Vietnam War Report; U.S. Senate Candidate

This is Carolyn is it with Vietnam reports next Tuesday the Massachusetts primary will take place with thousands of voters registering their preferences for the Democratic candidate. The United States Senate since many think that Vietnam is the major issue confronting the American people. This reporter interviewed three primary candidates Thomas Boylston Adams Mayor John F. Collins and former governor and a cup Peabody. I also discussed Vietnam with Attorney General Edward Brooke a Republican candidate for United States Senate who will oppose the winner of the primary. Each candidate was asked to give his views on present administration policy as well as to comment on their own personal recommendations their interpretations of Sunday's South Vietnam election escalation and the possibilities of negotiations. ATTORNEY-GENERAL Edward Brooke has released three position papers and yet I asked him to comment on the importance of the issue and outline his recommendations. I think it is very important issue in the campaign not from a partisan

point of view but I believe that both political parties and candidates have a responsibility to look for solutions and to make proposals and to be as helpful as they can to our government in getting us out of a bad situation. I think the administration should balance its military action to support our political objectives so that it has a stake in the war can still be handled at the conference table. We can and we must do more to build the economy for negotiations before the course of the war is completely out of control. And I said I feel that we are dangerous to that point really. Time. The real challenge to American policy is to create a political and military conditions that will stabilize a climate one goshi Asians in Vietnam. I'm not trashing should be aimed at maintaining our posture in South Vietnam and our potential position of strength at the bottom table we should avoid further

escalation that will raise the stakes on our part and make new and more difficult issues into this conflict. And as an alternative to the an acceptable choice between limitless escalation and withdrawal and I do believe that they are both unacceptable choices. I propose one that the United States government should state unequivocally that we do not intend to expand the war by committing American ground forces to fight and that we should flatly reject premia keys played to escalate the war beyond the point of a possible and negotiated settlement 26. After that we invade off Vietnam and of course this could bring this costly close to a war with China and possibly even with the Soviet Union could bring about a nuclear holocaust. Second I would suggest that we expand the international control commission to provide

effective control between North and South Vietnam that we should now want to go into neighboring Cambodia and offer reparations to the Cambodian people overcome this cause. Print Council is a mistake. And. Cost us some real consternation. On that point there was some debate whether we can tell your side. You recognize it is kind. When our the United States government has now recognized that it was Cambodia and has apologized as I understand it and I think there are reparations but more important I think that we should do everything we can to avoid a repetition. This has happened before you know in Cambodia but other countries close the border with South and North

Vietnam always. In an area which is potentially dangerous because you know you can have a target in a certain place and bombs do go astray on their miscalculations and this could set off a bad relationship with Cambodia Thailand without a country and could have the damage throughout the world. So yes I think I would have to answer that. I do recognize that the government has I have professed that the government has said that then I would recommend their ministrations specify limitation action you know inside Vietnam in order to avoid mamak civilian population. And remember actions that might trigger an entry of communist China are rushing into the war. And that's not only with the Cambodian of course that's in North Vietnam and bombed

strategic areas such as I suppose events classified as in the Metairie area or areas where there may be a buildup of manpower down materials which could. Threaten the security of American forces. These people then I think that's a fair military target. We should bomb them for our own protection. I see nothing wrong with it but when we mount her honestly close to the Chinese border this could sight read Chinese and could cause them to. For no other reason than to defend their sovereignty. To enter into this war to participate in this war than they are presently doing. The United States claims that there is a. Zone. Which they're careful not to go so that if they some other flights they won't go in to. Red China. Do you believe that this is sufficient.

Well I don't know how I discounted it but I think that this this is the type of planning that I would. Would condone. And then I would have the government give priority attention. To political development and social reform inside and encourages political leadership is possible. We should support give support pacification program and increased economic. America should support our political actors. The Democratic candidates the United States Senate have not issued position papers on Vietnam. However they do have strong views on the subject. The rest of this program will be devoted mainly to the comparison of Thomas biassed Nat hims marry John F. Collins and former governor and a good Peabody first Mr Peabody outlines what he thinks should be done.

My position has been unwavering since the outset of this campaign Carolyn My feeling is that South Vietnam is the focal point of a Cold War that it is here where Communist aggression from North Vietnam backed up by Red China is primed to work and some breadth to the overthrow of countries such as South Vietnam which are trying to work out their own destinies in their own way. I feel that we must halt this aggression now as we call it aggression since the end of World War 2 in Greece in Turkey and Berlin in Korea and many other places and that if we do it here this is the best road to peace. I think that we should be anxious and we are anxious to negotiate the end of this conflict. But as we all know it takes two to negotiate until the North Vietnamese Red China realizes that were there to stay they were there to prevent aggression.

They were there to prevent the overthrow of. Governments that are trying to work out their own solutions. Until that time I will have to stay there and fight. I would recommend every effort to try to bring the conflict to a close including the bringing in of a third force a third force who could barely arbitrate and mediate this conflict. The UN has been rejected. The country of India has been rejected. I have recommended to the president of the United States that we should consider strength Think position of Pope Paul VI re-establishing diplomatic relations there and hopefully he could be a third force in that area to mediate the conflict because he has dedicated his whole pontifical see to the restoration of peace. Next Mayor John F. Collins addresses himself to the Vietnam debate. It's a source not only of debate but of. Frustration annoyance

and dismay to an awful lot of people. And in discussing it I think that we should refrain from availing ourselves of hindsight since it was not available to the decision makers at the time the decisions actually were made. We were in Vietnam as a result of two model commitments one to afford the sort of Vietnamese people an opportunity to determine for themselves the form of government under which they live and also to contain the spread of Asian communism. Now every single American not only thinking Americans but every single American deplore the fact that in order to fulfill those mild commitments it was necessary to have recourse to the battlefield. Nevertheless we find ourselves there now on the battlefield. Every single mode a means of reaching the negotiating table certainly should be explored. I would like to say a reiteration a publicly iterations of our willingness to negotiate

the regrettable fact seems to be however that while negotiation takes two sides the need of the Viet Cong nor the North Vietnamese have manifested the slightest willingness to even commence the beginnings of a formula for negotiation. Now while we are on the battlefield and in Vietnam and while we are paying such a terrible price in terms of lives more than in dollars we should utilize to the maximum the time that is made available to us. We should see to it that my actual Kiev government is broadened as quickly as possible. We should recognize that if south of the ad nauseam is to become a responsible member of the society of nations that there must be a whole new class of school teachers nurses doctors village chieftains a restored retrained for those who formerly existed was systematically liquidated by the Viet Cong over 10 or 15 years.

We should also recognize that. While each individual act of response our escalation may in and of itself be entirely proper and necessary militarily there may come a time when there is some combination of these acts. Which made to Red China in a somewhat sheltered and inhibited position feel that their own security and safety is being threatened. And then of course we have another problem. The problem with the possibility of a massive land war in Asia and and or the possibility of a nuclear holocaust which frightens just about every thinking person so that all of what I say about Vietnam is simply this I do not agree with Mr Adams who has a position which in my judgment is unrealistic. He simply says Let us withdraw or let us get out where in an immoral war. I don't think we are in an immoral war and to simply get out would be

to try my to do injury to do injustice to every person who has died and to the American position in an all of Southeast Asia as well as in Europe and other parts of the world. Not a way I agree with Mr Peabody who says in substance he gives the administration a blank check. Whatever the president says is all right I think to the president. To a considerable extent has handled the matter to this moment with restraint and with intelligence. But I don't believe that any person running for the Senate should say that what he does in the future should also be accepted. I would like to take a look at every single act of escalation every single chain and I'm military posture every single thing which we do affecting Korea and affecting Vietnam and our position around the world. I think that we are in a dangerous perilous

time and why our advice and consent is a function of the Senate. It's always dissent. And I'm ready to do whichever the circumstances dictate. One of the most unusual senatorial candidates is Thomas Bowles now Adams who many say he's basing his whole candidacies young withdrawal from Vietnam. I asked him to explain exactly why he's running. I'm not basing my candidacy on Vietnam. I'm primarily concerned with the domestic situation in the United States and the usurpation of power by the president of the United States. I'm a confirmed unreconstructed Democrat and I believe that unless the power of the president is in foreign affairs. And unless the Senate reassert its duty of advice and consent. All of the president acts in foreign affairs that is then the democracy with which we have grown up will be destroyed

that the domestic conditions of Negro got housed the hearts of us it is rotting out bad housing very poor education in our cities. All of these things are going to be destroyed in a useless foreign war which is a danger to the security of the United States. Now we're in the situation we're in the Vietnam War. What would you do about it if you had the power. There is wrong very simple very basic step from which all other steps automatically flow. The first and essential step is for the United States to get rid of the dictatorial key government to see. To put its trust in these wretched people. The key government is a band of cutthroats and crooks. These people are making enormous profits out of the wall. They would like to have the war continue

indefinitely because it is to that interest to have the war continue as long as the war continues they are going to get richer and richer and consolidate their power. They are willing to fight to the enemy's wall to the very last American. This is all wrong from the Americans point of view. We should permit the Vietnamese people in that part of South Vietnam which we control to hold elections under neutral auspices and that means not under the thumb of the key Origi and not under the thumb of the United States. But we should call in a new crew powers to supervise elections and permit the election of a civilian regime to take over the government of that part of South Vietnam which we now control. By all means do you think we could find the people who would be willing to do this and do you think it's practical.

It is both practical and the people are actually there under the Geneva Conventions. There were three powers to supervise the agreements and see that they were carried out. India counted on Poland. India which is strictly neutral Poland which you Communist oriented and Canada which is so called free world oriented and completely neutral group these people out of there. But they have never had any power because the United States has denied them the power to act. It was because of the refusal of the ice and Howard government to permit the elections in 1956. The all this trouble began. We should now rectify our mistake and allow these neutral nations who have Representatives right now in Saigon. We should allow these people to supervise the elections and have elections in Vietnam which would

generate genuinely free honest and fair and that would be the beginning of the end of this wall. What kind of candidates do you think would emerge. I think that the candidate that would actually add would undoubtedly be what we would call neutralized people who were concerned primarily with the ending of colonial rule. But since the population is very largely Buddhist and the Buddhist tend to be neutralized I'm inclined to believe that the government would be for ending the war the elimination of all foreign influence and creating a wholly independent Vietnam. The Form of Government doesn't matter very much in my opinion because the actual reason for this war is the desire of the people of Vietnam for independence just exactly the way the desire of the people of the United States in

1776 was for independence the desire for independence. As John Kennedy said. The secret weapon which is constantly working in favor of the three were all human beings want to be independent whether or not one agrees with Mr Adams ideas about the future. One must be concerned about Sunday's election for representatives who will write a SAS Vietnamese Constitution. Each Massachusetts senatorial candidate was asked to comment on whether the Vietnam election was fair. And what do you thought it would really accomplish. First Mayor Collins there was Perez as it's possible to have I think it's in our interest to make them fair. It's in our interest to make them have them participated in as broadly as possible to do what we have to remember this is something new in the whole history of this country. The average Vietnamese president hasn't seen beyond the end of his own rice paddy and isn't very much interested in anything beyond the end of his own rice paddy. It's as successful as a first experience can be.

Some people have claimed that and I wonder if you'd comment on this from a very practical point of view that the fact that the Vietcong don't have any candidates even if they didn't want to happen if they had the opportunity that this would be a great propaganda advantage for us and also perhaps not leaving the only alternative to shoot. Well I don't know how sensible an outcome of that really is I think. That is to say if you had a docs and a Pekinese in the back yard and were going to have an election to ascertain which was going to be the ruler of the backyard that you wouldn't then give a jackal a place on the ballot I I really don't think it was possible to do and I don't think any of the other circumstances we made any mistake. Next former governor Peabody comments on what he believes to sask these elections will achieve. I think let's save the development of a government in South Vietnam. It's

quite apparent that the cloak is being ripped off. The Vietcong who have been portrayed in some circles as the groups that are really anxious to work for self government in that area because they're doing all on their power. To destroy the chance of elections in that area. So I would say that the communists are desperate. That this election will succeed. I've been reading in the Christian Science Monitor that distinguished and respected leaders of South Vietnam who are not members of the military click feel that this election has a real chance of bringing the kind of government to Vietnam which Vietnam wants and all of Southeast Asia is looking for. But I think the big con or at least the membership is welcome to participate in the election but I think that it's quite apparent that they're abstaining and withdrawing and not been any way interested in participating in them at all and I think that the real fact is that is coming out is that they are a revolutionary force

attached to the communists of North Vietnam and Red China and that that is here in Vietnam where we must contain communist aggression. If we are to have any hope for peace in Southeast Asia and on would you have permitted them a couple of candidate. Well I just don't think it's apparent at all that they were denied candidates. And I'm sure that the government does it more than welcome it got the policy of promoting the Viet Cong members of it to come back into the into the communities in which they live and to participate in the elections and to vote for a candidate. But anyone who was committed to the forcible overthrow by force of the government itself. By that statement so does not really want to participate in the election. Mr. Adams has very strong opinions on the subject. I'm glad to have this opportunity of stating categorically that the election's going to be held in Vietnam are a fraud. Americans must not be deluded by these fraudulent elections.

These elections are exactly comparable to the previous sites by which Hitler perpetuated his power in Germany. He and his nefarious gang of cutthroats have no legal standing whatsoever that I and they alone alone are regulating the elections these elections are in no sense an expression of the popular will. They are not even elections to elect a government. Nobody can stand for the elections. Who has not been approved by the regime. Those people who are elected have no authority whatever except to write a constitution. Constitution when written according to the decree of the key government which made the elections take place the Constitution when written can be changed at will by the Cuban regime. And finally he himself has stated on three separate occasions that no government

at any time in the future will be allowed to take office which is not satisfactory to him and his cohorts. Attorney General Brooks feels that the Vietcong should be allowed to produce a page in the elections even though they might not choose to do so. He claims that it would provide the United States and the government of South Vietnam with an opportunity to show that we are trying to deal in good faith. Bombing an escalation is constantly in the minds of many voters following the Vietnam situation. Mare Collins was asked to explain what he thinks of the bombings. The bombing of Hanoi and Haiphong in the demilitarized zone I assume you're talking about. It would seem to me that the president of the Joint Chiefs of Staff were in possession of all the information which dictated the bombing of annoying Haiphong. I always was somewhat fearful that the bombing of Hanoi and Haiphong aside from whatever psychological or military effect it might have on the

enemy. Psychologically I was afraid that bombing alone might not be the deterrent that it was hoped that it would be. And I'm afraid that the time is indicating that that view is quite correct that it's terribly difficult to stop infiltration and supplying of troops in the south in the south by bombing the demilitarized zone. Again it's awfully awfully difficult for anyone who is not in position of the military faction to second guess or to critique an individual military action. But it would seem to me that the Vietcong the North Vietnamese were using the demilitarized zone as a base for commencing raids on our troops in South Vietnam. If they were it's entirely proper that the de-militarized zone be bombed or. Thought we should have taken every opportunity that we could to have had some international body such as Are you aware of the Geneva Conference take a look at the so-called demilitarized zone. I have to assume that

every alternative to bombing it was taken and if it was taken and no results were forthcoming then bombing would seem to me to be the only thing that was left to us. Next Mr. Adams. The day the bombings took place I went on the wild and stated categorically that the effect of these bombings would be to lengthen the war and make it much harder to negotiate a peace. I was very glad to discover the next day that Robert Kennedy had followed my lead and said very much the same thing that Mr. Fulbright likewise had agreed then as you know Mr. Ross Mr. McNamara the president himself made apologies for the bombing trying to explain that they were going to shorten the war. That they were doing a great deal of damage to the striking force of the North Vietnamese and the South Vietnamese grows. This all occurred

in the first few days of July. But before three weeks ago on by the president not Nomar and Rusk had all had to eat their words. I agree that the bombings had merely lengthened the war that the psychological effect of the bombings FOF from persuading the Vietnamese to go to the peace table had precisely the opposite effect. Exactly as if a couple of kids were having a scrap and one of them soaks the other fella in the eye and says Well now you're ready to negotiate. This is who thought of your logical approach to the United States government as you've now constituted. And finally Mr Peabody comments on escalation and bombing of North Vietnam. Well the escalation Obama and beyond what now has taken place. It is. Not necessary here for what we're doing presently is striking at the sinews

of the war and I think that this is justified by the fact that the North Vietnamese have increased their effort there sending divisions of troops down into South Vietnam and we're well justified in attacking their supply sources such as the oil refineries in Hanoi and Haiphong. We are not escalating the war the war as it has been escalated has been escalated by the aggressor. We are merely matching the plants against aggression by this counterattack. And I think that that is absolutely essential in order to prevent the expansion of the war into other areas of southeast Asia. As you heard earlier in the program Brooks felt that further escalation is not necessary. Each senatorial candidate was asked to comment on whether the Vietcong should be recognized as a future negotiating party to any peace treaty. The answer was unanimous yes. This is been Carolynn is where we get non reports. Tonight we explored the views of the Massachusetts candidates the United States Senate. Thomas

Boston Adams attorney general Edward Brock married John F. columns and former Gov. Endicott Peabody. If you have any topics you would like discussed on Vietnam reports or views on the war which you would like to have read on the air. Send your letter to Vietnam reports WGBH radio Boston 0 2 1 3 4.