« PreviousContinue »
U.S. imperialism's “operation curtailed abroad, it will turn with more relentless fury upon the American people, seeking to recoup losses abroad
more intentive exploitation at home. Thus, we foresee a protracted, stubborn, many-sided conflict with U.S. imperialism, the termination of any single encounter serving as prelude to another. But it is not an endless struggle. Each setback for U.S. imperialism serves to weaken its position and to strengthen the forces arrayed against it. The realizable aim in the series of encounters is, therefore, the creation of a preponderance of antiimperialist strength sufficient to keep U.S. imperialism in check, and finally, with the American people themselves in the forefront, to replace it with a new and just society."
SOVIET LIVING STANDARDS (From: The Worker (U.S.A.),
(From: International Affairs (U.S.S.R.), January 23, 1966, p. 5)
January 1966, p. 3) VICTOR PERLO-DOLLARS AND SENSE “Scientific principles in manage
ment of the national economy are the RISING SOVIET LIVING STANDARDS
basis for creating the necessary preOp my October visit to the U.S.S.R., requisites for accelerating the rate of I superficially compared living stand- industrial development and agriculards with those I observed in 1960. tural production, for raising the People are more brightly dressed, people's material and cultural level their clothes are better cut. Stores and providing for a further increase are better supplied with meat and in the might and defense potential of fruits. There are more shops, res
the Soviet state. These scientific taurants, and snack places. Many principles are the guarantee that our more people have decent flats, with achievements, expressed first and foreunshared kitchens and baths. Wages most in the fulfillment and overfulfillin factories I visited averaged about ment of the 7-year plan target figures, 20 percent above those in like factories shall provide the basis for further 5 years earlier. Prices seemed to advances in building the material and average just a shade higher than in technical foundation of communism." 1960.
U.S. ESCALATION (From: Political Affairs (U.S.A.),
(From: International Affairs, No. 1 (U.S.S.R.), April 1966, p. 15)
January 1966, p. 6)
As events have shown, Washington (By Betty Gannett)
has adopted the course of combining
military ventures, political maneuvers Vietnam is today the tinderbox and subversive activities. The escawhich can set off a world conflagra- lation of armed aggression in different tion. The brutal, savage war raging parts of the world was undertaken on the soil of Vietnam has entered a together with intensified activities new and more perilous phase. In directed at undermining the unity of what is described as "one of the the anti-imperialist forces. swiftest, biggest military buildups in the history of warfare,” U.S. imperialism has transformed this small Asian land, 10,000 miles away, into a formidable armed encampment.
With a limitless arsenal of destructive power, it seeks to beat into submission a people whose only crime is their burning desire to live in peace and freedom.
(From: The Worker (U.S.A.),
Mar. 27, 1966, p. 3) NEXT STEPS FOR PEACE
(From: International Affairs. No. 3 (U.S.S.R.),
March 1966, pp. 21 and 22)
MORE WANTON ESCALATION
The national debate initiated by the February hearings of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee unleashed new forces with the power to force a halt in the Vietnam killing.
The March 25–26 marches, demonstrations, and rallies mark a great step forward.
Now further steps must follow.
The potency of the forces for peace is enhanced by the fact that this is the year of congressional elections. The shadow of defeat looms over many Members of Congress who have tied themselves to the coattails of the President and his Vietnam policy or have remained silent. The Democratic leadership is worried; so is that of the Republican Party.
President Johnson himself took cognizance of the threat last Tuesday when he devoted a major portion of an unscheduled press conference to the congressional elections. He indicated this obliquely in reporting on discussions about Vietnam and the elections with a number of Democratic Congressmen. He said, “They are all worried about the sacrifices our men are making there."
The President is so worried about the possibility that he might lose effective control of Congress, particularly the House, over the Vietnam issue that he made an indirect bid to the Republicans not to oppose their candidates if they continued their support of him. He said:
"* * * The Congressmen on both sides have done a good job, and I don't think that the Republican Congressmen, except in rare instances, have much to be worried about. Most of them have a chance to be reelected. * * *
But the President is whistling in the dark. The people will repudiate his dirty Vietnam war in the November congressional elections if the peace forces move unitedly and vigorously to mobilize them.
There are two phases to this action. The first is to commit the present Members of Congress who have remained silent up to now on Vietnam, and to change the minds of those who have been lined up on the President's side. The second is to guarantee that in every congressional primary and in November there will be
The U.S. Government has intention of leaving the path of war. This is shown by the further expansion of aggressive U.S. operations in southeast Asia. Piratical air raids on the Democratic Republic of Vietnam have been resumed on President Johnson's orders. In early February, the Pentagon used the occasion to sum up the results of a year's bombing: the U.S. Air Force had dropped a quarter of a million tons of bombs, rockets, and napalm on peaceful towns and villages of the Democratic Republic of Viet
Needless to say, the official spokesmen of the U.S. Defense Department said nothing of the destruction, misery, and suffering the "scorched earth" tactics inflicted on the peoples of the Republic.
The military powwow in Honolulu in early February decided to intensify punitive operations against the South Vietnamese patriots and increase the number of interventionist U.S. troops. The Washington Post said, for instance, that by midsummer the number of U.S. troops in Vietnam would double to 400,000, and would then be increased to 600,000.
The military conference in Honolulu, one of the largest and, you might say, most representative during the whole period of the U.S. Government's Vietnam gamble, was shrouded in secrecy. Still the press got wind of some of the topics discussed by Johnson, McNamara, and Rusk with their generals and admirals, and the South Vietnamese puppet dictator, Air Marshal Ky. The Washington Evening Star said the generals insisted on a further extension of operations, specifically on carrying direct military operations by South Vietnamese and American troops into the territory of Laos.
The Pentagon is also expanding its military operations in southeast Asia by trying to inveigle more countries into its gamble. The South Korean puppets have undertaken to prepare another division for dispatch to Vietnam. More pressure is being brought to bear on America's allies in the military aggressive blocs but on
a selective basis, because most of her partners have refused to back the U.S. policy of military gambles. More and more bases and
1 Italics supplied.
The basic elements for achieving these objectives are already in the making. The organization set up in Detroit by labor unionists, the one in New York, the opposition to the Vietnam war registered by the Amalgamated Clothing Workers, all these indicate the possibility of mobilizing working people everywhere for peace.
The disenchantment of the AFL-CIO with the Democratic Party, as intimated even by George Meany, opens the door for independent political action by labor
The Negro people, worst sufferers in the Vietnam war, are increasingly acting in opposition. This is indicated in the actions of most leaders of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and of the Students NonViolent Coordinating Committee, and the organization of such groups as the Harlem Peace Committee.
The clergy have cleared the way for mobilization of tens of millions of churchgoers for peace in Vietnam through organization of the National Interreligious Conference.
All over the country, peace forces in the Democratic Party are pressing for anti-war candidates in the primaries.
The first major national opportunity to register the people's opposition to U.S. aggression in Vietnam will come in the campaign of the National Committee for a Sane Nuclear Policy (SANE) for pledges from millions of voters to cast their votes only for candidates backing a halt to the killing in Vietnam. This campaign will culminate in a national march and a Congressional Districts Peace Convention in Washington May 14.
Women Strike for Peace is conducting its own peace pledge campaign as well.
The success of this drive will demonstrate to Congress and to the White House the will of the American people for peace in Vietnam. The united effort of all peace forces will guarantee its success.
manpower reinforcements are being demanded of Thailand, Malaysia, the Philippines, Australia, and New Zealand.
There is obviously great danger in the further enlargement of the nidus of war, which is already a serious threat to world peace. This has got through to sober-minded politicians in the United States and in Washington itself. Senator Morse told a recent sitting of the Senate Foreign Relation Committee that the United States is becoming the greatest threat to peace on the globe, and that by their actions in South Vietnam the Pentagon militarists have drawn America to the darkest day of her history. In another speech, Senator Morse said: “The most dangerous men in the world today are in our own Pentagon building. *'* *
They are leading us into a massive war.”
Apart from the fact that such is now the opinion of the public in various countries of the world, many Americans are_also coming to accept it. Thomas Benham, public opinion specialist, says, for example, that 46 percent of Americans believe that the Johnson administration's current foreign policy is leading to war. The escalation in Vietnam is a source of growing alarm among the American people, Benham said; slowly, but surely, the President's popularity is waning
The White House and the leadership of the ruling Democratic Party are highly worried by this fact. In the midterm congressional elections this autumn, the Republicans will surely play up the failures of Johnson's policy, chiefly in Vietnam, and will make use of the mounting protest movement of the American people against the criminal colonial war which the present U.S. administration is waging. Nor will the Republican politicians fail to capitalize on the historical fact that America has usually started or entered into wars under Democratic administrations.
Accordingly, the White House has tried to win over public opinion at home and abroad. In January, it launched a loud "search for peace" propaganda campaign or, as it was called, President Johnson's "peace offensive." It was organized on purely American scale. Six special White House emissaries, including the well-known Averell Harriman, traveled to the capitals of 34 countries. The President sent personal messages to many other heads of state. These socalled “doves of peace” were an at
tempt to convince mankind that the U.S. Government was intent on securing an early peaceful settlement in Vietnam.
But mankind remained unconvinced. The Christian Science Monitor ad. mitted that “President Johnson's beginning of the New Year 'Peace Offensive' has ended, as was to be expected, in official failure'." And it could not have been otherwise. The "search for peace” campaign and the propaganda exercises that accompanied it proved to be nothing but a crude diplomatic trick, and that is how public opinion saw it. Its purpose was to disorient world opinion, and slanderously accuse the Vietnamese people of not wanting peace, while using this propaganda barrage as a blind for further extension of the aggressive operations in Vietnam.
In starting its so-called "search for peace” in Vietnam, the U.S. Government put forward the old 14 points as a basis for settlement of the Vietnam problem. Washington was well aware that such a basis was unacceptable, because it was completely contrary to the demands of the South Vietnam National Liberation Front and the Government of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam. “The United States is trying to remain in South Vietnam, to preserve the puppet administration it has set up there and to perpetuate the split of our country,' said President Ho Chi Minh of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, analyzing the notorious 14 points in a message to the chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the U.S.S.R.
Thus, in setting out on its "search for peace," the White House was fully aware that it would come to nothing, and that it was merely a short breathing space for the aggressors. Therefore, paradoxical though it may seem, the U.S. President's order to resume air raids on the Democratic Republic of Vietnam was simply a logical sequel to the "search for peace" campaign, an act in the farce played out by Washington.
This rash order is known to have aroused a storm of indignation all over the world, including the United States itself. In this connection, the Soviet Government stated categorically: “The resumption of U.S. air raids on the territory of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam 2 days after the head of that state had come forward with a new initiative is an indication that the U.S. Government does not want an end to the war in Vietnam.
The Governments of France,
* * *
India, and other countries expressed “regret and disapproval.” The peoples of the world branded the U.S. aggressors. "Johnson and his advisers," said the Indian weekly Link, “could not have been unaware of worldwide disgust (with) which American aggression in Vietnam is viewed."
The reaction to the resumption of the piratical U.S. air raids on the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, the extension of military operations in South Vietnam following the Honolulu decisions, and the sinister hints dropped' by McNamara and other “hawks" are an indication that the Johnson Government's policy of escalation has aroused universal indignation. The American columnist, Walter Lippmann, says: “After all the bombing and the multiplication of our forces, the best that can be said is that * * * we have snatched not a victory, nor any credible prospect of victory, but a bloody and costly stalemate."
McNamara has admitted that the U.S. ground forces alone in South Vietnam are using up $ 100 million worth of ammunition a month. Senator Gore has estimated that this year the U.S. military and economic expenditures in South Vietnam will cost the U.S. taxpayers $18,500 million. He stressed that this is half of what the country urgently needs for improving schools, hospitals, transport and municipal services. It was, therefore, quite a logical conclusion that Emmet Hughes drew in Newsweek, when he said: “Never in this generation of Americans has so much power been spent so lavishly to gain so little.” For no result at all, to put it more precisely.
The escalation of the war in southeast Asia has not given the United States any military or diplomatic advantages. U.S. prestige in the world has been dropping disastrously over the last few years precisely because of the reckless policy of escalating the war in Vietnam. The peoples of the world regard the United States as the chief aggressor, as a state, in the words of Bertrand Russell, "hellbent on * * * destruction * * * of the world”.
The U.S. Government is trying to get out of the Vietnam impasse and to embroil the United Nations in its gamble.
The U.S. delegation has resorted to pressure, inducements, and even to threats in an effort to get the Security Council to adopt a suitable resolution which would allow the United States to sidestep the 1954 Geneva agreements. But in the Security Council, Washington came up