Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
December 12, 2016
Document Release Date: 
October 7, 2001
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
November 6, 1967
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP69B00369R000200290002-1.pdf371.23 KB
Approved FoK-Release-2001/11/01 ' CIA-RDP69BO0169RO90200290002=1 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE - November 6, 1967 efforts, our government has continually pro- posed more and more of the same old thing. We are trying to build success on proven failure. Our medicine has not worked, so we are asked to double or triple the dose. More, more, the Administration asks.' It is time for the people to rise up and say, less, less, no more, no more. For example, Robert W. Smith, executive editor of the Minenapolis Star, returned from Vietnam in June and reported that the United States wanted to assign 60 percent more advisers to Viet- namese army units, But what can, more advisers achieve that earlier advisers failed to do. The problem is a lack of will to fight by the South Vietnamese, it is not a lack of advice. Our policies have thus far failed in Viet- nam, but even If they had succeeded we need to ask ourselves whether the price is not too high. Sensible and rational people should place their aims and objectives over against the cost in American lives and dollars. Is the difference between a friendly or unfriendly Vietnam worth more _to the United States than 12,600 brave fighting men and as much as $50 to $100 billion dollars-and the pro- war advocates would raise the cost even higher. Does the kind of government Viet- nam has made this much difference to the United States? Scores of countries around the world-much more powerful than tiny, poverty-ridden Vietnam--are unfriendly to the United States, but we are not spending blood and treasure to force them to main- tain a government friendly to us, or to guar- antee elections. It is clear that we stumbled into Vietnam inadvertently, a step at a time, and that the cost of this intervention In a civil war is much greater than we antici- pated, But we have been unwilling to admit our mistake after seeing that no possible achievement in Vietnam would be worth the price we are having to pay, The American people should insist that their government explore alternative policies In Vietnam. Many distinguished and patrl- otlo Americans, including military experts Such as General Gavin and General Shoup, have advocated for many months that we de- escaigte the war. As Senator Thruston Mor- ton said on Aug. 14, we should seek "honor- able disengagement." Indeed, this is the first step toward getting any kind of peace. As an initial move, the United States should im- mediately reduce its aggressive air and ground activity and maintain a holding ac- tion. Of course our troops should defend themselves and we should support them with everything necessary to do that. One reason we should cease our search and destroy oper- ations is that they have been very expensive in terms of lives, and they have been a failure militarily. But the broader-and more signifi- cant reason to reduce military activity is to provide a proper climate for peace negotia- tions. Next, we should make it known that the U.S. Is willing to negotiate a gradual with- drawal from Vietnam and leave the country to the Vietnamese. Rather than us taking the lead in negotiations, we should urge the Asian powers, the U.N., and especially U Thant, to develop policies which would be acceptable to the various interests and groups. If.we let nearby Asian countries work out a solution it is much more likely to last than if we try. to force some kind of settle- ment on the region. After all, this Is an Asian problem, not an American problem, ex- cept as we have made it one. Moreover, if it appears that the leaders who have supported us in the war ? are endangered, we should offer them asylum. Most Important of all, the United States should outline a policy which would gradu- ally withdraw American troops from a land war which every knowledgeable civilian and military leader warned us against a decade ago, and main t i6 ~ iz h3r~'Ab 21F- namely main our 1 ne of Tenses just off the mainland of Asia. With complete air and sea superiority in the west- ern Pacific, no nation can successfully chal- lenge us; and the United States will be in a position to defend its vital interests of trade or defense without getting mired down in an unending land war. Many Americans have strong objections to concentrating our efforts on a political and diplomatic settlement in Vietnam-one in which the Vietnamese and other Asian coun- tries would be permitted to work out the problems-because they feel we must "win" the war as a kind of atonement for those who have already died in Vietnam. This is strange reasoning. We have achieved no worthwhile goals or objectives in the na- tional Interest with the death of approxi- mately 12,500 American troops, so the pro- war advocates urge sending more and more brave Americans boys to their deaths for equally unsound policies. Every American should, I believe, support the men in Viet- nam, most of whom are there against their will, with everything they need. If this means higher taxes, or anything else, we must bear that cost. But we will serve our troops best if we help reverse the policies which have sent them there. The most loyal backing give our men in Vietnam is to bring We can them home, and our best chance of bringing them home is not in enlarging the war, but in negotiation and gradual withdrawal. This is indeed a curious and paradoxical war. Many of the most vociferous supporters the war have no sons in Vietnam. They, keep their sons in college as long as possible and thank God when en they fail to pass the physical examination for military service. They also oppose tax increases es to to pay for the war. In other words, the war has millions of supporters who think it is fine to keep fight- expand the, war-so long as some- one else's sons are fighting it and they can pass the cost on to the next generation. There is a basic dishonesty here which is not in the best American tradition. the pro-war advocates have not at any time shown what benefits will scours to the United States as a result of all the which we have made and continue make in Vietnam, They have not shown what the United States can. get out of the war which is of value to us as a people and as a nation. How is our national interest by elections in South Vietnam? No one has told us. How have we strengthened our defenses by losing thousands of men in a small country which could not possibly threaten or attack the United States? No has told us. How have we helped our country by spending billions killing Viet- namese-this may provide psychic satisfac- to some people while. poverty, unrest, riots occur here at home? No one has told us. The truth of the matter 1s that we have nothing to gain and everything to lose by further military involvement in Vietnam. Let us practice what we preach about sel determination and let the Vietnamese solve their own problems. Let us do what Senator has proposed and seek an "honorable disengagement" by negotiation. We have tried military force and It has failed. Honest and imaginative diplomacy deserves a try. I agree that such a dialog would be most valuable. I well recognize that we in America know all too little about the strong urge now being felt in the Arab world for nationhood built on freedom and justice, and I am sure that many Arabs misunderstand our efforts in Viet- nam and elsewhere to help establish free and independent countries. I am sure that they all too often equate these efforts with imperialism. But valuable as I know a wider Amer- lean-Arab dialog could be, I feel also that the American attitude toward the Arab will never change deeply until there is meaningful dialog between the Arabs and the Isarelis, as well. Perhaps the dialog could be a three way one-Arabs, Israelis, and Americans. I ask that Dr. Saab's well written and eloquent letter be printed in the RECORD. There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: FOR AN AMERICAN-ARAB DIALOG UNIVERSITY OF UTAH THE Salt , Lake City, September 291967. SIR: I take pleasure in writing MY DEAR of Utah, which I to you from the University for the fall quarter of 1967 as a visit- joined professor of Political Science. I left Leba- ing , hoping that non in these critical moments, the United States would allow my visit to my Ameri- me to communicate directly with the present grave situation can friends about Middle East. in the of us, Americans and Arabs, ought to All deeply Concerned with all the aspects of c be the Arab-Israeli conflict. We must do our utmost to prevent the resumption of hostil- . We must.spare no effort in ities in the area. a peaceful and just solution to this finding . Nonetheless, its impact on tragic conflict. -American-Arab relations deserves more at. it has received. tention than , the United States of This great country, , has every reason and every possi- America, , freedom, justice bility of building in dignity peace, a creative partnership with the and from Morocco to Iraq. The whole Arab world - Arab world has its weaknesses and short- , but it has also all the thrilling comings, comings of a developing society. The United promises excesses of affluence, but it States has the a de- has also the resourceful abilities of . American-Arab partnership veloped society. should be" ly for the mutual good of the American and . the Arab people. , have been many obstacles which There, have hampered the emergence of such a part- nership. The Arab-Israeli conflict has been the greatest of these obstacles. Therefore, f- there to this conflict, which would its catastrophic effects on American- limit . A new free dialogue must im- Arab relations. mediately begin, which should enable Amerf- cans and Arabs to reassess their relations in terms of common ideals and mutual interests more than in terms of power politics or of do- mestic pressures. Truth, Reason, Wisdom, A AMERICAN-ARAB DIALOG Statesmanship, and Farsightedness should guide this dialogue rather than prejudice, -Mr. MOSS. Mr. President, a visiting emotion, violence, politics and short-sighted- Lebanese professor of political science- ness. Dr. Hassan Saab--now teaching at the Americans and Arabs must not allow any University of Utah, in Salt Lake City, has "third party" to stand in the way of such a written a most interesting letter recom- free, direct and creative dialogue. From 1047 mending a new, free dialog between to 1967, there has often been a "third party", Americans and Arabs so that their rela- such as Europe, Israel, or Communism, lying tionship may be assessed in terms of behind the deterioration of American-Arab "common ideals and Interests," rather relations. There has never been a genuine and direct confrontation between the American than of "power politics and domestic and the Arab people, nor an authentic meet- 2 .C e& 1n feftP8M6M ] ,,tp~ gtyveq~otlao?ADierican and the Arab Approved For Release 2001/11/01 : CIA-RDP69B00369R000200290002-1 November 6, 1967 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE Under. the impact of the Cold War, Ameri- cans see the Arabs In the shadow of a "third party": world Communism. Under the im- pact of three hot wars with Israel, the Arabs see the United States dominated by another "third party": world Zionism, To Americans, the Arabs are obsessed only with the destruc- tion of Israel. To Arabs, Americans are ob- sessed only with the destruction of Com- munism. Thus, each party thinks that it knows all about what the other party stands against, but does not seem to care about what it stands for. In the Arab mind, the prevailing image of America is the image of a stronghold for world Zionism rather than that of a new continent blessed with unlimited opportuni- ties for human beings. In the American mind, the disturbing image of the Arab world is the Image of a stronghold for world Com- munism rather than that of a land bursting with the restless aspirations of its people for a new renaissance. Americans equate Arab na- tionalism with fanaticism. They mistake Arab socialism for communism. Islam is judged through the utterances of its reac- tionary mullahs rather than through the bold achievements of its modernist leaders, The Arabs equate American world leader- ship with imperialism. They Identify Amer.. , lean democracy with Zionist pressure groups. Americans ignore the Arabs' deep urge for a new nationhood built on concrete freedom. They do not properly appreciate the Arabs' sincere longing for a,new society founded on justice. Arabs overlook American striving for a new world order governed by freedom and justice. This basic mutual misunderstanding deep- ened during the tragic events of the Fifth of June, which conveyed to the Arabs the im- pression that Americans were feasting over their military debacle. Technological supe- riority and swift victory seemed to justify all the unhuman means and effects of this vic- tory. The facts about the crisis, before, dur- ing and after the so-called "six Days War", were reported by American mass-media of Information. in an utterly one-sided manner, which made every Arab question American objectivity, and led him even to wonder about the American sense of fairness. While statesmen and diplomats are seek- ing at the United Nations a political settle- ment of the Arab-Israeli conflict, American and Arab thinkers and intellectuals must attend urgently to the more obvious task, of shortening the widening gap between the American and the Arab mind. They should not allow power alone to determine the fu- ture of American-Arab relations. Man should be the master of power, not its slave. The United States cannot rely on power alone for the preservation of her interests in the Arab world. She cannot continue to view her relations with the Arab world only as one aspect of a power game with the Soviet Union or Red China, The greatest human asset in the world contest for power in the Middle East is the good will of one hundred million Arabs, who live at the crossroad of the world continents, command the world's greatest reserves in oil, and who are the heirs to some of the world's greatest civiliza- tions and religions. The Arab world can de- velop better and faster with American under- standing, assistance and friendship. . American intellectuals are called upon to free themselves from the complexes of in- difference, isolationism, condescendence or onesidedness which have determined their- approach to the Arab world. Arab intellec- tuals should overcome the feelings of mis- trust, grudging, suspicion, bitterness and re- sentment which have governed their ap- proach to the United States of America, American and Arab intellectuals must lead the way In challenging national prejudices. They ought to remind their countrymen that the people of another nationality are men, who may commit the greatest blunders but may also pursue the greatest achievements. They ought to show them how to engage in the search for a better future rather than to Indulge in recriminations about a vanish- ing past. Our love for Mankind, our trust in Man, and our concern with a better fu- ture for all Men must be deep enough to set our minds free from- all the ingrained ha- treds of the past. An association, a university, a foundation, any responsible Institution should immedi- ately take the initiative in bringing together, outside of any governmental influence, a group of American and Arab thinkers, who may be capable of starting the overdue dia- logue between American and Arab thought. I hope that this letter will stimulate the reader into more thinking about American- Arab relations, and will encourage all those who have considered any proposal for the betterment of these relations to come out with their ideas and suggestions. My little, country, Lebanon, has always be- lieved in free and rational dialogue as the proper way for communication between men. Faithful to their role as mediators between the Western and the Arab mind, our intel- lectuals will be happy to make their humble but active and creative contribution to the opening of a new dialogue between Ameri- can and Arab thinkers. Sincerely yours, Dr. HASSAN SAAR, Professor of Political Science at the Lebanese University and the Saint Joseph University of Beirut. ure is expected to face a tough light on the House floor. The Commission's work has be- come embroiled in a separate dispute over three newly drafted treaties with Panama." The aim of my enclosed article is to pre- sent a comprehensive analysis of the proposed treaties and the status of the Canal Studies. In view of the current situation, it would appear to be a most appropriate time to place this article In the Congressional Rec- ord. Should you consider It advisable for me to make some revisions, I will be happy to do so. Estoy muy agradecido. Sincerely, PROPOSED CANAL TREATIES AND SEA LEVEL PROJECT (By Carl Svarverud) Speculation concerning the prospects for joint signing and ratification, in the near future, of the proposed canal treaties be- tween the United States and Panama on the status, defense and replacement of the Panama Canal was put to rest by President Robles of Panama, October 1, 1967. At the opening of the Panama National Assembly, President Robles "reiterated his government's stand on renegotiating the pro- posed treaties with the United States. Only after changes, alterations and clarifications were approved would his government decide on the best course for Panama." Announcement had been made simultane- ously in Panama and Washington, last June 26 that r t h d b h d th , ag eemen a een reac e qn e ISTHMIAN CANAL TRAF'F'IC three proposed treaties. Signing was tenta- Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, a constitu- tively set for July 24, in Washington by the ent of mine, Mr. Carl Svarverud, of Eu- two Presidents, Johnson and Robles. Ex- gene, Oreg., has for many years been President Eisenhower was expected to wit- president of the Nicaraguan Strait De- ness the signing. ? These plans were upset because quite ob- velopment Co., Nicaragua. He is an ex- viously neither government anticipated the perienced engineer with many insights almost vicious opposition to the proposed into the political and economic problems treaties by just about every segment of So- and relations involved in canal construe- ciety in Panama. This included eight polit- tion in the isthmus of Central America. ical parties, lawyers association, professors, After talking to him recently in Eu- 8,000 member University Student Body, gene, I asked that he prepare a written Labor leaders, et. al. With a Presidential account of the points that he had brought Campaign and election coming up in Spring, veobles has to my attention. Since the subject of Panama next Isthmian Canal traffic is of so much in- prudently bowed d to to the overwhelming public terest and importance to many Ameri- in opposition to the proposed treaties, s, at least present form. cans, I feel that his paper should be The rude and adverse reception of the shared and therefore I ask unanimous proposed treaties in Panama, which would, consent that it appear In the RECORD at if ratified, grant Panama undreamed of con- the conclusion of these remarks. cessions, was met with discreet silence by the I should make clear that Mr. Svarverud Administration' in Washington. Panama's s opposition to the proposed speaks for .himself; but I do agree with treaties demonstrates that no amount of his general conclusion that far more at- concessions and . sugar-coating will ever tention should be given by our country to make palatable there a foreign enclave, or the alternatives to Panama in the con- "micro-state" as Panamanians refer to the struction of a new isthmian canal. proposed treaty provision for the reduced There being no objection, the material "Canal Area." A foreign occupied military was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, base is equally disasteful. The fact that the. proposed treaties would as follows: I give Panama no less than a one thousand per THE NICARAGUAN STRAIT DEVELOP- cent increase in payments over the present MENT Co., INC., annuity has not softened the opposition to Eugene, Oreg., October 23, 1967. . the treaties in Panama. They would receive Hon. WAYNE MORSE, 17 cents a ton from canal tolls starting two Senate Office Building, years after the treaty signing. This would in- Washington, D.C. Crease 1 cent each year for 6 years, up to 22 DEAR SENATOR: You kindly suggested to me, cents a ton. The United States would receive at our recent meeting at your Eugene home, 8 cents a ton, increasing 1 cent a year up to that I prepare a written account of the points 10 cents a ton. Net earnings of the canal to I brought to your attention and you would be split 80-60 between the United States place it in the Congressional Record. and Panama. Panama would receive about . The Wall St. Journal reported Iast Fri- twice as much from the canal as the United day, Oct 20, that the House Sub-Committee States, if the treaties were to go into effect on Panama Canal had approved the measure, in their original form. K.R. 6791, to give the Canal Study Commmis- Fernando Eieta, Panama Foreign Minister sion an extension from June 30, 1968 to Dec. and in charge of treaty negotiations with the 1, 1969 to carry out its studies. The Senate United States, in talks in Panama trying to companion bill, S. 1666, approved last June 'sell' the treaties, stated that Panama would 5, grants an extension to Dec. 31, 1970, receive approximately $1.3 billion from the The Journal further reported: 'The meal- canal enterprise in the next 30 years. Approved For Release 2001/11/01 : CIA-RDP69B0036`9R000200290002-1