GROUPINGS IN VIETNAM

Press, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 25346, 20 November 1947, Page 5

GROUPINGS IN VIETNAM

CLEAR CUT, OPPOSITE CAMPS SUPPORT FOR FORMER EMPEROR (From Our Own Correspondent.) LONDON, September 4. The political forces in Vietnam are converging on two clear-cut, opposite camps—one aligning with Dr. Ho Chi Minh, leader of the Vietnamese Nationalist Party and President of the Vietnam Republic, and the other pitted against him, says Reuters. The anti-Ho Chi Minh front is being strengthened round the name and personality of the ex-Emperor Bao Dai, who is in Hong Kong. A spate of propaganda for the immediate return of the ex-Emperor is being released in a section of the press in Saigon and at Hanoi. “Mass appeals,” said to have been signed by thousands of people of all classes, rer questing Bao Dai to negotiate with the French, are published almost daily in these newspapers. Simultaneously, long articles are written denouncing Dr. Ho Chi Minh, his Government, and his policy. One of the points made against the President of the Vietnam Republic is that Dr. Ho Chi Minh, at the moment, represents only one party—the Viet Minh (Vietnam National Independence League), who “are controlled by Communists and inspired by Russian ideology.”

Vietnamese spokesmen contend that “Communism is a bogey which fhe enemies o£ Vietnam’s freedom are putting up in order to mislead international opinion.” It is further explained that the Vietnam Government is not confined to one party, but is composed of representative leaders of all parties and religious affiliations, and that the Vietnam Assembly, to which the Government is directly responsible, was constituted as a result of elections held in January. 1946, on the basis of adult franchise. It is claimed that the support of the Vietnamese people for Dr. Ho Chi Minh is “spontaneous, willing, and wholehearted,” and that everyone is following him because “he is fighting selflessly for the real unity and independence of the country.” Vietnam radio commentators repeatedly deny the charge that the war is of the making of the Vietnam Government and allege that “it is the French who, by violating the ‘modus vivendi’ of September, 1946. forced the Vietnamese people to fight in selfdefence and to protect national freedom.” The people and “fronts” who are now found to be ranging round the banner of Bao Dai are denounced as “slavish puppets of the French.” A few “neutral” Vietnamese leaders state that they are yet uncertain whose j help—Ho Chi Minh’s. Bao Dai’s, or both —the French authorities may shortly seek to restore peace in Vietnam. An underground resistance leader, on the contrary, made the grim forecast that “French colonialists, while talking of peace, are actually leading Vietnam into a state of civil war, between the supporters of Dr. Ho Chi Minh and others against him. “In that event Dr. Ho Chi Minh will openly call for the help and intervention of certain big Powers.”