Delivered at a conference sponsored by
theAmericanFriendsOfVietnam, WashingtonDC, June 1st, 1956.
It is a genuine pleasure to be here today at this
vital conference on the future ofVietnam, and America’sstake in that new
nation, sponsored by theAmericanFriendsOfVietnam, an organisation of which I am
proud to be a member. Your meeting today at a time when politicalevents
concerningVietnam are approaching a climax, both in that country and in our own
Congress, is mosttimely. Your topic and deliberation, which emphasise the
promise of the future more than the failures of the past, are mostconstructive.
I can assure you that theCongree oftheUnitedStates will give considerable
weight to your findings and recommendations; and I extend to all of you who
have made the effort to participate in this conference my congratulations and
bestwishes.
It is an ironic and tragic
fact that this conference is being held at a time when the news aboutVietnam
has virtuallydisappeared from the frontpages of the american press, and the
american people have all but forgotten the tiny nation for which we are in large
measure responsible. This decline in
public attention is due, I believe to threefactors: (1) First, it is due in
part to the amazing success ofPresidentDiem in meeting firmly and with
determination the major political and economic crises which had heretofore
continuallyplaguedVietnam. (I shall say more about this
point later, for it deserves more consideration from all americans interested in the future
ofAsia).
(2) Secondly, it is due in part to the traditional role of
americanJournalism, including readers as well as writers, to be moreinterested
in crises than in accomplishments, to give morespace to the threat of wars than
the need for works, and to write larger headlines on the sensational omissions
of the past than the creative missions of the future. [I like it when they’re
honest, whoever they are.]
(3) Third and finally, our neglect ofVietnam is the result of
one of themostserious weaknesses that has hamepered the longrange effectiveness
of americanForeignPolicy over the past several years – and that is the over
emphasis upon our role as “volunteerFireDepartment” for the world. Whenever and
wherever fire breaks out – inIndoChina, in theMiddleEast, inGuatemala,
inCyprus, in theFormosanStraits – our firemen rush in, wheeling up all their
heavy equipment, and restoring to every known method of containing and
extinguishing the blaze. The crowd gathers – the usuallysuccessful efforts of
our able volunteers are heartilyapplauded – and then the firemen rush off to
thenextconflagration, leaving the greateful but still stunned inhabitants to
clean up the rubble, pick up the pieces and rebuild their homes with whatever
resources are available. [I like it when they’re honest, whoever they are.]
The role, to be sure, is a necessary one; but it is
not theonlyrole to be played, and the others cannot be ignored. A
volunteerFireDepartment halts, but rarelyprevents, fires. It repels but
rarelyrebuilds; it meets the problems of the present but not of the future. And
while we are devoting our attention to the communistarson inKorea, there is
smoldering inIndoChina; we turn our efforts toIndoChina until the alarmsounds
inAlgeria – and so it goes.
Of course, Vietnam is notcompletelyforgotten by our
policymakeres today – I could not in honesty make such a charge and the facts
would easily refute it – but the unfortunate truth of the matter is that, in my
opinion, Vietnam would in all likelihood be receiving moreattention from our Congress
and Administration, and greater assistance under our aid programs, if it were
in imminent danger of communistinvasion or revolution. Like those people of
latinAmerica and Africa whom, we have verynearlyoverlooked in the past decade,
the vietnamese may find that their devotion to the cause ofDemocracy, and their
success in reducing the strength of local communistgroups, have had the ironic
effect of reducing american support. Yet the need for that support has in no
way been reduced. (I hope it will not be necessary for theDiemGovernment – or
this organisation – to subsidise the growth of theSouthVietnamCommunistParty in
order to focus american attention on that nation’s critical needs!)
No one contends that we should now rush all our
firefighting equipment toVietnam, ignoring theMiddleEast or any other part of
the world. But neither should we conclude that the cessation of hostilities
inIndoChina revmoed that area from the list of important areas
ofUnitedStatesForiegnPolicy. Let us briefly consider exactly what is “America’s
stake inVietnam”:
(1) First, Vietnam represents the cornerstone of the
free world in southeastAsia, the keystone to the arch, the finger in the dike.
Burma, Thailand, India, Japan, thePhilippines and obviously Laos and Cambodia
are among those whose security would be threatened if theRedTideOfCommunism
overflowed intoVietnam. In the past, our policymakers have sometimes issued
contradictory statements on this point – but the longHistory of
chineseinvasions of southeastAsia being stopped by vietnamese warriors have
removed all doubt on this subject.
Moreover, the independence of freeVietnam is crucial
to the free world in fields other than the military. Her Economy is essential
totheEconomy of all of southeastAsia; and her politicalliberty is an inspiration
to those seeking to obtain or maintain their liberty in all parts ofAsia – and indeed
the world. The fundamental tenets of this nation’sForeignPolicy, in short,
depend in considerable measure upon a strong and free vietnamese nation.
(2) Secondly, Vietnam represents a proving ground
ofDemocracy inAsia. However we may choose to ignore it or deprecate it, the
rising prestige and influence of communistChina inAsia are unchallengable
facts. Vietnam represents the alternative to communistDictatorship. If this
democratic experiment fails, if some onemillionrefugees have fled
theTotalitarianism of the north[Vietnam] only to find neither freedom nor
security in the south[Vietnam], then weakness, not strength, will characterise
the meaning ofDemocracy in the minds of stillmoreasians. TheUnitedStates is
directlyresponsible for this experiment – it is playing an important role in
the laboratory where it is being conducted. We cannot afford to permit that
experiment to fail.
(3) Third and in somewhat similar fashion, Vietnam
represents a test of american responsibility and determination inAsia. If we
are not the parents of littleVietnam, then surely we are the godparents. We
presided at its birth, we gave assistance to its life, we have helped to shape
its future. As french influence in this political, economic and military
spheres has declined inVietnam, american influence has steadilygrown. This is
our offspring – we cannot abandon it, we cannot ignore its needs. And if it falls
victim to any of the perils that threaten its existence – Communism,
politicalAnarchy, poverty and the rest – then theUnitedStates, with some
justification, will be held responsible; and our prestige inAsia will sink to a
new low.
(4) Fourth and finally, America’sstake inVietnam, in
her strength and in her security, is a veryselfish one – for it can be
measured, in thelastanalysis, in terms of american lives and american dollars.
It is not wellknown that we were at onetime on the brink of war inIndoChina – a
war which could well have been morecostly, moreexhausting and lessconclusive
than any war we have ever known. The threat of such war is not now altogether
removed from the horizon. Military weakness, politicalinstability or economic
failure in the newState ofVietnam could change almostovernight the apparent
security which has increasinglycharacterised that area under the leadership
ofPresidentDiem. And the key position ofVietnam in southeastAsia, as
alreadydiscussed, makes inevitable the involvement of this nation’ssecurity in any new outbreak of trouble.
It is these fourpoints, in my opinion, that
representAmerica’sstake in vietnamese security. And before we look to the
future, let us stop to review what theDiemGovernment has alreadyaccomplished by
way of increasing that security. Moststriking of all, perhaps, has been the
rehabilitation of more than ¾ of onemillionrefugees from the north. For these
courageous people dedicated to the free way of life, approximately45.000houses
have been constructed, 2.500wells dug, 100schools established and dozens of
medicalcenters and maternityhomes provided.
Equallyimpressive has been the increased solidarity
and stability of theGovernment, the elimination of rebellious sects and the
taking of thefirst vital steps toward trueDemocracy, a free and
independentRepublic has been proclaimed, recognised by over fortycountries of
the free world. Where once a playboyEmperor ruled from a distant shore, a
constituentassembly has been elected. Social and economic reforms have likewise
been remarkable. The living conditions of the peasants have been
vastlyimproved, the wastelands have been cultivated, and a wider ownership of
the land is gradually being encouraged. Farmcooperatives and farmerloans have
modernised an outmoded agriculturalEconomy; and a tremendous dam in the center
of the country has made possible the irrigation of a vast area
previouslyuncultivated. Legislation for better labourrelations,
Healthprotection, workingconditions and wages has been completed under the
leadership ofPresidentDiem.
Finally, the vietnameseArmy –
now fighting for its own homeland and not its colonial masters – has increased
tremendously in both quality and quantity. GeneralO’Daniel can tell you more about
these accomplishments.
But the responsibility oftheUnitedStates forVietnam
does not conclude, obviously, with a review of what has been accomplished thus
far with our help. Muchmoreneed to be done; muchmore, in fact, than we have
been doing up to now. Military alliance in southeastAsia are necessary but
notenough. Atomic
superiority and the development of new ultimate weapons are notenough. Informational and propaganda activities, warning of the
evils ofCommunism and the blessings of the american way of life, are notenough
in a
country where concepts of free enterprise and Capitalism are meaningless, where poverty and hunger are not enemies across
theseventeenthparallel but enemies within their midst. As
ambassadorChuong has recentlysaid: “People cannot be expected to fight for the
free world unless they have their own freedom to defend, their freedom from
foreign domination as well as freedom from misery, oppression, corruption.”
I shall notattempt to set forth the details of the
type of aidprogram this nation should offer the vietnamese – for it is not the
details of that program that are as important as the spirit with which it is
offered and the objectives it seeks to accomplish. We should notattempt to buy
the friendship of the vietnamese. Nor can we win their hearts by making them dependent
upon our handouts. What we must offer them is a revolution – a political,
economic and social revolution far superior to anything the communists can
offer – far morepeaceful, far moredemocratic and far morelocallycontrolled.
such a revolution will require much from theUnitedStates and much fromVietnam.
We must supply capital to replace that drained by the centuries of colonial
exploitation; technicians to train those handicapped by deliberate policies of
illiteracy; guidance to assist a nation taking those first feeble steps toward
the complexities of a republican form ofGovernment. We must assist the
inspiring growth of vietnamese Democracy and Economy, including the complete
integration of those refugees who gave up their homes and their belongings to
seek freedom. We must provide military assistance to rebuild the new
vietnameseArmy, which every day faces the growing peril of vietminhArmies
across the border.
And finally, in the councils of the world, we must
neverpermit any diplomatic action adverse to this, one of the youngest members
of the family of nations – and I include in that
injunction a plea that theUnitedStates nevergive its approval to the early
nationwide elections called for by theGenevaAgreement of1954. Neither
theUnitedStates nor freeVietnam was a party to that agreement – and neither
theUnitedState nor freeVietnam is ever going to be a party to an election
obviouslystacked and subverted in advance, urged upon us by those who have
alreadybroken their own pledges under theAgreement they now seek to enforce.
All this and more we can offer freeVietnam, as it
passes through the present period of transition on its way to a new era – an
era of pride and independence, an era of democratic and economic growth – an
era which, when constructed with the long years of colonial oppression, will
truly represent a political, social and economic revolution.
This is the revolution we can, we should, we must
offer to the people ofVietnam – not only charity, not as a businessproposition,
not as a politicalmanœuver, nor simply to enlist them as soldiers
againstCommunism or as chattels of americanForeignPolicy – but a revolution of
their own making, for their own welfare, and for the security of freedom
everywhere. The communists offer them another kind of revolution, glittering
and seductive in its superficial appeal. The choice
between the two can be made only by the vietnamese people themselves. But
in these times of trial and burden, true friendships stand out. As PremierDiem
recently wrote a great friend ofVietnam, SenatorMansfield, “It is only in
winter that you can tell which trees are evergreen.” And I am confident that if
this nation demonstrates that it has not forgotten the people ofVietnam, the
people ofVietnam will demonstrate that they have not forgotten us.
No comments:
Post a Comment