THE U.S. AS A SCAPEGOAT

LONG before the Viet Nam papers were liberated from the Pentagon's files, Americans had endlessly debated the question of why the U.S. ever got into the war. The official rationale was, and remains, that the South Vietnamese need and want U.S. help to maintain their independence. In fact, the feelings of the Vietnamese people were rarely considered by U.S. policymakers. Recently, a more or less formal poll was taken among the South Vietnamese to find out what, in their view, the U.S. has been up to. The answers, gathered by U.S.-trained poll takers in five areas from Qui Nhon on the central coast to Can Tho in the Mekong Delta, range from balanced to bizarre.

Choosing Not to Win. In Saigon, 30% of those questioned said the U.S. was in Viet Nam to stop Communism. But 44% could not--or would not--offer any explanation for the massive U.S. presence. A sizable minority of 17% said the Americans were there primarily to test their new weapons or to make money for munitions manufacturers. Nobody suggested, however, as do some New Leftists in the U.S., that Washington plunged so deeply into the war to exploit the oil that has recently been discovered off the shores of South Viet Nam. A majority said that the U.S. could have won the war but chose not to do so for its own perverse and selfish reasons.

What good has the U.S. done for Viet Nam? Almost three-fourths of those questioned in Can Tho cited the fight against Communism and the roads and bridges that the U.S. has built. But 12% could think of nothing specific, and 14% insisted that the U.S. has done no good at all. When the same group was asked what were the worst things Americans had done, 78% cited the corruption of Vietnamese youth, women, customs and traditions, the use of Vietnamese officials as "henchmen," the undermining of the country's politics and economy, and the disregard of its national sovereignty, dignity, life and property. The remaining 22% had "no opinion." Perhaps the most savage view of the U.S. impact recently appeared in the opposition newspaper Hoa Binh, which printed a cartoon showing Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon literally raping the country.

A large majority--ranging from 71% in Can Tho to 83% in Nha Trang --thought the U.S. controlled the Saigon government. The general attitude was summarized by another opposition newspaper, Cong Luan, in an editorial on the presidential elections scheduled for October: "As to what candidate has the greatest chance for success, all Vietnamese agree with the Vice President [Nguyen Cao Ky] that the most trustworthy prophet is none other than [U.S. Ambassador] Ellsworth Bunker." Translation: Bunker knows because Bunker decides. A cartoon in Saigon's Tin Sang daily summarizes a widespread feeling; it shows Ambassador Bunker, called "the Father of the Country," rocking a cradle labeled "Viet Nam."

Most of those polled felt that U.S. civilians in Viet Nam tended to be honest, courteous and industrious, with the exception of construction workers. Many praised U.S. military men for their hard work and sincerity. But servicemen were also criticized as "drunkards, haughty, licentious men who wore ridiculous clothes and seemed indifferent to accidents for which they were responsible."

Just Demonstrators. To explore these attitudes more deeply, TIME'S Saigon Bureau Chief Jonathan Larsen in recent weeks interviewed a number of well-educated South Vietnamese. The interviews demonstrated beyond a doubt that even the most sophisticated Vietnamese blame the U.S. for a wide range of war-induced problems, from economic crises to political corruption. Items: A NEWSPAPER EDITOR: "At first, the Vietnamese thought the Americans were very generous, with idealism to fight Communism. But after years of seeing you behave in bars, driving recklessly and insulting our people, we know that we were wrong to put you so high. You put a woman too high, and then you marry her and realize you were deceived. So it is with you and us. You had no time to show your culture, your education, your civilization. You were too busy fighting the war. The French had time. They showed us their music, their schools, their culture. If our people could see you in the States, they would have a far better impression. But here they see G.I.s running over innocent people and fleeing the scene of the accident.

"You thought that you were superior and did not want to ask our advice. You didn't know how to approach the Vietnamese. What you needed was a Dale Carnegie course in how to get along with the Vietnamese. Take the title 'advisers,' which you have given yourselves. To us, an adviser should be someone who is superior in every way, who can give you advice on all subjects, on life, on love. You are really just 'demonstrators.' You show us how to shoot the M-16 and fly the F5, and we need you for that. But you are not 'advisers.' You thought that by giving us an easy life, a television, a washing machine, a car, that we could fight Communism better. That is not true. You must have discipline, you must make sacrifices to fight Communism. We have become bourgeois, although we were not born to be bourgeois."

AN OPPOSITION DEPUTY IN THE LOWER

HOUSE: "The people in the country believe that you are here to sell weapons because the U.S. is run by the manufacturers of big weapons. The American policy is to make small countries dependent on the Americans. How can the people believe that the Americans are here, as Mr. Nixon says, so that the people can choose their own fate and their own leaders, when the U.S. Government so openly supports President Thieu?"

A TEXTILE MANUFACTURER: "When we were in bad straits in 1965, the Americans came here to rescue the Vietnamese, so the majority of the people thought the Americans came here to defend them. But as the war wore on, they realized, no, the Americans came here to help themselves. The people feel perhaps you do not want to end the war." A CIVIL ENGINEER: "Americans came like firemen to extinguish the fire, but they haven't done the job, and now they are going home. It's unbelievable. Fine, we will put out the fire ourselves, but you have taken the water, the pump and the ladder with you. Once we knew how to put out these fires with bucket brigades, but now we are used to your technology, and you are taking it away. Many people believe things were better in 1961 than they are today. There were no motorcycles then, few radios. Now the people are making more money and there is more democracy, but the morality of the society is declining sharply. Our spiritualism has given way to materialism."

A COLLEGE PROFESSOR: "The Vietnamese can win the victory, but first we must stop the 'graspers.' To stop this corruption, we need the CIA, the FBI and the CID [the Army's Criminal Investigation Division]. Everything in Viet Nam is planned by the Americans, including who sits in the palace. If the Americans don't want Nguyen Van Thieu for President, he will leave--it is as simple as that. If they want to stop the corruption and the grasping, they can do it."

It is distressing but hardly surprising that so many Vietnamese see the Americans as scapegoats for almost everything that is wrong with their country today. Many of the accusations are not only untrue but cruel. The idea that the U.S. would pour $125 billion and 45,000 lives into the country with the idea of "undermining" it is absurd; yet some Vietnamese insist that such is the case. Illogically, many are convinced that the U.S. is supporting Thieu and at the same time trying to weaken the Thieu government.

According to a nationwide poll, 66% of the Vietnamese people are aware of the U.S. troop withdrawal. Of these, 56% approve of the U.S. departure --possibly because they feel spurned --and do not appear to be overly concerned about the consequences. While 21% of this group think the position of the North Vietnamese will be strengthened, 38% foresee only a short-term problem that the South Vietnamese can handle. A scant 15%, however, believe that ARVN is strong enough to maintain control without any hitches.

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