United States Senate Foreign Relations Committee; Fulbright Hearings On Legislation To End The Vietnam War

This is National Public Radio in Washington. While most attention in the nation's capital today is focused on the streets where demonstrators are trying to end the war by disrupting traffic. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee is continuing its hearings on ending the war through legislation. This morning the committee heard for the first time from an administration witness on the various Vietnam War resolutions now before the Senate. The witness was John Nichel Irwin the second who has been undersecretary of state since last September. Secretary of State Rogers has been invited to appear before the committee and will probably do so within the next month. But he is currently in the Middle East. Undersecretary Irwin is a lawyer and until last September was a partner in a Washington law firm. During the Eisenhower administration he was a deputy assistant secretary and assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs. During the next two hours and 45 minutes we will present gavel to gavel coverage of Under Secretary Irwin's testimony. We will begin with about 15 minutes of prepared testimony and will then go on to questioning by members of

the committee the committee members to be heard will be chairman William Fulbright of Arkansas Jacob Javits of New York Clifford Case of New Jersey John Sparkman of Alabama Claiborne Pell of Rhode Island. Q Scott of Pennsylvania and a George Aiken overmuch. Now to open hearings Senator Fulbright hearing. All right. They all say they don't know that or maybe they say they say this. We are very very interested to get an explanation from the

executive branch and what their view is is to how the war can be ended. It's never been clear to the least to me and maybe to leave it what is the procedure by which the administration hopes to bring the war to an end. Also in that connection would hope that the secretary had an opportunity to see the area this morning. Hey did you see that line and this is a shame you know I think. Well I don't absolutely. The best way Judge said demitted least take part. They gave Brett thought not to exclude the fold It was a time when they thought oh I'm bored.

Take a look at whatever they were in any case I perceive little discussed. Full later very pleased to have I might say I'm very glad steak is willing to clear it up and say it's not often we have the privilege of either the secondary under Second say thank you Chairman. As you know Secretary Rogers is in the Middle East on a trip. Yes he was here. He asked me to appear and there's his place in response to your letter of April 8. This opening statement will review briefly the ministrations policy on bringing United States to space in the war on India and to an end. And on the recent creation of the business of war. With also read this on the importance of poles and we should be aware and only because of the morning activity up till now I have not a chance to see that the day's paper and

full. When the administration came into office it found over half a million troops in Vietnam. The issue was not whether to commit U.S. forces or additional U.S. forces to the defense of them. It was how to withdraw U.S. forces how to bring an end to the war and how to provide the South Vietnamese a reasonable chance to defend themselves without the thanks of U.S. troops. As the president has said he had two choices. Whether the order the immediate withdrawal of all American forces and in effect blame the result on his predecessors are to bring our men out in a way which would leave the South Vietnamese a reasonable chance to determine their own future. The president explained the consequences of immediate withdrawal and he's recently on a report to the Congress in the following words. Quote I have repeatedly explained why I consider this a disastrous path for the South Vietnamese

Minnie's people who would have lost their collective political choice in countless individual lives for other noncommunist countries especially in Asia. Among the not a single leader recommended such a policy for the global credibility of the US were for those Americans who had made such heavy sacrifices and for the integrity of American society in the post Vietnam era and it is for these reasons that the administration believes that this course of engagement warrants a continued support of Congress and the American people. The administration's preferred way to achieve its goal is to bring an end through negotiation to him and to space in the war in Vietnam and to the war itself and to lay the basis for a stable peace in China. President Nixon has made far reaching proposals to the Cisco on October 7 of last year the president called for an immediate standstill cease fire

throughout Indochina had this initiative been accepted by the common aside the fighting would already have been brought to an end. The president made it clear that he is prepared to set a date for withdrawal of all our forces from south in them. No I would do the same. He has suggested 12 months is an appropriate time table for such with dollars. The president called for a political settlement within cell which would reflect the existing balance of political forces in the country. Our side of the talks is suggested re-elections organized by commissions which would include representatives of the communists as a means to arrive at a fair political settlement. At the same time we have indicated that we could accept any other arrangement acceptable to the Vietnamese people. The president called for immediate release of all prisoners of war held throughout Indochina irrespective of progress toward agreement on any other items. Had this proposal been accepted by the other side our men could be home

and the Vietnamese prisoners held throughout in the China could also be the president called for an Indo China peace conference to discuss these matters. At the same time he said we would pursue peace through the existing negotiation negotiating line in Paris until a wider conference could be convened. As we have since emphasized we are prepared to join any negotiating which offers a prospect of progress toward peace. The administration believes that this program for peace is far reaching reasonable and flexible. Our government has made clear that we are prepared to engage without preconditions and serious discussions on these proposals and any others which sit on the sidelines advance the administration has emphasized that it will take a positive and realistic approach in any such discussions and that it considers every NIC everything negotiable except the basic right of South Vietnamese determine their own future. To date all efforts to induce the other side to engage in serious

negotiations have been fruitless. The other side is refused even to begin until we exceed to two far reaching preconditions. One is a commitment on our part to total US withdrawal by what they consider a reasonable date without any commitment on noise part with respect to its forces. The other is removal of the three top leaders of South Viet Nam and replacement of the present constitutionally elected government of that country by a government satisfactory to. There's no indication that the attitude of the other side is likely to change. We will continue looking for signs of any change. We would welcome it and will remain prepared to negotiate seriously if it comes. In the face of the other side's refusal to move toward an acceptable settlement. The president is pursuing the policy of the it is a Vietnamization which is designed to reduce and eventually eliminate him and hasten in the war in a way

which leaves the South Vietnamese a reasonable chance to survive as a free people. The rate of withdrawal of our men has been determined on the basis of the criteria announced by the president at the beginning of the program. The level of military activity enemy military activity progress in the talks and the ability of the South Vietnamese to assume an increasing share the burden of their own defense. To measure the accomplishments of this policy one must start by remembering the situation the president found when he took office two years ago. There were some five hundred forty nine thousand American troops in Viet Nam more than two hundred sixty five thousand have now been withdrawn by December 1 of this year another 100000 will be brought home. And as the president indicated last Thursday evening before that date he will announce his plan for further withdrawals. Approximately 300 Americans are being lost every week this year that figures come down to an average of less than 60. The ratio of South Vietnamese forces

and forces in Vietnam was less than two to one. Today it is more than three and a half to one. Thus the president could announce on April 7 the American involvement in Vietnam is coming to an end the day the South Vietnamese can take over their own defense is in sight. Our goal is the total amount and with all the NBA we can and we will reach that goal. Vietnamization is not simply a program of U.S. withdrawal and compasses significant accomplishments by the Vietnamese militarily politically and economically most of which were outlined in the president's foreign policy report to the Congress in February. The South Vietnamese is gaining experience and self-confident now accounts for a growing bulk of the combat engagement. The security of the rule population has increased markedly in the last year. Local participation self government and self defense is been increased. Elections village municipal and eventually Council for one have the Senate seat.

Took place throughout the country in 1970 lore house and presidential elections are scheduled later in 1971. Legislation to enact a sweeping land reform program was passed last year. And distribution of land under the program is under way. The government of Vietnam undertook strong fiscal measures fiscal and monetary actions to limit inflation in the fall and again in March prices which rose 50 percent in the 12 months of the mid-1970s have been remarkably stable since that time. In sum the Vietnamization program is produce positive results to date in terms of the president's two objectives ending U.S. involvement in the war and providing the South Vietnamese a reasonable chance to determine their own future. The ministration continues to believe that the Vietnamization program offers the best means so long as the other side refuses to negotiate to bring the American participation in the war in Indochina responsibly

to an end. You have before you a number of resolutions which suggest a different way to end our involvement. By announcing six day of the total withdrawal of all our forces in the circumstances of a long and costly war it is easy to understand the appeal of a specified date for withdrawal. As the president stated on Thursday night the administration has listened and listened seriously to the many serious sincere critics of the war and our involvement in it. Some of them argue for this course of action. Everyone in government has deep concerns about Viet Nam and wishes to see the conflict ended. However the administration believes strongly that such an announcement would not serve the interest of securing in order to mount an involvement in the war on early release of our prisoners. To announce a fixed date for withdrawal would remove one of the few bargain encounters we have to bring about a negotiated settlement and noise uncertainty about the precise withdrawal

timetable for the considerable amount of force still in Viet Nam. And about the size and nature of any continuing American role. It would put an ally on notice that our forces will be out of Vietnam by a given day and enable the Noida plan its military activities with full knowledge of what our force levels will be. So long as annoyed is not nor precise withdrawal plan their own planning. The argument has been made that if we would only set a reasonable date for our total withdraw it in these would be willing to cease firing against US troops in the release are dead because this argument ignores several important points. First as long as the ceasefire was not universal our men would still be exposed to enemy fire because of their support for the South Vietnamese forces. So far the president's call for a total cease fire has been refused by the other side. Second all their statements including those made in the most recent section of the Paris talks

on April 29. The other side is limited itself to a commitment to discuss the release of our prisoners if we announce a reasonable withdrawal did withdraw all day. They're continually link the actual release of our prisoners of war as opposed to mere discussion of the question. With the settlement of the war on the basis of their political demands the clearest enunciation of this position was made by Chief not the Vietnamese to go share with a negotiator line twee. As recently as April 15. We calling North Vietnamese and then for one announcement of the fall date to cessation of encroachment of sovereignty of not and three removal of the present Saigon government he said if you give a response if you give a response rapidly and positively to these three points then a rapid return home will be possible. The captured military personnel and for the personnel now participating in the along

the CI Congo Shater Manam been said at the same session in order to settle the question of captured military personnel. It is necessary to settle the problem of the cessation of the war and the US government should rapidly withdraw American troops and the now so government so the captured American military personnel could go back rapidly to their homes. These statements by the not yet amazing their Southern supporters plus their steadfast refusal to give any unlucky interlocutor a commitment to do more than discuss the P.O. Debbi question if we announce a withdrawal date I suggest that announcement of such a date on our part would be met with demands for further concessions by man. These conclusions about the attitude of the other side with regard to negotiation do not mean the ministration has given up on efforts to reach an agreement for the release of our men. Both our government and the South Vietnamese government have repeatedly reiterated our proposal for

immediate exchange of all because it is without awaiting on other matters. We have offered to repaginate all sick and wounded prisoners of war and we have suggested internment in a third country a sick and wounded prisoners as well as those long. The administration continues to believe that the policy of withdrawing our forces as a South Vietnamese becomes much more capable of assuming the burden of their own defense. Together with the present statement that all our forces will not be withdrawn until our men are released. Provide the best prospect of bringing all our men in prison or in the field out of Viet Nam in a way that gives the South Vietnamese a reasonable chance to survive the people. Take a look you. Your concept of free will you use that phrase

used to be terminated in a week. I think self-determination is a good definition of what I think self-determination is a good definition of the of the basis for people is free. You may have terminations may not have people free but I think that is one of the fundamentals of free people. So like when I was a C day in you you saw on several occasions this reading the book and you said you elaborate on what you mean like me. Name one is usually a day late

and the other the right. Do you really want to let a deal with the requisites of the free. Yeah what you mean you eating a little bit. Yes I think your words germination by the sound of the enemy's position in the pre-determined concept. Nor me nor Viet Nam when they won the right to engage in free elections not only initially but over time. Their electoral process calls for their right to certain basic civil liberties is weak in the

United States. These are not always universal and there are governments those in the world that have one or other these aspects of essential freedoms it does not perfection. But just in general I think is what we would see. Basically it would be the initial right of the South Vietnamese to determine their own future without the pressures or the control. North Vietnamese are the local the support of the Vietnamese truth but is it. Only in the bush. He did take a look at election similar to our own.

This is what we think they're leaning over the last decade and longer the United States has been engaged in South Viet Nam. The war was going on and present Nixon came to office in 1969. As I said in my statement his choice is not whether we would go in and make an initial entry into the air in order to determine certain events or to establish free elections it was a choice he just got with his forces. And this is what he's been doing so it's not. The proposition of which he speaks is what you say. Joyce's immediate withdrawal or are you in the alternative on your first day. Bring them out. Read on their own. Then you need to

free what you call it. Free free. There are people in the world that really people of the system will be so many others I don't know why. Really this is not very pretty. See here while we go in Lol it was allegedly our horses of the day we were going with the priest. They come up with a new lease of life came early. Brain no magic and there's no magic at all and uses the word freak people and anything with chance or survive with the right of

self-determination. What you're saying anything good in any way and they may simply be something and think what an enabler. Leon. OK then you feel you know the flaws in a lot. They never had our say in the press and the spoken to object is for our withdrawal is one to get at me is a reasonable chance. This is a lot of the use that language is a drawing a lot like a stand what you mean by this official rhetoric. Still

holding it legal I really don't know what you mean and I don't know what the administration source. Elaborate head you want to get you the other day. Dying to go out there and they're there learning that an intern will in fact then release it as an internal matter for us to be concerned about when we employ the reporters in the field you decline to get what you're saying and I think he did it least this committee and the public ought to have a little of what you know and the repetition of the same rhetoric doesn't

play when free people can mean anything I think I can think there. Really any large bottles think they're free. Easing bank you know sit there and under a dictatorship reading very much about it. You think to create a freebie on trying to get away from the word free people as I find it because I would say it does mean the right of self-determination. Yeah all right. If you're going to nation then they do in Spain. You're not advocating we do anything about it I say. Yeah this is there. I think I think the principal difference is this ministration found itself in a situation which the war been going on for a decade or more. So it's entirely different

situation with respect to any other country. I agree with that and many people this is one reason why we need not like it is all that was suggested but now that we have ready for this. When we don't like any of the polls that believe it it. Does it is worth while.

Well that is not the whole story because the existence of the war makes it impossible for us here at least the whole atmosphere. Back to the people. Are you a lawyer or God is that what you're saying is that you need not raise them like.

The apostle for the ride along. We're not of the least understand what it is you think it's a lot of what I want to have another. They knew we would be saying in effect the same thing that your committee would be saying if they adopted it with you all day. I thought I accept doing whatever

those costs were until that withdrawal date. We are saying that we think the administration is saying that it thinks it can end the war or end American dissipate and give the Vietnamese people a reasonable chance to defend themselves and have the right of missiles terminate within that period of time it takes to continue withdrawing the forces under the program the president has adopted at the same time being conscious. Survivability of the Rs want to try to avoid words same time giving the right giving South Vietnamese a reasonable chance

to be able to defend themselves and hold their own election. So what it seems to me is we are not saying that anything essentially different to the acceptance of the COS and none of us want to bear than it would be saying by adopting a particular date whether it's the end of this year and the next year halfway through next year. We're saying that we believe it's a disadvantage to give a date because that might make more difficult the accomplishment of the program as a present busy day. Anyplace in the numbers. Laurie. Thank you

very much. The probability of a piece of the bridge and. The result we're a long way. Get me to let the enemies get this not let you have two other countries in law. It means a little over a million a minute isn't it. We long to leave given the PR and there comes a time when the decision be

made and it's actually there's not a reason for the dollar. Did you ever hear that your head unit and looked there and then I think what six three more dead ends of what isn't that long now. Our object is the same you say. The only difference is the means today then you that your again. In fact you hear me sponsor the Senate. I think they would leave it for this year. I would hope that many more than here. Incidentally I think to be put in the red it is a complete wreck. You just highlight that mentioned in the beginning of it Mark. It really made you result.

One is a question which is the reason the law was a success or failure. Twenty four weeks instead a successful 40 years if the U.S. withdrawal long as combat can get Mandy's will be capable of getting the Viet Nam and not 24 7 that it will kill the public for whatever we're not doing it. If we withdraw then they're independent which means employed under the administration resolute to stay there until again this is what the polls will say this is this is the result of being there in the word. KEYES I'm 52 and least said anything negative this morning and this is all our

time to lose a day like this one. What you really mean to the public in a zombie not a defendant. Without me. And we'll say that it is a good day. Yeah I guess it is a name that I would say the events a negative that. Mr. Chairman the record the administration over the past two years in the truth has withdrawn. The fact is the president has met the troop withdrawal dates it is best. And the fact that he is specifying another goal for December the fact

that he has stated that he would declare another withdrawal at that time. The fact that with respect to the ability of the South Vietnamese to defend themselves he said last Thursday night that we have a very good idea when that would occur. Other words he has in his own mind I think get a definition and all of these I think point to that. Move toward the conclusion of just pacing in the same way that under better program in the judgment of the in the next ration then the goal is setting a definite date for withdrawal.

As the bills before you suggest what you suggest to me is that the Senate know that these matters and don't see anything really nice. This is also supported by the attitude of the department in refusing to make the Senate committees to name the worst that would happen lest he say Well the president has a thing. Look at it all day all the time just taking it on to the pole to get their pay. He is not accepted. But I submit it does have a constitutional right to disagree and I do not accept

is implicit in what administrations and that is in order to change it. He has a large factor in the judgement but I would. I think be broader than I would think there would be consultation with this committee mystic and I think it is. I don't have the record in front of me but I understand the secretary's considerably before the committee and here. Then you know what life is

like. But like a meeting on Friday. Positively yes. The idea that we're tired of what the what's going on back in an age in this was a request to commit is to simply give us a report on the situation and then accuse the son how much we are given and so on and these days reveal the basic day of the sword certainly in my age that any of the laws declining to give the information to the committee and the president has a view.

Mind you never say anything and you tell anybody or even doing gauging any serious discussion is the weather reasonable. I don't know what the Senate members did but it is they're going to support one in their trial. That is they're intending to subordinate understand why. More forthcoming in what you really had in mind in the old. This is the day I don't know where he still is out in the ME. Maybe he's killed him. But the South Vietnamese clearly missed a key thing that they have a voice in determining whether or not they're capable of resisting the North Vietnamese would

still leave you could well manage a day long in these if they can maintain their ended. When you say he said the government of South Vietnam that the Prez. It is that could be an amazing would be consulted is the other thing that I think basically the decision would be a United States decision and I think that they would be consulted as time goes on but I don't think it would be dependent on. And to listen. But do you think significant it this morning people can believe that we all are or

even the whole NSA. It may be that they come up with in the last suppose the only way these men got legend because it grows inside why didn't the Senate said they would say they didn't like the first time they've gone that far to meet it in the Senate. Responsible to take into account the wisdom the collective wisdom of the public. I don't think in any one given time we can jump to the polls. But this feeling out there is a very strong change your original question is how you balance the costs against what you think.

Is I don't think is properly elucidated I don't think you made me get it. What did you expect to achieve and what is simplest possible way. And I think it's your responsibility as a representative of the State Department to do that. What is one little employee on any dead wounded and I want to help us make that using it. Well I think it's hard to give an estimate. Mr. Chairman because it is the number to withdraw.

And as they move more and more and more away from a combat role there will be a much greater savings in light of the less casualties. Hard to say that over a 50 percent drop in number of personnel in France a factory fire mower and savings in case of these doing it period. Now when we go into areas with more forces more and more there is. Supporting an action I think would be considerably less but I would hesitate to make a test cos I understand in 1968 today the cost of the

RS dropping from some 29 to something under 15 in the year that it continued is as forces are withdrawn. But again I would hesitate to give an estimate.