As we see it: Vietnam '68; Dr. Walter Judd
If you can demonstrate to the world that the great United States with all its weapons and its wealth does not have the will to do that we are as most of the EU has said over and over again. A paper tiger. You can humiliate the United States and demonstrate we don't have the resolution the ingenuity this steadfastness to deal successfully with this relatively small problem. Then who in the world can count on the United States national educational radio presents as we see at Vietnam 68 a series of appearances of noted spokesman presenting their various views on the war in Vietnam. As we see it Vietnam 68 was conducted over a period of five weeks last spring on the campus of Miami University in Oxford Ohio. Under the sponsorship of the Miami University student senate. Because of the time that has elapsed since the presentation. There may be a few references that are in Congress with the current
situation in Vietnam. The speaker for this program is Dr. Walter Judd a former Republican congressman from Minnesota Dr. Judd was a medical missionary in China from one hundred twenty five to one thousand thirty eight. He served as a member of the House of Representatives from 1943 to 962 and served as a delegate to the United Nations General Assembly in 1957. Dr. Judd gave the keynote address at the 1960 Republican National Convention. Here is Dr. Walter Judd the first speaker in. As we see it the Vietnam 68 if I had to pick out two words to describe our world tonight. I think they would be these two kind flaked and confusion. There have always been conflicts and I assume there always will be kind of leaks but this is the first time I think it's correct to say when all continents and all cultures and all countries are in turmoil and
dislocation on us even violent revolution in many places at the same time. In the last 22 years a billion people have gotten their independence some 60 new country. And during the same 22 years another billion people have lost their independence. Some of the oldest and stabilises countries and peoples of history there have not been to such convulsions in a two decade period in all of human history as have occurred on this round globe in the last 20 years. And if they knew things were it was anything worse than the conflict it's the confusion with respect to the conflict and particularly with respect to Vietnam which is the hottest of these conflicts at the moment. Equally sincere high minded conscientious loyal Patriots take exactly opposite positions with respect to this
issue. Now both sides may be wrong but they cannot both be right. And therefore it's the job of the serious minded people students particularly and intellectual institutions to examine them now. There are many explosions around the world as I've said but the hottest of them all I have to see in the news news tonight there may be a new one someplace else that day but the hottest of the explosions just now and the one where Americans are dying tonight and the one from which I returned recently from my seventh visit. You can see everything in those short visits but when you've been there almost every two years since or less since 1953 you can quickly tell whether it's getting better or getting worse. You sense this quite quickly. This is Vietnam. This
is the hottest stuff. This is the key test of us today. Three different times in the last 22 years the test case was brand new. Three different times the adversary progun you must give them credit. The Communists have never yet started an operation without probing. Now. I say three times the test case was Berlin they tested President Truman they tested President Eisenhower in his administration and they tested President Kennedy and each time in each of those three instances that point came where the president of the United States said no I don't to have those occasions under Eisenhower and Kennedy they were threatening nuclear warfare. And each time the same timid people beginning with Mr. Lippman were scared to death if we stood up it would lead to nuclear war. But he didn't. The Three times we were prepared for two of those three times we were prepared if necessary
to use nuclear weapons we didn't have to. When they pushed President Kennedy during his first eight months he made concessions concessions concessions concessions because he'd been convinced that he could get a deal with the Communists that had just been rejected Dulles is a little clumsy Eisenhower who were responsible for our difficulties but these new young men had all the answers. And finally President Kennedy couldn't retreat anymore. And in September 19 61 he went to the U.N. and he said we have a resolve to use whatever measures are necessary to defend the independence and freedom of West Berlin. The communists had been saying up let hour that nothing could stop them from getting Berlin by the end of 1961. They never again since September 25th 61 have said they were going to take Berlin come what may. These were the test cases then and once it was in
the test case was in Korea. Twice it was in the Formosan Straits once it was in Lebanon. A couple of times it was Cuba probing when we stood firm. The danger lessened when we hesitated or didn't stand it escalated the war increased the danger. With out the exception. I didn't create this situation this is the history now of the test case. Is Vietnam. What is the issue in Vietnam. Is it about one little country with 16 million people that is South Vietnam. No the issue is this. How are international disputes to be settled. That's what the war in Vietnam is about. Are we to go back to the law that too. Can the claw the jungle and any outfit with the will and power to impose its unwanted rule on its neighbors. From within or without.
Is to be permitted to do so. This is what the war in Vietnam is about. Are we to stand up and let this go on. Well it's a long ways away until it inches closer and closer. Or are we to go to the assistance of a neighborhood who's being attacked. From without and within and is trying its level best to defend its precious newly won national independence. Are we to go to its assistance one because we're a good neighbor and two because if you don't check that kind of international behavior over in your neighbor's house after a while you have to try to resist that then your own house. Now the United States has never adopted as its main instrument of foreign policy the use of armed force with the possible exception of the Mexican War. But we're dealing with an old pit worldwide organization which has adopted as the main instrument of its
policy armed force. When you confront that however reluctantly you have to try to keep it this far away and as weak as possible I think you'll find if you study it this is what the war in Vietnam is about. Now what is the state in Vietnam. One little country with 16 million people know the stake is Southeast Asia and the rest of Asia and the world including the United States. I will say particularly the United States. Why do I say that. Because the communists have said so again and again calls this the watershed. He has said this struggle in Vietnam will be the watershed of our period of human history what does he mean. He means that if in Vietnam he can humiliate the United States if he can demonstrate to the world that the great United States with all its weapons and its wealth does not
have the. That we are as monsoon has said over and over again. A paper tiger. You can humiliate the United States and demonstrate we don't have the resolution the ingenuity the steadfastness to deal successfully with this relatively small problem. Then who in the world can count on the United States watershed. They have no choice except to go to Peking make the best terms they can. Last fall I was in Japan at a dinner one night with some rather high Japanese officials one of whom had been ambassador there ambassador to the United Nations when I served as an American delegate to the General Assembly and this person whom I'd gotten to know there enough so that he was reasonably Frank. He said We read once in a while that people in your country are advocating pulling your troops off the Asian mainland and holding the Iranians around. He said I
hope you're not counting on Japan as one of the islands that will be able to be secure. I waited he said. RED CHINA has exploded nuclear devices. She hasn't yet the means of delivering them on your country but she doesn't need long range missiles to hit Japan. She can hit us with them the same way you did drop them out of the Bay of an old bomber. We had to Hiroshima Nagasaki. We're not going to have any more. And if you the United States can't find a way to deal successfully with communist China and that threat then the Japanese people will force whatever governments in power to make the best terms it can with became. Please don't he said we are naked and yet a lot of people think that will be easier to defend on the 20 yard line than it was on the 30 year it was on the 40. Or maybe just a little better on the 10 yard line because it's difficult on the 20.
The state is our sounds. They always have a maximum objective and a minimum their maximum. Is the world. If they can humiliate United States if they can't they can always come and settle for the 17th parallel we told them that a hundred times. You see their minimum is an hour maximum their maximum is the room the minimum is the status quo. Our maximum is the status quo won't you please be nice enough to leave it the way it was. How can you win. How can they lose if their minimum is our maximum. Maybe someday they'll break through. Get a new weapon get a new device greater disintegration in the free world and the alliances and they break through. You may say well it isn't communism mellowing isn't especially in the Soviet Union and in Europe isn't it. But to agree isn't
it evolving. Aren't they introducing some capitalism and we're becoming more socialistic and are the two systems converging and be patient and we'll all be in the same boat. Well no we say that but you haven't heard communists say that have you. Have you found it will run important communist in the world who wishes it has renounced the goal of world domination. If they really want to relax tensions Why doesn't Mr. Gromyko come from the Soviet Union to the United needs in the Security Council or General Assembly and announce that they're having a big power on Moscow and they've made a fundamental decision to give up their program of world domination. Communist nation of the world. And from now on the government in Moscow is just going to act like any normal national government and we're solely for the well-being of the Russian people period.
They've given up the goal of world domination. That threat would be gone and the men couldn't carry on a month and he'd have to come and negotiate in terms of calling off that he aggression and our American boys would be home as fast as it's possible to get them home. But they haven't. In fact if you go back and study what Mr. brazen of said in a per hour speech on the 7th of November or the fifth year I think it was the 6th but it had to do with the 50th anniversary last November. You find that he reaffirms in great detail that they have not abandoned their objective of a world communism nation. And he says we've been accused of revisionism. But no no he said hatefully following the tactics laid down by Mr Lennon are great leaders. Some people have said that they are becoming more capitalistic means they're abandoning
communism. He said this is not evolution. This is it. This is not evolution. Well he didn't say this. I say it's three versions. He didn't say it in those terms. It's rebuilders into what Mr. Lenin himself did in the 20s early 20s 21 and 22. They had shortages of production in the Soviet Union and he introduced what was called Lenin introduced what was called the New Economic Policy It was a modified capitalism. He gave incentives and people could do better if they worked harder. Whereupon they worked harder under the capitalistic system whatever its shortcomings it gives incentives and people work hard and they produce. Then the production went right up and it stabilized Lennon's base so he was in a stronger position to go ahead and Mr. Brace and he pointed out that this was not evolution. This was not an abandonment of communist doctrine. This was a frank application of Mr Lennon's teaching. That
is just as important to know when to retreat as it is to know when to advance. Most of them puts the same doctrine in more intriguing Oriental fashion. He says you must take sometimes to step one step back. In order to take two steps ahead. Whenever they take this step back we think Nala fine you see there given up communism. No no this is the way it's supposed to do to get ahead. Now we shouldn't get upset at that. Communism uses the same tactics as you use in football power and deception. If you have been a power and you drive through. But if you don't have enough power the quarterback pulls his trick play. We understand this in football. If we see the quarterback take a handoff to the right and then run or pass to the left we don't say well I'm so disappointed in that nice clean looking young kid. I never thought he'd tricked that other team. I trusted him. And then look at how he let me down. No we
don't say that because we know that the quarterback didn't trick the other team because he's a bad man. He tricked them because he's a good quarterback. The name of the game is football and deception is a virtue not a vice. Then we give them lectures have a communist when they play by their rules. They never said they were going to play by our rules they said they were not going to play with our rules. If we have this done our homework even this late as it is with respect to the nature and the rules by which this game or this team World team plays soul of state is the world. Now what is the problem in Vietnam is that the corruption is at the Buddhist. Is it a lack of a stable and strong government. General key your general if you don't have things under control those are problems. I think the corruption when I was there last fall was about as bad.
Perhaps as bad as it was in our country during the revolution when the RockNess in Grafton factionalism in our government in the Continental Congress were so bad that many almost despaired you recall the problem. The problem is none of these their problems. The problem is aggressive communist expansionism from North Vietnam backed up by Red China and the Soviet Union. Now you may say Isn't there a split. And I'm sure this will be taken up in more detail by some of the electors that come later isn't there a split between Red China and the Soviet Union. No I say categorically there is no evidence of a split between them as two nations. Communism is not a national movement. Communism is an international movement. There is a quarrel and a bitter quarrel. I'm grateful for it it's probably the most hopeful thing on the horizon. They're diverted their divisions but it we ought to understand it's a quarrel between two
factions within the Communist movement. The main leaders of one faction are in Moscow. But that faction has supporters in in China and the main leaders of the other faction are in Peking. But it has had its supporters in the Soviet Union just three years ago the Soviet Union announced its government in Moscow announced it had purged in disgrace three of the only stalwarts who had built the communist movement in Russia. Mr. Millet told Mr. Coggan movie it's Mr. Marlin coffee. Why did it purge them because they're Chinese No they're not Chinese not Russian. But they were wrong mild symptoms side and not too soft and version of sight. And you read about the Red Guards that most of them sent out to purify his country. They were set out to destroy with the three slogans the three antis. Against three things what. First the anti-socialist Who were they Chinese who don't
want communism. Second the anti party faction. Who were they Chinese who don't want a dictatorship by one party. They want to have something to say about their own government. And the third the one the Red Guards went out after in dead earnest or what was called the anti Maoists. Now who are they Russians. No no they're Chinese and they're Chinese communists but they're on my scouse sorry not on the side of their fellow Chinese. Now what's the difference between them. What's the coral about how to conquer the world not whether. It's over tactics and timing modes of doing says force. Moscow says the S.. Also don't is always asking this rhetorical question of when and where has the revolution ever come by legal and parliamentary mean. The
revolution never comes except by blood shed. Get on with it. Keep on killing. A year ago last October there was a movement been in Hanoi a split in their government there are core a rift and one strong faction wanted to come and negotiate and a man backed up by militant known refused to. He said keep on killing keep on killing Don't you see America weakening don't you read the speeches of certain senators and the editorials in certain papers and I think I can hear recently most of them saying to hoodoo man I told you so. I told you just sell just keep on killing and America is beginning to fragment. As I told you it's lost its will. I hope he doesn't prove right. But he's appearing to have a lot a lot on his side in his analysis now what's Moscow's line deception. Don't use force now the United States is too strong we don't suffer.
So let us turn on the charm peaceful coexistence a relaxation of tension date home. But the United States to sleep until we get more countries subverted in Latin America and more countries subverted in in Africa in the United States gets tired and pullout gets tired and pull out of Vietnam it's going to isn't it and the rest of Asia goes down and Europe is more divided and the Middle East is blowing up. This is the time for the revolution that will be the time not now. And the Moscow clique and their devotees in this country right out in the Daily Worker in their magazines. They're convinced then they will win the world not by actual use of the weapons of mass destruction. They'll win the world including the United States buy that crap out of their US coupled with the demoralization and the intimidation and the division that they will have been able to create in the United States by that time. Are you sure they are right of the to the mosque Allah led faction tonight
is enormously more dangerous than the Peking faction. Because one it has more power it can hit is right now and two its leaders are so much more clever they can talk like a man of peace. So there is a quarrel and praise God for the poor. But let's understand it. Whatever else they disagree on and they disagree deeply. But there is no disagreement on the necessity to defeat the United States and work together to support the Viet Cong while they bleed and confuse the United States. Show me any disagreement on that. If I have two doctors who are disagreeing about how to get me well that's of life and death importance but if their only point of disagreement is this which is the quickest way to eliminate me. Well I'm interested in that disagreement but I don't get too much comfort out of it. Now if the real problem is communist
expansionism backed up from North Vietnam backed up by Red China and more remotely the Soviet Union. Let's look at the Red China because this is the key to Asia China. And it's the key because of the geography of Asia because the size of China because of the strength of the Chinese people. Look at the geography. Asia is like a giant hand I can use my map my hand is a map of Asia. China is the palm of the hand and out from it come not by fingers as from my physical palm but 15 fingers 15 countries lying in peninsulas and island groups around this giant central mass. China Korea Japan. For most of the Philippines six in Southeast Asia seven. If you called the two Vietnam's aid if you count Australia which is just one step further away and across the south more Burma India Nepal Pakistan Afghanistan
all of these come out of China. The way the fingers come out of the palm or the way this folks come out of the hub of a wheel. The key to Asia is China. Which means that the only ultimate solution to the problem that will really relax it in Asia is if the Chinese people can be returned to the free world if they're free they will be friendly and there's no insoluble problems in those fingers. But mark my word if the communist regime in Peking had been able or if it should be able to consolidate unite the Chinese people and exploit their full potential. Then there is no solution no solution. Korea no solution for Japan in the end it's got to be on the same side as the mainland. No solution for the Philippines.
No solutions for South Vietnam and Malaysia and Indonesia and Thailand and Burma and India and all the rest. Which means that our objective. If you examine it if we can achieve it our objective is to try to return the Chinese to the free world. If there are three in friendly no problem I'm perfectly aware. I think perhaps more than most people of the difficulties in returning the Chinese to the free world where the Chinese people can resume their horror or historic stands in in that part of the world. But I'll tell you however difficult it is to return Chinese people to the free world. Any other course presents greater difficulty. I choose the lesser difficulty. Now if China is the key Let's look at it in another sense. When the Communists got China it
was like when you're playing baseball getting your man on first base. Now I don't think they needed to have first base but they got it. I don't think there needed to be a war. Our men engaged as they are in Vietnam. I tried my level best to get us adopt policies which I believed then and believe now might have prevented this. We in Korea as I said this was the unfinished Korea war. We were in the last inning and we were in the lead and our then president pulled out our star pitcher or president or that General MacArthur and decided not to win. Because as he's President Truman said to me he said what I'm trying to stop the war not expand it. And I said I'm trying to stop with the policy of UN finishing this in Korea will lead to allow the communists to move from Korea where they can't win to Southeast Asia where they can win and you can look up that position in a nationwide broadcast I meet on ABC network in the summer of 1050 why.
I don't think we needed to be there but we're there. Commitments were made and they're made by the duly constituted authorities of these United States. I did not vote for those authorities but they are the duly constituted authorities and you can't have three quarterbacks at the same time. I belong to an opposition but we're a loyal opposition not a disloyal opposition. And when the commitments are made and the integrity of my nations involved then I cannot glibly do what some people are saying. Military defeat would not be fatal to the United States but more a would be part will be fatal to the United State. Who wants to be an ally of a paper tiger. You see a route. Beginning in the other direction in that direction watershed. Now let's look at baseball. When your opponent gets his best baserunner on first base What do you say. Do you say well I don't know whether
- As we see it: Vietnam '68
- Dr. Walter Judd
- Producing Organization
- Miami University (Oxford, Ohio)
- Contributing Organization
- University of Maryland (College Park, Maryland)
- AAPB ID
- Lecture/debate series on aspects of the war in Vietnam and Southeast Asia. This prog.: Dr. Walter Judd, a former U.S. Congressman and delegate to the General Assembly of the United Nations; also a former medical missionary in mainland China.
- War and Conflict
- Media type
Producing Organization: WMUB
Producing Organization: Miami University (Oxford, Ohio)
- AAPB Contributor Holdings
University of Maryland
Identifier: 68-28-1 (National Association of Educational Broadcasters)
Format: 1/4 inch audio tape
If you have a copy of this asset and would like us to add it to our catalog, please contact us.
- Chicago: “As we see it: Vietnam '68; Dr. Walter Judd,” 1968-07-01, University of Maryland, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC, accessed September 21, 2021, http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip-500-p843w973.
- MLA: “As we see it: Vietnam '68; Dr. Walter Judd.” 1968-07-01. University of Maryland, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Web. September 21, 2021. <http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip-500-p843w973>.
- APA: As we see it: Vietnam '68; Dr. Walter Judd. Boston, MA: University of Maryland, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip-500-p843w973