hat were the
leneva

yreements ?

a

cere the agreements
i €d the war of inde-
© waged by the Viet-

indepen-

ce a ace French a

letnam as
tT 90 years, aan

It is
a worth remembering that

ts ate the French colonial-
aa ad continual help from
ates pent of the United
an 1954 John Foster Dul-
tate, ae U.S. Secretary of
offerin shocked the world
atomionn 0 eive the French
1¢ bomb to drop on the

n

pang Canada, and at
; lain and the Soviet
€re co-chairmen.

As
bed. ones Vietnam was con-
q that for Agreements provid-
militar immediate purposes
fam should regroupment, Viet-
PProximat, be divided into two
Ne point €ly equal zones at
Where the 17th paral-

of nort :
S oa runs through

rallel 2 ‘© the north of this
tro] aos to pass under the
Ublic th the Democratic Re-
@ or tt to the south under

Contr
ne of the “State of

rench for
ition ovisio
e ine

oe

ces to the north of
nal military demar-
and forces of the
Republic to the
were, within 300
d Northern € to the southern

reinforcements,
ish nce, and no es-
N military en its soil of for-
: ases it-
4 0 either ae was permit
>t dul :
0 be a 1956, elections were
am leading both parts of Viet-
Unified 8 to the formation of
ent, 'etnamese govern-

iti :
er sy ‘4 Teprisals against for-

} Tters of th -
Ww 1 the opposin
Ones TE forbidden in Both

ne:
of Sy international Commission
ting 9 ‘Sion and Control con-
(chaj representatives of In-
wand see Canada and
e es 2
ents ® €xecution i ihe Spent

re
Velant section of the

Final Declaration of the Geneva
Conference, July 21, 1954, reads
as follows:

“Section 6 — The Conference
places on record that the essen-
tial purpose of the agreement
relative to Vietnam is to settle
military questions in order to
end hostilities, and that the mili-
tary demarcation line is tempo-
rary and is in no way to be in-
terpreted as constituting a poli-
tical or territorial boundary. It
expresses the conviction that
the implementation of the pro-
visions of this declaration and
of the agreement on cessation
of hostilities will create the ne-
cessary premises for a political
settlement in Vietnam in the
near future.”

In addition, Section 7 of the
Geneva agreement stipulated
that there should be elections
throughout all of Vietnam by
1956; and said the 17th parallel
was not a boundary line be-
tween two countries but simply
a line of demarcation to be used
in demobilizing the troops which
had been fighting. Vietnam was
and continues to be ONE coun-
try.

*

How has the U.S.

violated
these agreements ?

The Geneva Agreements were
not signed by the United States.
John Foster Dulles had quit the
Geneva conference on May 3,
1954, when it became clear that
he would be unable to disrupt
it, Dulles left the conference be-
fore negotiations got under way
— in fact, his departure was
the signal for the beginning of
genuine negotiations.

Dulles left behind him in
Geneva as U.S. representative,
General W. Bedell Smith, whose
brief from the State Depart-
ment permitted him only to sign
the “Final Declaration” of the
conference, and to make a sep-
arate statement undertaking on
behalf of the U.S. to “refrain
from the threat or the use of
force to disturb” the Geneva
Agreements.

On June 15, 1954, the U.S.

- elevated its puppet Ngo Dinh

Diem to the position of prime
minister of the ‘State of Viet-
nam.” A member of a family of
wealthy landlords and_ influen-
tial mandarins which adopted
Catholicism during the period
of French colonial rule, Diem
had worked for the Japanese
during World War Il.

Diem, with American support,
began violating the Geneva

Prepan® Material for these two pages on Vietnam has been
These «With the aid of a number of reputable sources.
an ailude Malcolm Salmon's authoritative book, Focus.
e See Wilfred G. Burchett’s latest book, Vietnam:
End in sp! of the Guerilla War; the compact volume, Bitter
ae Asia, by Victor Perlo and Kumar Goshal; official
's 'ssued by the South Vietnam National Front for
i News dispatches from Hanoi and Saigon, govern-

n Oc
Insiq

=n
LintSPapers
| Eration

S
nt Statements, etc.

AT ea NL Questions & Answers —

| killed 40 Viet Cong today,
from a bombing raid in South Vietnam o
lage, anyway, and | levelled it.” One suc
death on a South Vietnam village. Beside

20 mm. guns.

Agreements from the moment
he took office. During the first
year, according to the Interna-
tional Control Commission’s Re-
port No. 4, “In cases where en-
quiries were possible, we have
verified 319 cases involving the
loss of human lives... The
Commission was unable to de-
termine that, apart from the
cases cited, there have not been
other reprisals and discrimina-
tions.”

Diem, on advice from Wash-
ington, refused to even discuss
the holding of free elections, as
called for in the Geneva Agree-
ments. Time magazine com-
mented on April 4, 1955 that
South: Vietnam is “neither ma-
thematically nor politically re-
motely ready for the contest.”

The reason why Diem and
the Americans were not ready
for elections, was because they
knew perfectly well they would
lose. :

This was confirmed years
afterwards by President Eisen-
hower himself in his book, “The
White House Years.” He wrote:

“J have never.talked or cor-
responded with a person know-
ledgeable in Indo-Chinese affairs,
who did not agree that had
elections been held as of the
time of the fighting, possibly 80
percent of the population would
have voted for the Communist
Ho Chi Minh as their leader.”

Diem, while rejecting elec-
tions and banning talk of reuni-
fication, stepped up his cam-
paign against the people. Thou-
sands, and later tens of thou-
sands, of people protesting
against the harshness of his re-
gime were arrested, thrown into
jail, tortured and killed.

The United States violated
the Geneva Agreements by con-
tinuing its military buildup in
South Vietnam; sending in “mi-

.

an American pilot told an Associated Press reporter after returning
n March 3. “That's the number they told me were in the vil-
h plane is shown here at the moment it dropped its load of
s conventicna! bombs these planes carry napalm bombs and

litary advisers” to train Diem’s
army; building ports and _air-
fields.

This policy did not go un-
challenged in the United States.
Let us recall for example the
sharp statement made in 1955
by the United States Senator
from Texas:

“It would be wrong to send
American GI’s into the mud and
muck of Indochina on a blood-
letting spree to perpetuate
colonialism and the white man’s
exploitation in Asia.”

The senator was none other
than Lyndon B. Johnson!

. Oppression irievitably breeds
resistance. When in 1956 Diem
abolished elections even for vil-
lage councils, the villagers turn-
ed against his regime. When
peasants were herded into “stra-
tegic villages” they began to
form guerilla bands and fight
back. Soon the countryside was
in a ferment.

*

Who is against
the United States

in South Vietnam?

The vast majority of the 14
million population living south
of the 17th parallel has been
opposing, in one form or an-
other, America’s attempt to turn
South Vietnam into a _ semi-
colony and military base.

On Dec. 20, 1960, the South
Vietnam National
Liberation (NFL) was born. It
defined its objectives as: na-
tional independence, democra-
cy, improvement of the people’s
living conditions, peace, neu-
trality, and the gradual advance
toward peaceful reunification of
the Fatherland,

Front for -

It is important to carefully
note that the NFL is not fight-
ing for a “Communist takeover
from North Vietnam.” They are
not even demanding the imme-
diate re-unification of their
country which was only torn
asunder a dozen short years
ago.

The program of the National
Liberation Front says:
; “To carry out a foreign pol-
icy of peace and neutrality, to
establish diplomatic relations
with all countries which respect
the independence and sovereign-
ty of Vietnam.

“To re-establish normal rela-

~ tions between the two zones

(north and south). To advance
toward the peaceful re-unifica-
tion of the Fatherland.” (Em-
phasis ours.)

This policy was again con-
firmed recently in an interview
given to Wilfred Burchett by a
spokesmen for the People’s Re-
volutionary Party in South Viet-
nam, published in the National
Guardian for March 6, 1965:

“We want peace, everyone
wants peace. But peace for us
has a specific content. It is
inseparable from three other
factors — independence and
democracy; the right of the peo-
ple themselves to dictate their
own future; and neutrality. To
offer us peace but without the
rest is useless.”

Under the leadership of the
NFL the independence struggle
made great strides. Relentless
political struggle was combined
with armed struggle; within the
space of three years two-thirds
of South Vietnam was liberated.

The U.S. State Department
decided that Diem must go; the
Pentagon wanted him _ disci-
plined, but not removed. The
Central Intelligence Agency
team in Saigon was divided.

(Continued on next p97¢)

March 19, 1965—PACIFIC TRIBUNE—Page 5

Se