To Hanoi with Candor

By deed and by word, Washington addressed Hanoi last week in unwonted concert. The message was clear. Despite all the antiwar sentiment in the universities and within the U.S. Senate, despite all the Administration's avowals that it will explore any reasonable route toward a negotiated peace, the American people, however unhappy or confused about the war, agree in greater numbers than ever that it must continue to be fought--at least to the kind of conclusion that permits a realization of the Allies' aims.

"Don't Be Misled." The deeds included the bombing of downtown Hanoi for the first time, as U.S. jets flew through a formidable antiaircraft barrage to strike a 32,000-kw. power plant, largest in the North. But the biggest show of U.S. strength occurred in the Demilitarized Zone at the 17th parallel, just north of which at least three North Vietnamese divisions sit menacingly. In what Washington described as a "purely defensive measure" to cut off infiltration, 10,000 U.S. Marines and South Vietnamese troops for the first time stormed the southern tier of the zone via helicopter and amphibious craft (see THE WORLD).

Though Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman J. William Fulbright denounced the assault as "just another indication of the rising momentum of fighting" and urged "some drastic action to halt it," his Democratic colleague Senate Majority Leader Mike Mansfield was less alarmed. "Our troops have gone only to the doorstep of North Viet Nam," he said. "They are operating south of the 17th parallel."

Earlier in the week, Fulbright had joined 15 other Senators--all longtime opponents of the war--in addressing to Hanoi an extraordinary statement. Its message, as President Johnson summed it up at a news conference, was: "Don't be misled, North Viet Nam."

Initiated by Idaho Democrat Frank Church and signed by 14 Democrats and two Republicans,* the statement warned that with the conflict entering a "critical juncture, it would be tragic indeed if there were any misconception in Hanoi about the realities of the political situation in the U.S." Entitled "A Plea for Realism," the document noted that "there are no doubt many citizens of the U.S. who share our expressed misgivings about the growing American involvement in Viet Nam. But there are many more who either give their full endorsement to our Government's policy in Viet Nam or who press for even greater military action." Pointedly, the signers declared that despite their attacks on the Administration, "we remain steadfastly opposed to any unilateral withdrawal of American troops."

Another Pause? The Senators who signed apparently had a threefold purpose. First, they wanted to let their constituents know that they were not giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Second, they wanted Hanoi to be aware that despite their own views, the great majority of the American people back the war; a Louis Harris poll, in fact, showed that no less than 72% of the public support Johnson on the war and that 59% want to intensify it. Third, the Senators were anxious to shore up their own political flanks. In Idaho, Church is worried that he may confront a recall move sponsored by members of the John Birch Society. In Oregon, a recent poll indicates that Democrat Robert Duncan, an all-out advocate of the war who lost narrowly to Mark Hatfield in last year's Senate race, enjoys a 2-to-1 edge over Morse. Democrats Clark, Fulbright, McGovern and Nelson also are in trouble in their respective states because of their outspoken misgivings about Viet Nam.

Lyndon Johnson thus perhaps was within reach of a wider public consensus on the Viet Nam war than he had yet been able to achieve. Some Administration officials have hinted that this may presage some kind of peace bid. This week Buddha's birthday offers the President an opportunity to announce an extended bombing pause to determine whether North Viet Nam will really begin meaningful negotiations once its territory is no longer under air attack. There is widespread speculation in Washington that Johnson will seize the opportunity, despite its high political risks and though he is under intense pressure from his military advisers to continue the air offensive.

Meanwhile, the air at home was filled with anxious talk of a wider war. U.N. Secretary General U Thant, neither the most impartial nor the most precise of observers, said that Viet Nam may prove to be "the initial phase of World War III." In the Senate, Republican Cooper feared that the U.S. may be approaching the "point where the last possibility for a peaceful settlement of the war will be foreclosed."

On the battlefield, the situation was certainly tense enough. In addition to the North Vietnamese divisions based just north of the 17th parallel, U.S. intelligence detected two full divisions and elements of a third along the Cambodian frontier, waiting to attack the Central Highlands. There were reports by neutral observers that the Russians have sent Hanoi ground-to-ground Shyster missiles, 750-mile intermediate-range weapons that could reach Saigon from North Viet Nam. And the week's casualties pushed U.S. deaths in Viet Nam over the 10,000 mark, making Viet Nam the fifth costliest war in U.S. history (after World War II, the Civil War, World War I and Korea).

Well aware of the week's deeds and words, Lyndon Johnson reiterated his determination to keep the Viet Nam conflict localized--and to persevere there as long as is necessary. "All of us regret that we have to do what we are doing," he said, "but I think we would regret it more if we didn't do what we are doing."

* The Democrats, besides Fulbright and Church: Alaska's Bartlett, North Dakota's Burdick, Pennsylvania's Clark, Indiana's Hartke, New York's Kennedy, South Dakota's McGovern, Montana's Metcalf, Oregon's Morse, Utah's Moss, Wisconsin's Nelson, Rhode Island's Pell, Ohio's Young. The Republicans: Kentucky's Cooper and Oregon's Hatfield.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.