bordering ocean. In. my lieve we can ask the States alone to as-
State, we have for generations been sea sume the burden of a nationwide system
and navy minded-from early colonial of sea-grant universities. Nor should
days. there be as many sea-grant universities
I have cited what is happening in as there are land-grant institutions of
Rhode Island because I am excited about higher learning.
the future possibilities and the events Improved communications techniques
give some inkling of what "sea grant" and new modes of transportation make a
universities might accomplish on a na- State-by-State system of sea-grant uni-
tional scale. versities unnecessary. I envison pos-
If nothing else, I believe the Congress sibly a dozen or more such centers serv-
should take, steps to initiate a Federal ing various regions in the country. These
extension program in fisheries and re- should also be centers of excellence for
lated areas of marine sciences. We need the entire broad range of oceanographic
people who can review the extensive re- studies. The universities could be th; .
search that has already been done and focal point for vast research and develop-
take steps to put it into practical use. ment complexes involving the Federal
We need people to bridge the gap be- Government, private industry, and fish-
tween the researchers and the people ing interests.
who can benefit from this research. The These centers of excellence in the
place for these people is In the univer- marine sciences should be fostered and
sities. Fishermen who are already op- developed in those areas that have made
erating on a narrow profit margin can- a beginning and have the capabilities
not beexpected to take time, out to adapt and resources for such an undertaking.
experimental gear to their own uses, even Obviously, geography too is an important
though in the long run it might be the consideration.
most ,profitable thing to do. These men I believe such a marine science com-
cannot be expected to try and catch new plex is well on its way toward develop-
species of marine organisms, even though ment in the region stretching from New
this might open up vast new markets. London, Conn., through Rhode Island to
Let us take note of two very specific in- Woods Hole, Mass.
stances where a fisheries extension pro- Within the 75-mile span from Electric
gram would be of benefit. Boat in New London. to the Woods Hole
Right now North Atlantic fishermen Oceanographic Institution are major
traditionally trawl along the bottom to fishing ports, companies like Raytheon,
fill their holds with fish. Yet-as any Electric Boat and United Nuclear, several
biological oceanographer will tell you- important Navy installations, including
many valuable species are found in mid- the U.S. Naval Underwater Ordnancf
water depths. These fish escape bottom Station at Newport, universities, Federa
nets. The Bureau of Commercial Fish- research laboratories, a research reactor
eries has done pioneering work in devel- and most importantly a considerabi
During the decades that Rhode Island oping midwater trawl methods on the number of people with experience an
was rising to promine_ee in oeeanogra- west coast. Hearing about this, some advanced degrees in the marine science
phy, the role of agriculture in the State fishermen at Point Judith, R.I., have Working together with the proper a
was declining. As a result the Un1ver- said they would like to try and adapt sistance and encouragement, these pe,
city of Rhode Island's College of Agri- these' techniques to local conditions and pIe can make outstanding contributio:
culture shifted its emphasis. I am not boats. But this requires technical assist- to the national welfare and the advanc
going to go into the details of the many ante, time away from the fishing banks, ment of science.
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RD.P67B00446R000300150003-0
 May7,1965
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 9569
At this time in our history, I believe
this Nation is on the threshhold of a new,
bold, and imaginative era in which the
Science of Oceanography will play an
immense role. Within the next decade,
I foresee we will take giant steps forward
in this area to keep our Nation strong in
the leadership of the free world.
Already there are a number of bills
before the Congress to advance our so-
ciety through the potentials of the great
oceans that wash our shores. I am
happy to be cosponsor of the Magnuson
bill in the Senate which would provide
among other things for expanded re-
search in the oceans and the Great Lakes,
establish a National Oceanographic
Council and preserve the role of the
United States as a leader in oceano-
graphic and marine science and tech-
nology.
It is very possible, I believe, we will
someday in the not too distant future
embark on a great program comparable
perhaps even to our effort. in space and
perhaps equally as important, if not
more so, in exploring, developing, and
harvesting the seas. And, I believe, my
own State of Rhode Island, already en-
dowed with the advantages of geography
and scientific facilities and know-how,
will make a significant contribution in
this vital, progressive and perhaps even
survival endeavor.
MEDICARE TESTIMONY, MAY 7
Mr. HARTKE. Mr. President, the Fi-
nance Committee today continued its
hearing on H.R. 6675. Five witnesses
presented testimony dealing with what
we have commonly come to call medi-
care. I offer once more, and ask unani-
mous consent that it may appear in the
RECORD, a brief summary digest, prepared
by my staff and entirely unofficial, of the
testimony of the day.
There being no objection, the summary
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
AMERICAN NURSING HOME ASSOCIATION
Dr. Carl E. Becker, clergyman of the Amer-
loan Lutheran Church and administrator of
the Lincoln Luthern Home, Racine, Wis.,
president since 1960 of the Wisconsin Nurs-
ing Home Association. American Nursing
Home Association comprises over 5,000 nurs-
ing homes, including 10 to 15 percent non-
profit homes.
1. Proposes amendment to allow conversion
of home health visits to additional nursing
home days at 2 for 1, allowing a maximum
of 25 added nursing home days instead of 50
home visits (out of the 100 available). This
would parallel (in section 1832) provisions,
or converting unused hospital days into
nursing home days (section 1812).
2. Proposes deletion of "listing" (section
1 63) as inappropriate in a standards sec-
>i on, leaving the secretary to consult with
'4ational (listing or) accrediting bodies."
iection 1865 on accreditation should specify
h e National l Council for the Accreditation of
i*ising Homes, whose chairman is also a
l?uber of the Joint Commission on Accred-
a tion of Hospitals.
I. Proposes additional specification (sec-
s 1867) of membership in the Health In-
ance Benefits Advisory Council by at least
representative' of nonprofit and one of
proprietary nursing homes among the 16
members.
4. Nursing home provisions should take ef-
fect at the same time as hospital provisions,
not 6 months later. Otherwise nursing home
patients will seek transfer to hospitals at
greater cost in order to receive benefits. The
3-day hospital stay for nursing home eli-
gibility should likewise be eliminated to
avoid "caravans of ambulances" shifting pa-
tients to secure eligibility.
5. Proposes added standards: Fire-resistant
building; disaster plan; a planned program
of nursing care; uniform accounting sys-
tem (section 1861(j)).
KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN, INC.
Dr. Clifford H. Keene, general manager.
Plan "provides most of the hospital and
medical care services for over 1,200,000 per-
sons through 14 hospital-based medical cen-
ters and 29 outpatient clinics."
1. Supports health care provisions of the
bill, but believes they can be improved to
give (a) better health care and (b) incen-
tives for controlling costs.
2. Choice of plans should be furnished
comparable to the choice offered in the Fed-
eral employees health benefits program.
3. Direct service plans (Kaiser, Health In-
surance Plan of New York; etc.) have direct
responsibility for their own facilities and
staff. This provides "a built-in incentive
for economy of operation not present in the
'fee-for-service' method of payment for medi-
cal care," since increased treatment or hos-
pitalization does not increase income. "Fee-
for service" plans should be provided as "the
dominant pattern in this country" but
should not be exclusive.
4. There should be a financial incentive
for effective utilization controls.
RICHARD S. WILBUR, M.D.
Internist, partner in Palo Alto Medical
Clinic, Palo Alto, Calif.
1. Protection should be against medical
catastrophe, but the proposed coverage goes
"well beyond" this. "Total health care" pro-
grams encourage increased utilization, in-
creased costs of administration without
comparable health values. Result will be
depletion of benefits fund.
2. The ' program should be restricted "to
those people who must have help now."
3. "Ordinary working doctors" should be
consultants in rewriting the bill.
4. A separate "health oriented" agency
should administer the plan.
- SHIRLEY POWELL MARLOW
Mrs. Marlow is "a southern housewife,"
Virginia Beach, Va.
1. Strongly opposes the bill.
2. Main objection: It tries to shift a basic
personal moral obligation to Government.
3. "Medicare" is already "a pretty cruel
hoax," not doing what many expect.
AMERICAN SOCIETY OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
Dr. Malcolm S. M. Watts, San Francisco.
Society has 8,000 members.
1. All diagnostic services ordinarily super-
vised by physicians should be in the
voluntary rather than basic coverage.
2. Diagnostic service should not be tied to
hospital controlled facilities. only; should
include physicians' offices and laboratories
as well.
S. A choice of programs comparable to
that of the Federal Employees' Health Bene-
fit Plan should be included.
4. Benefits "should be extended to include
truly catastrophic illness for the perhaps
2 to 4 percent of beneficiaries who will really
need it."
5. Administration should be by "a quasi-
Independent governmental board or com-
mission."
CONCLUSION OF MORNING
BUSINESS
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
further morning business? If not, morn-
ing business is closed.
ORDER FOR ADJOURNMENT UNTIL
MONDAY
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent that when the
Senate completes its business today, that
it stand in adjournment until 12 o'clock
boon on Monday.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
VOTING RIGHTS OF 1965
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent that the unfin-
ished business be laid before the Senate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
The Senate resumed the consideration
of the bill (S. 1564) to enforce the 15th
amendment to the Constitution of the
United States.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the amend-
ment offered by the Senator from Mas-
sachusetts [Mr. KENNEDY], on behalf of
himself and other Senators, numbered
162, to the amendment in the nature of a
substitute, as amended, numbered 124,
offered by the Senator from Montana
'[Mr. MANSFIELD] and the Senator from
Illinois [Mr. DIRKSEN].
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
suggest the absence of a quorum. I ask
unanimous consent that the time for the
quorum call to be charged to the time
allotted to my side.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered. The clerk will
call the roll.
The Chief Clerk proceeded to call the
roll.
Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr.
President, I ask unanimous consent that
the order for the quorum call be re-
scinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
How much time does the Senator yield
to himself?
Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr.
President, I yield myself 1 hour.
' The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ator from Massachusetts is recognized for
1 hour.
Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr.
President, this amendment deals with a
subject that has been the concern of
Congress for almost 30 years. In 1942,
1943, 1945, 1947, and 1949 the House of
Representatives passed statutes abolish-
ing poll taxes in Federal elections, while,
in the Senate, this issue was not allowed
to come to a vote. In 1942, and again in
1950, the poll tax requirement for voting
was abolished by act of Congress for men
in the Armed Forces. Just 3 years ago,
under the very able leadership of the
Senator from Florida, we passed the 24th
amendment.
Approved For Release 2003/10114: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
9570 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD SENATE
We have debated this matter for so
many years because the overwhelming
majority of the Members of the Senate
know in their hearts Mat, used as a pre-
requisite to voting, the poll tax is not
right. It is not logical. It is not in
keeping with the principles of our form
of free government to tell a man that,
in order to vote, he must pay a tax.
Who are we protecting by abolishing
the poll tax? We are protecting the
Negro farmworker in Greenville, Miss.,
whose average income,is $12 a week, and
to whom the family poll tax is the equiv-
alent of 1 day's pay. We are protect-
ipg the sharecropper in Alabama who
earns $2 a day and does not get paid
until the cotton comes In, but who never-
theless must pay his poll tax in Novem-
ber and December. We are,saying to
these hundreds of thousands of people:
"We will not stand by and see your right
to vote taken away because you are poor
and have had no economic opportunity.
We will not single you out of all the
other citizens of the United States and
place an economic hardship on your
right to vote."
The voting rights bill before us, which
the President of the United States pre-
sented to us so eloquently, as we all re-
member, at the time of the crisis in
Selma, Ala,, will have its greatest effect
in State elections. It is designed to give
Negro citizens the right to participate in
the choice of their sheriffs, their mayors,
their State legislators, and their Gover-
nor-all the State and local officeholders
whose activities have such an impact on
their lives Including the officeholders
who have been so prominent in discrim-
inatory practices against -Negro-- citizens.
Because of the importance of., these
offices to the lives of these people, I be-
lieve that the overwhelming majority of
the Members of the Senate, know in
their hearts that it is neither right, nor
logical, nor in keeping with the princi-
ples of our form of free government to
tell a man that in order to vote in a State
or local election he must pay a tax.
All of us who are cosponsoring this
amendment believe that the leadership,
In its bill, has recognized these principles
just as the great majority of Senators
recognize it.
I commend the distinguished majority
leader and the distinguished minority
leader for the interest they have shown
in this subject.
First. The leadership undertook to put
in a provision, which is the present sec-
tion 9, stating that there was evidence
that poll taxes denied the right to vote,
and directing the Attorney General to
forthwith make a test of the constitu-
tionality of poll taxes in the four States
that still have them.
This is extremely significant. It shows
that the leadership and'the Senators who
sponsored this amendment have the same
strong feeling about poll taxes and are
working toward the same end.
I also commend the Attorney General
for the interest he has 'shown in this is-
sue. The Department of Justice has
been concerned with developing ways and
means of insuring the abolition of poll
taxes in State elections. This is typical
of the leadership in the cause of equal
rights that, the Attorney General has
given this country, both in his present
position and before.
We are all agreed on purpose. We dis-
agree only on how to accomplish that
purpose. The nine members of the Ju-
diciary Committee who introduced the
original ban on the poll tax have been
joined in cosponsorship of the amend-
ment we are now considering by 30 other
Senators of both parties. With all due
respect for both the ability and sincer-
ity of the authors of the substitute, we
believe that:
Our methods will work and theirs may
not.
Our method will work quickly while
theirs will work slowly.
Ours clearly expresses the policy of
Congress in this area while theirs leaves
the making of policy to the courts.
First, let me state what our amendment
does. It does not outlaw the poll tax,
it merely says that the right to vote
cannot be conditioned on its payment.
Many States have poll taxes today, but
collect them in other ways than by deny-
ing people the right to vote. Only Ala-
bama, Mississippi, Virginia, and Texas
make payment a precondition of voting
in all State and local elections. It is to
the people in these States that our
amendment is directed.
First, our amendment makes a strong
congressional declaration that the pro-
hibition of the poll tax requirement for
voting is necessary to secure the rights
guaranteed by the 14th and 15th amend-
ments to the Constitution against denial
or abridgement.
Secondly, our bill forbids the collec-
tion of such a tax as a precondition of
voting. It orders the Attorney General
to sue forthwith against any State or
local voting official who threatens to
enforce such a tax. In this we have
tried to stay as close as possible to the
procedure laid down by the Mansfield-
Dirksen bill. They seek a court test of
constitutionality. We seek a court test
of constitutionality. But we sincerely
believe that the chance of a favorable de-
cision by the Court will be immensely
strengthened under our version. That
is why I hope all who feel strongly about
abolition of the poll tax will vote with us.
Let me explain why we believe our ver-
sion will do better in court:
First, we make a strong congressional
declaration that the prohibition of the
poll tax as a voting requirement is neces-
sary. The courts always give a great
weight to such declarations by Congress.
The courts have said that they do this
because Congress does have the ability to
review the whole situation and gather all
the evidence, while the courts can only
look at the facts of the case before them.
Congress can declare a national policy,
while the courts can only decide the
pending cases.
The bill we are seeking to amend does
not have a declaration of national policy.
It merely says that evidence has been
presented to_ Congress. But what does
it do with this evidence? It does not
take any action on it. It merely passes
it on to the courts. A great deal of evi-
dence is presented to Congress on many
subjects. But if Congress does not do
May 7, 1965
anything with it the evidence certainly
loses persuasiveness.
Our amendment does take action on
the evidence.. It does so by prohibiting
States and political subdivisions from
enforcing the poll tax as a requirement
for voting. And that action, in our
judgment, is going to be crucial to the
court test. Until Congress acts-and
this is a very important point-until
Congress acts, all the courts can do is
decide whether existing State poll tax
voting requirements are constitutional.
The courts have never outlawed such a
statute even though cases have been be-
fore the courts in varying postures on
four or five occasions. But once Con-
gress acts, the only question then before
the courts is whether the act of Con-
gress is reasonable. Under our version
all the Attorney General has to do when
he goes into court is show that Congress
could reasonably arrive at the declara-
tion that prohibition of the poll tax was
necessary to secure constitutional rights.
Mr. President, the Nation's leading
authority on constitutional law is Prof.
Paul Freund, of the Harvard School
of Law. He is universally recognized as
such. It was he who spoke at the funeral
of Mr. Justice Frankfurter. It is he who
is editing the history of the Supreme
Court that Congress has authorized and
funded. He says on this subject, and I
quote:
Congress has the responsibility under the
14th and 15th amendments that cannot be
avoided by forcing issues of voting rights
into the courts without the benefit of con-
gressional declarations of policy, experience
and judgment.
He does not say evidence. He says
declarations of policy. This is what our
amendment has and the present bill does
not have.
We have received expressions of sup-
port for the constitutionality of our
amendment from experts all over the
country. They include the dean of the
Yale Law School, the associate dean of
the St. Louis University Law School,
professors at the University of Alabama
Law School and many others. But no
one has stated the issue more succinctly
than Professor Freund. And with all.
respect to the distinguished constitu-
tional lawyers in this Chamber, I think
his views are entitled to the most care-
ful consideration.
What the question really gets down to
is this:
We all want a quick Court determina-
tion of constitutionality. We all want
the Attorney General to go into court as
soon as he can.
Are we going to send him in thei 'f
with. the strongest possible case? Are vn
going to give him a strong declaratik-li
and action by Congress so he will =b
in the best possible position? Are rx
going to give him the tools to do til
job?
Three times in the last 8 years we h-," passed bills that allowed the Attorl
General to sue to protect voting rigl
But these bills did not have the to
They did not do the job, so each ti
we had to come back and pass a new 1
Now the President has asked us to sti
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 May 7, 1965 Approved F CO RES SI~~TAL1 8 ~DP6~7 ( R000300150003-0 .95 07
Mr. MANSFIELD. May the number
increase. I withdraw my reservation of
objection.
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the name of the
Senator from Indiana [Mr. BAYH] be
added as a cosponsor of S. 1796, a bill
to amend the Small Business Act to pro-
vide additional assistance for disaster
victims.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
NOTICE OF HEARINGS ON THE BANK
MERGER ACT
Mr. ROBERTSON. Mr. President, I
should like to announce that the Finan-
cial Institutions Subcommittee of the
Senate Committee on Banking and Cur-
rency will begin hearings on Wednesday,
May 19, 1965, on the bill, S. 1698, to
amend the Bank Merger Act so as to
provide that bank mergers, whether ac-
complished by acquisition of stock or as-
sets or in any. other way, are subject ex-
clusively to the provisions of the Bank
Merger Act. The hearings will be held
at 10 a.m., in room 5302, New Senate
Office Building.
Any persons who wish to appear and
testify in connection with this nomina-
tion are requested to notify Matthew
,Hale, chief of staff, Senate Committee
on Banking and Currency, room 5300,
New Senate Office Building, Washington,
D.C., telephone [phone].
HEARINGS ON U.S. BALANCE OF
PAYMENTS
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, in ac-
cordance with expectations, which I re-
ported to the Senate a few days ago,
printed copies are now available of the
hearings conducted by the Subcommit-
tee on International Finance of the
Banking and Currency Committee an the
continuing deficits in our balance of pay-
ments and the resulting outflow of gold.
Several distinguished officials of the
Government, a number of outstanding
economists expert in this field, and repre-
sentatives of business and banking ap-
peared before the committee. The pur-
pose of the hearings was stated to edu-
cate the members of the committee, the
Congress, and the general public as to
the nature and causes of the problem and
as to proposed measures for dealing with
it.
Hearings began with statements by
the Government officials-Mr. Dillon, the
then Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Con-
nor, the Secretary of Commerce, Mr.
Martin, the Chairman of the Federal
Reserve, Mr. Murphy, then Under Secre-
tary of Agriculture, Mr. Griffith Johnson,
Assistant Secretary of State, Mr. Hitch,
Assistant Secretary of Defense, Mr. Bell,
Administrator of AID, and Mr. Linder,
President and Chairman of the Export-
Import Bank. These officials described
the general nature of the problem, ex-
plained the existing governmental pro-
grams that affect it, and discussed the
new administration programs for dealing
with it.
Economists then discussed the basic
elements and principles involved and set
forth views as to means of handling the
problem of the deficit. The representa-
tives of banking and business also pre-
sented their views as to the nature of the
problem and measures for dealing with
it.
Following statements of the witnesses,
significant points were further developed
in question by members of the subcom-
mittee. In addition, the record of the
hearings contains a number of state-
ments, studies, and data developing par-
ticular points, as well as various public
statements bearing on the subject by
distinguished public officials and experts.
It is contemplated that hearings will
be resumed in the near future. As I an-
nounced in the Senate earlier, Dr. Ed-
ward M. Bernstein, who has been chair-
man of a committee of experts which
has recently completed a review of bal-
ance-of-payments statistics and pre-
pared a report recommending improve-
ments, and who is an Outstanding expert
on international financial economics, is
scheduled to appear on May 17. Other
businessmen, bankers, and other experts
in this field will be requested to appear
when the schedule of the committee
permits.
ADDRESSES, EDITORIALS, ARTI-
CLES, ETC., PRINTED IN THE AP-
PENDIX
On request, and by unanimous consent,
addresses, editorials, articles, etc., were
ordered to be printed in the Appendix, as
follows:
By Mr. RANDOLPH:
AFL-CIO will present Murray-Green Award
to Henry J. Kaiser in recognition of his ac-
complishments in the field of voluntary
medical care, housing, and labor-management
relations.
Editorial in the May 3, 1965, issue of the
Herald-Dispatch, of Huntington, W. Va.
By Mr. CHURCH:
Editorial tribute to Hon. William E. Drev-
low, Lieutenant Governor of Idaho, pub-
lished in the Lewiston, Idaho, Morning Trib-
une of May 1, 1965.
By Mr. JAVITS:
Resolutions requesting elimination of the
Federal excise tax on new passenger cars,
adopted by the Greater New York, Long
Island & Westchester Automobile Dealers
Association.
TRIBUTE TO SENATOR FANNIN OF
ARIZONA
Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, Iny
friend, Willard Edwards, who is one of
the outstanding representatives of the
Chicago Tribune and who covers the
Senate Press Gallery very diligently, has
done an excellent portrayal of our col-
league, Senator PAUL FANNIN, of Arizona.
Not only is it an excellent article but I
might add that it is richly deserved and
I am delighted indeed to ask consent for
its insertion in the RECORD as a part of
my remarks so that it might have wider
currency and be frequently quoted in all
areas of the country.
IFrom the Chicago (I11.) Tribune, May 2,
19651
ARIZONA's SENATOR FANNIN EARNS LABEL OF
"MAN WHO SUCCEEDS"-1 TO 100 SHOT FOR
GOVERNOR, BUT HE WINS
(By Willard Edwards)
WASHINGTON, May 1.-When political lead-
ers gather to pick a slate of candidates for a
forthcoming campaign, an embarrassing si-
lence sometimes falls when volunteers are
sought in a virtually hopeless cause.
The problem arises when someone must be
found to seek a political office which has al-
ways been won by the opposition party with
no indication that the voters are inclined to
disturb this precedent.
NEED FOR SACRIFICE
If the chief of the parley is a diplomat, he
may inquire, not without a note of sarcasm,
along this line:
"Is some loyal member of the party avail-
able to sacrifice himself in this effort?"
On a somewhat lower level, he might ask:
"Have we got a sucker for this spot?"
Such was the situation in 1958 in Arizona
when Republican Party leaders began con-
sidering the selection of a candidate for Gov-
ernor of the State. They had been encour-
aged in 1952 by the astonishing victory of
their candidate for the U.S. Senate, a Phoenix
department store owner named Barry Gold-
water. He had ousted a veteran Democratic
incumbent, Senator Ernest McFarland, Sen-
ate major leader.
STATEHOUSE HOPES DIM
Goldwater now was running for a second
term and GOP hopes were high for his re-
election. However, registered Democrats still
outnumbered Republicans in the State by
3 to 1 and the widest hopes of the party
leaders did not extend to capturing the state-
house.
Arizona had never had a Republican gov-
ernor and the experts could detect no popu-
lar surge to elect one. The need was for
a willing victim to endure the hardships of
a campaign without the slightest hope of vic-
tory.
Goldwater's brother, Robert, had roomed
at Stanford University 30 years earlier with
PAUL J. FANNIN, son of a transplanted Ken-
tuckian who had come to Arizona in 1907 for
his health. The friendship had remained
firm as FANNIN and his brother, Ernest, con-
verted a small hardware store into a pros-
perous distributing business which stretched
into several States.
FANNIN, then 51, had never been active in
politics. He was a poor speaker and un-
versed in the strategy of wooing votes. How-
ever, he was highly respected, possessed of
the necessary means, and widely known in
the State through his business activities,
BARRY STUDIES CHANCES
When FANNIN was suggested as a candi-
date for governor and proved not unwilling
to make the sacrifice, Goldwater toured the
State to survey his prospects.
"Well," he reported to FANNIN, "it's pos-
sible that you might have a chance." This
was accepted as polite encouragement to one
willing to give his all to the party. The
betting against FANNIN was 100 to 1 with
no takers. The winner of the Democratic
primary already was celebrating his certain
victory in November.
With the temerity of the innocent who
venture where angels will not, FANNIN
plunged into a campaign which astonished
all. He almost literally "walked" the huge
State, shaking hands with thousands, invad-
ing the smallest villages, voicing his ideas
about government, sometimes haltingly, but
with an impressive sincerity.
There being no objection, the article On election day, the experts surveyed the
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, results with unbelieving eyes. FANNIN had
as follows: won by 35,000 in his first race for office,
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 9508,
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
CONGRESSIONAL. RECORD - SENATE May 7, 1965
When Goldwater had upset similar odds 6
years earlier, he had won by only 6,500 votes.
Arizona's first Republican governor was
reelected in 1960 by the largest majority
ever given a gubernatorial candidate in the
State. He was elected to a third term in
1962. In 1964, be was asked again to make
a sacrifice which could remove him from
politics, perhaps forever.
He was induced to file as a candidate for
the Senate on a standby basis pending the
outcome of Goldwater's bid for the Republi-
can nomination for the Presidency. If Gold-
water should fail in this attempt, it was un-
derstood that FANNIN would withdraw and
permit Goldwater to run for a third Senate
term. It would then be too late for FANNIN
to file for any office.
He was relieved of this gentleman's agree-
Mont when Goldwater gained the GOP presi-
dential nomination. FANNIN remained on
the ticket as candidatefor the Senate.
Again, on election day, the experts were
cpnfounded. Goldwater captured his home
State's b electoral votes by a narrow margin
of 4,000 votes, FANNIN ran ahead of him
by 10,005 votes, winning the Senate seat by
a,comfortable 14,000 margin.
Today, the political tyro of 7 years ago sits
in the seat formerly occupied by Goldwater
Whose political future is uncertain.. The new
Senator from Arizona would be the first to
admit that he does not possess the quick
mind, the witty personality, and the charm
and gayety which helped thrust his predeces
sal' to the political heights. His friends gay
he has the dogged persistence, the capacity
for study, the ambition to learn 'which were
not easily visible as Goldwater's outstanding
characteristics.
"He grows on you," an associate said.
"It's hard to assess the political ingredient
which makes him a winner. Perhaps It's the
utter sincerity which he projects and which
was Eisenhower's greatest attribute. He's no
Orator but people listen to him and believe
him."
Some measure of FANNIN's ability may be
gained from his record as Governor. Facing
a Hostile legislature in which the senate had
97 Democrats and 1 Republican, he called
4 special sessions and made 4 recommenda-
tions, winning approval of them all, an al-
most unprecedented accomplishment in the
State's legislative history. Among other
things, he killed a thriving racket in liquor
licenses which were being handled as a mo-
nopoly by a small group and being leased for
as much as $60,000 a license. He also put
through a program for much needed im-
provemelits in the State's educational system.
In an interview, he +disclosed the project
closest to his heart-a somewhat amazing
program of international cooperation be-
tween Arizona and the State of Sonora in
Mexico, which lies just south of the border.
He sees the beginnings of a common market
of the Americas In the joint development of
the two States which are the fastest growing
in their respective republics.
FANNIN and the Governor of Sonora at
that time, Alvara Obregon, formed a per-
manent' committee in 1959 to expand cul-
tural and trade relations between the two
States. The result has been greatly increased
travel between them, the birth of new busi-
nesses, Cooperative programs between State
universities, and increased investments by
Arizona banks in Sonora.
CITED BY MEXICO
Some businessmen see in this development
the basis for a common market which is es-
sential if the United States is to meet the
growing Competition of the European Com-
mon Market in Latin America.
In Mexico, his efforts are so highly appre-
ciated that he was recently awarded a plaque
proclaiming him the Latin American equiv-
alent of "Man of the Year."
FANNIN is a big, rangy man-6 feet 11/2
inches, 185 pounds. He keeps fit and was a
famous softball pitcher in his day, playing on
championship teams where he was hailed as
"WINDMILL" FANNIN because of a sweeping
delivery.
His seriousness matches his size. However,
as he talked, losing self-consciousness in the
interest of his subject, a lively imagination,
a quiet sense of humor, and a sensitivity to
injustice began to emerge.
INTERESTED IN INDIANS' WELFARE
He became almost eloquent about the
plight of the American Indian, the ignored
minority when welfare state billions are be-
ing passed out. Arizona has more Indians
[83,000] than any other State. Taking the
floor for the first time in connection with
pending legislation last month, the Senator
discussed the inadequacies of the adminis-
tration's $1.3 billion aid-to-education bill.
"I must protest," he said, "against a form-
ula that would give the 10 wealthiest coun-
ties in the United States nearly $9 mil-
lion and 10 of the poorest counties only
half that much. And I protest the implica-
tion that the Federal Office of Education can
do better than what the States and local
school districts have been doing since the
beginning of our Republic.
"In my State, we happen to have a con-
tinuing demonstration of the Federal Gov-
ernment's competence in this field. Despite
the solemn treaty obligation of the United
States to provide thousands of Indian chil-
dren with adequate education and health
facilities, the government has clearly failed.
"Of 28,191 Navajo children on the Arizona
portion of the reservation, virtually all from
poverty stricken families, approximately
3,500 were not enrolled in any kind of school.
Three-fourths of the adult population can-
not speak, read, or write English."
Recently, a veteran. Republican colleague
found him poring over a book on the Sen-
ate's parliamentary rules, an intricate maze
of rulings and precedents which few can
decipher.
"Oh, Hell, Paul," said the elder. "Don't
bother with that. If you do something
wrong, someone will be around to tell you."
The freshman Senator went on studying.
He does not appear to be the type who waits
for someone to tell him he is wrong.
MAN OF THE YEAR
Mr. DIRKSEN. I. President, on
April 29 there was published in the Chi-
cago Tribune an editorial on the sub-
ject "Man of the Year." I believe it is
quite important and deserves wider cir-
culation. I ask unanimous consent that
it be Printed in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the editorial
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
[From the Chicago Tribune, Apr. 29, 19851
MAN OF THE YEAR
The Tribune today presents the real "Man
of the Year."
He was not picked by the Junior Associa-
tion of Commerce, or by the Senior Associa-
tion of Commerce, or by the politicians, or
by any association of newspaper men. You
won't find his picture in the papers. You
may not -recognize him as you pass him on
the street, But we hope you do.
Our "Man of the Year" is In the middle
income brackets. He gets up every morning
at 6:50 so that he can get to his job in an
office or factory at 8 or 8:30. He works hard,
not only because he wants advancement, but
because he thinks his employer deserves a
fair deal. He is honest and dependable.
Our "Man of the Year" manages to get
along with one wife. They have three or
four children, whom they love so much they
teach them to be respectful, law abiding,
and self-reliant. They have done their best
to earn and save enough money to send their
children to college, but the rising costs of
higher education make this goal more dif-?
ficult each year.
The rising cost of everything also, makes
it harder to put aside money for retirement.
Recent Federal income tax reductions have
helped the people in high income brackets
and low income brackets, but the man in the
middle has got little benefit. There are no
loopholes in the Income tax for him, and he
can't put any money into tax-exempt secu-
rities.
Social security taxes, which started at $30
a year, are now up to $174. Soon the medi-?
care program will make them much higher.
Local property taxes have doubled, and so
have the various State taxes. Worst of all,
the purchasing power of the dollar is only
42 percent of what it was when our "Man of
the Year" bought his first insurance policy
in 1937. The little money which he has set.
aside for a rainy day is worth about half
of what it was when he earned it.
Our "Man of the Year" belongs to a church
and works at his religion. He is no saint,
but he understands the biblical meaning of
neighbor and tries to be decent to men of
all races and creeds. You won't find him,
however, in civil disobedience demon-
strations. He believes laws ought to be en-
forced.
Our "Man of the Year"' is not ashamed to
be considered a patriot. He flies the flag
on national holidays. lIe can't understand.
Americans who join organizations dedi-
cated to the destruction of America. He
can't understand legislators and judges who
strive to undermine law and order, or to
feather their own nests.
Our "Man of the Year" believes in our sys-
tem of government. He votes at every elec-
tion, but he votes only once.
For all his merits, we salute him.
THE SILO-SOVIET DISPUTE ON WAR
AND THE NATIONAL LIBERATION
OF VIETNAM
Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, Mr.
Robert D. Crane, who is a member of
the Center for Strategic Studies at
Georgetown University, has prepared an
excellent article that involves, among
other things, our problems abroad. On
a previous occasion I have had printed
in the RECORD an article that he has
done. There is further information here
that I believe is at once constructive and
useful. It is a little lengthy, but it bears
the title "The Sino-Soviet Dispute on
War and National Liberation of Viet-
nam." It is extremely timely, and, not-
wtihstanding its length, I believe it will
prove extremely useful as a reference ar-
ticle. I ask unanimous consent that it
be printed at this point in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
THE SING-SOVIET DISPUTE ON WAR AND THE
NATIONAL LIBERATION OF VIETNAM
(By R. D. Crane)
The most significant development during
the past few months in the southeast Asian
war has been the decision of the Soviet and
Chinese Communist leaders to increase their
overt military support of the war in Viet-
nam. This new development has caused pol-
icymakers for the first time publically to
consider the risk of escalation as an impor-
tant factor in determining U.S. policy to-
ward southeast Asia. This new concern with
the degree of risk involved in prosecuting
the southeast Asian war has focused atten-
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 Approved For Release' 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
May 7, 4965 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
tion on the alliance problems within the
Communist camp, and particularly on the
nature and extent of the Sino-Soviet dispute.
The fullest possible understanding of this
dispute has become critical because Ameri-
can policymakers are concluding that the fu-
ture course of events in southeast Asia will
be determined not merely by North Vietna-
mese or Communist Chinese policy, but by
Soviet policy. This important point was
brought out in Secretary McNamara's an-
nual defense posture statement to Congress
on. February 18, 1965, when he said: "Unless
there is a change in Soviet policy, it still
appears doubtful that the Chinese Commu-
nists will deliberately initiate any major
overt aggression against their neighbors."
The two most critical questions for an
analysis of the impact of the Sino-Soviet
dispute on the southeast Asian war there-
fore are: (1) What is the real issue in the
Sino-Soviet dispute as it has developed dur-
ing the past few years? and (2) What policy
should the United States follow to prevent
the adoption of a dangerously expansionist
policy by the Soviet Union and to promote
Soviet policies of greater moderation? The
answer we give to these two questions will be
important in determining the whole course
of American policy in Asia during the com-
ing decade.
THE SING-SOVIET DISPUTE
Most of the, studies on the Sino-Soviet dis-
pute conclude that this dispute is caused
basically either ' by nationalism or by ide-
ology or by some combination of the two?
There is considerable evidence that the Sino-
Soviet dispute is not caused basically by
either of these two factors but rather by op-
posing theories of how best to control con-
flict, and particularly how to deter nuclear
war, during the course of the world revolu-
tion? According to this view:
1. Chinese and Soviet strategists are in
complete agreement that nuclear war and
even any serious risk of nuclear war must be
rejected as rational instruments of policy.
2. These strategists also agree that their
advanced weapons are not necessary primar-
ily for the defensive purpose of deterring cap-
italist attack on their homelands, but are
necessary for the offensive purpose of deter-
ring U.S. Intervention in expansionist Com-
munist wars of national liberation.
3. The Chinese and Soviet strategists dif-
fer primarily on how best to control conflict,
especially by deterring nuclear war, during
the course of the world revolution.
4. The Chinese Communists believe that
nuclear war can best be deterred by constant
revolutionary pressure designed to promote
isolationist tendencies in the United States.
The Soviets believe that nuclear war can best
be deterred, and revolutionary movements
protected from armed U.S. opposition, if the
Soviet Union can exploit an atmosphere of
detente to achieve superiority over the
United States in a few critical advanced
weapons.
The decision of the Soviet and Chinese
Communist leaders to increase their overt
military support of the war in Vietnam
might seem superficially to indicate the con-
vergence of Soviet and Chinese Communist
theories of conflict control and, therefore,
the abandonment of the Soviet strategy of
detente. Further analysis, however, suggests
that the Soviets and Chinese agree on the
advisability of pressing for victory in the
I Perhaps the best such study in the re-
cent literature is Richard Lowenthal's "The
Prospects for Pluralistic Communism," dis-
sent (winter 1965)., pp. 103-143.
$ See "The 51no-Soviet Dispute on War,"
In "Detente: Cold War Strategists in Tran-
sition" (New York and London: Praeger),
1965, eds. Eleanor Lansing Dulles and Robert
D. Crane.
southeast Asian war because developments
during the past year both in Soviet advanced
weaponry and in the national liberation
struggle have caused the Soviet and Chinese
Communist strategists to conclude that their
diverse theories of conflict control call for
a common and mutually supporting policy
of revolution in southeast Asia. Some of
the advances in Soviet weaponry, particular-
ly in Soviet antiballistic missile develop-
ments, which may have influenced Soviet
strategists, were discussed on February 11,
1965, before the Senate Armed Sefvices Com-
mittee. Some of the isolationist develop-
ments in the intellectual climate in the
United States, which may have influenced
Chinese, strategists, were presaged by Sen-
ator FULBRIGHT's speech a year ago on "Old
Myths and New Realities" and were described
on February 23, 1965, in a major speech by
Senator THOMAS J. DODD, Democrat, of Con-
necticut, entitled "Vietnam and the New
Isolationism."
The response of Premier Khrushchev and
of his principal military supporter, the late
Marshal Biryuzov, to the new developments
in Soviet weaponry and in U.S. foreign pol-
icy may have been the desire to exploit
the new Soviet weapons directly and dra-
matically in a Cuba-type gamble to intimi-
date the United States. The opponents of
Khrushchev, including Suslov and Marshals
Sokolovskiy and Malinovskiy, condemned
such "harebrained" scheming. The succes-
sors of Khrushchev in the Soviet power struc-
ture reportedly created instead a top-level
national liberation commission composed of
Presidium members. Among them may be
the individual to whom the Chinese Foreign
Minister, Chen Yi, referred recently when he
stated: "We expect nothing from Khru-
shchev's successors. However, we firmly be-
lieve that the Soviet people will have a
great leader in the not too distant future."
Soviet strategy in the post-Khrushchev era
has returned to the original Khrushchevian
emphasis of the pre-Cuba crisis period on
wars of national liberation, but has added
two innovations: (1) a further shift toward
the belief that the mere existence of the new
Soviet weapons, particularly in conjunction
with increases in their quality and quantity,
is sufficient to limit the strategic goals of the
United States and to deter any dangerous
U.S. response to overt Soviet support of na-
tional liberation wars, and (2) a new empha-
sis on the promotion and exploitation of a
continued detente with the United States
both to use its threatened termination as a
means of deterring U.S. intervention in na-
tional liberation wars as well as to gain the
many direct advantages that detente can pro-
vide for the Soviet Union.
The main points that emerge from the
above analysis of the Sino-Soviet dispute as
it affects American policy on southeast Asia
are the following: (1) both the Chinese and
the Soviets are in complete agreement on the
need to avoid any great risks of escalation
to nuclear war, and (2) although they differ
principally in their theories about the nature
of deterrence in the modern era of national
liberation war, nevertheless recent develop-
ments in Soviet weaponry and in U.S. think-
ing about foreign policy have caused the
Chinese and Soviet strategists to proceed
from their differing theories on deterrence to
the conclusion that the time is now ripe to
start a concerted effort finally to drive the
United States and its allies off the rimland
IMPICATIONS FOR U.S. POLICY
The second of the two principal questions
we must ask if we are meaningfully to ana-
lyze the impact of the Sino-Soviet dispute on
the war in southeast Asia is: What, policy
should the United States follow in order to
exert a moderating influence on the Soviet
Union and thereby indirectly on Communist
China? This question is basic to Ameri j an
9509
foreign policy. It becomes acute only during
periods of tensions such as we experienced
during and after the Cuban missile crisis and
are experiencing now.
Most of the recent commentary on this
question has warned against the alleged
danger that an overly firm U.S. policy might
push the Soviets into the arms of the Com-
munist Chinese, thereby eliminating an im-
portant moderating influence in the under-
developed areas of the world, particularly
in Asia. It has been suggested that during
Premier Kosygin's visit to Vietnam in Jan-
uary 1965 the Chinese Communists trapped
him into adopting a hardline position
against his will, and that we therefore must
agree to neutralize South Vietnam in order
to help Kosygin extricate himself from a
dilemma. Another consideration, which
first became familiar during and after the
Cuban missile crisis, is the alleged need to
follow a conciliatory policy toward the So-
viet leaders because the failure of their for-
eign policies, once the Soviet Union has be-
come committed for one reason or another
to these policies, would cause a succession
crisis that might result in a shift toward a
hardline and perhaps even a Stalinist line in
Soviet domestic and foreign policy.
The behavior of the power-oriented Soviet
leaders in past crises suggests, to the con-
trary, that the best way to bring on such an
unfortunate succession crisis would be for
the United States to follow a conciliatory
policy in southeast Asia. Such a policy
would serve merely to prove that the so-
called hardliners in the Soviet Union are
right in their contention that a maximum
push in revolutionary warfare will inaugu-
rate the third and final phase in the liquida-
tion of capitalism. The only way the United
States can support the moderates in the So-
viet Union and the Only way it can reduce
the present ideological orientation of the
Communist system is to combine a policy of
maximum contact with Soviet individuals
with a policy of maximum firmness in op-
posing Communist aggression. Instead of
trying to support the moderates in the Soviet
Union by adopting a conciliatory American
foreign policy, we should try to support
these moderates by frustrating and thereby
undermining their hardline opponents. Only
when the Soviets are forced to recognize the
Utopian nature of their global ambitions
can we achieve any real success in our long-
range policies of peaceful engagement and
peaceful cooperation with the leaders and
peoples of Russia.
Specifically, in our policy toward south-
east Asia, we should make it clear that we
support the original goal of the Geneva
agreement of 1954, which called for free elec-
tions In the country of Vietnam. We should
draw the conclusion, which the Communists
have forced upon us, that the Communists
do not want elections except on their own
fraudulent terms. If elections are to be free
from Communist terrorism, the entire coun-
try of Vietnam, both north and south, must
first be liberated from Communist control.
National liberation has been the goal of the
Vietnamese leaders. It was opposed by the
French colonialists. It has been opposed by
the United States on the pretext that the
time was not opportune, but really because
some American policymakers feared the pos-
sibility of escalation from the national lib-
eration war that the Vietnamese people
would have to fight in North Vietnam.
During 1959 and 1960 special Vietnamese
guerrilla forces liberated large areas in the
northern areas of Vietnam extending as far
north as the Chinese border. These success-
ful liberation efforts were forbidden by Amer-
ican policymakers at the time because they
feared that the very success of such a libera-
tion movement would provoke a Chinese
launched invasion under a Soviet nuclear
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
 9510
Approved For Release 2003/10/14: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300150003-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE May - 7, 1905
umbrella and therefore jeopardize the in-
dependence ofall of southeast Asia.
The resulting abandonment of what prom-
ised to be the first successful national
liberation movement in Communist con-
trolled Asia had an adverse local effect on
the conflict in southeast Asia because it
caused bitterness and disillusionment among
the Vietnamese intellectuals who had been
struggling for 20 years to liberate and unify
their ancient and proud country. Even more
important, this forced abandonment was a
milepost in the adoption of a defensive men-
tality among American guerrilla warfare
strategists. It provided the first classic ex-
ample of the power of Communist psycho-
strategic warfare to direct and control Ameri-
can strategy in the underdeveloped world .n
In order to exert a moderating Influence on
Soviet and Chinese Communist policy, the
United States must first reverse this defen-
sive orientation of its strategic thinking on
Asia. Specifically, the United States must
abandon its effort to force the Vietnamese to
remain at the tremendous disadvantage
which defending forces have in modern guer-
rilla warfare. The United States must aban-
don its efforts to force on the Vietnamese
people the unpopular goal of containing (and
'(