Evening star., 1954-05-14
Active or Passive Role in Indo-C China?
no the Editor Of the Star:

To the Editor Of the StoF:
The administrator craftsmanship
or its lack of it has never caused so
much sound and fury signifying moth
ing. The terrifying confusion and in
decision everywhere-in Government, in
all news media, and in the minds and
hearts Of the whole free worlds due
to lack Of honesty and willingness to
face facts
Some facts are: The French are
loosing a Communicated rebellion be-
cause they have caused most of the
people to hate them. A. Communist
victory in Indo-Chiha may become
highly contagious in neighboring areas.
mobilize the power to stop successful
rebellion. The words collective or
united action" can at best be only a
euphemism for an American military
operation easily comparable to Korea.
The United States intentions and
strategy should have been decided and
made clear by action long, long ago.
One thing above all should not be done:
We should not bluff or be unclear. At
this late date either we should, by q
firm agreement with the French, ac-
lively participate in the war or stop
pretending we are going to. All talk
about collective action in 1ndo- China
must be diplomatic excuses for action
or no action.
In my opinion American Intervention
iva TVANA ThiVao DC Of this ffVaa
and should not be made contingent on
the form such intervention might
take; for united or alone, time seems
to have run out. The reasons seem
so overwhelming that any statement
OF them seems SuperfluouS.
That Indo-China is strategically
vital is self-evident. In 1941 the Japa-
nese used Indo-Ch as well as For
mosa as the jump-off place to conquer
Southeast Asia. There are also politi-
cal and moral considerations, but at
bottom it seems a matter of survival.
The present crisis seems to be also
a crisis in American policy. The Re
publican administration is undergoing
its baptism of fire. and it is extremely
disturbing to be forced to watch its
heSitationS. No criticism OF Secretary
Dulles can be sustained, in my opinion.
but that it should have developed
that his policy before Geneva was made
to depend upon the casual reaction
to the Vice Presidents trial balloon Is
extraordinary. Perhaps had the Presi-
dent been as eloquent in this as he
has been concerning the need of virtue,
the country would have become aware
that the fate of the Red River delta
is as significant as was the fate OF
Ethiopia and of Manchuria in the
thirties, and Korea more recently. AS
a result of the inadequacy of preSi-
dental leadership. we have been SUBJ
jected to the spectacle Of American
policy dependent upon the precarious
position of the courageous Foreign
Minister of France, position depend
ent on concession which, IN the
apparent circumstances existing in
Indo-China, actually means defeat.
1t simply is not an excuse that we
have been required to follow French
leadership in this matter, for even
superficial scanning Of French history
since. 1884 fairly shouts the conclusion
that France will not force a show
down alone. Her request for aid DEM
onstrated this and further demon
strated where the responsibility must
reside. personally feel Shamed that
the United States was found wanting
in the clutch.
Nor Is it an excuse that the power
is not in the presidency. No elabora-
ton of this is necessary.
Secretary Dulles in his speech May
seemed to be by intonation pleading
D. %1n snln
must fulfill in the world today. Per-
haps, however, the correct interpreta-
ton is that the Nation, far from abdi-
eating its responsibilities, expects the
presidency to exercise its constitutional
function to conduct foreign relations.
Perhaps, too, inspiration can be de-
rived from the Secretary of the Army
on the right way to eXtricate oneself
from an apparently impossible tactical
position.
Richard N. TillsOn.
The matter of what our policy should
be with reference to the Far East is
indeed grave. It calls for clear un-
derstanding of the problem. Whatever
it was, / think it ought to be clear
now that the problem we now face is
simply whether or not Western civili-
zation, with its humanitarianism, can
be saved for future ages. Western civili-
zation is essentially European civiliza-
ton and its offshoots, of which we are
one. If it is lost. our situation becomes
desperate indeed. It must be saved.
If this is the underlying basic fact,
then it follows logically that whatever
effort we may make should be dedi-
Gated to that specific end, first and
foremost if not entirely so. Any ex-
cursions elsewhere can not but be dis
sipations of our national energy and
a wasting of our national resources,
which are not inexhaustible.
AS longtime resident of the Far
East still more longtime student Of
history convinced of its biological char
acter. and one who sees meaning in
the evolutionary process as it operates
on nations, am unable to find any
reason why we should intervene in Asia
in any way other than (perhaps) rem
dering Point Four assistance when
asked to- It is my considered opinion