Marked Lack Of Enthusiasm For Cease Fire In U.S.

Press, Volume XC, Issue 27408, 22 July 1954, Page 11

Marked Lack Of Enthusiasm For Cease Fire In U.S.

(N.Z. Press Association —Copyright) (Rec. 8 p.m.) ‘ WASHINGTON, July 20. A marked lack of enthusiasm was evident in high official circles in Washington today as reports from Geneva told of the agreement for a cease fire in Indo-China.

President Eisenhower and the Secretary of State, Mr Dulles, were reported to have decided to delay any comment until they had studied carefully all the terms involved. The American Associated Press said that they obviously disliked the idea of a partition of Vietnam, which meant Communist rule for millions of people.

There appeared every indication, however, that, barring an unexpected hitch, Mr Eisenhower and Mr Dulles later would announce the Government’s readiness to “respect” the provisions of ah armistice, although refusing to endorse its provisions, the agency said.

The armistice agreement tonight was seen by Senate members of the United SU-Vs “Congress as an unhappy peace without victory and its terms a tragedy for the free people of Indo-China. The Congressional attitude was that the only good thing which cotild be said about the settlement reached at Geneva was that it had stopped the bloodshed in the war; but there were many who questioned whether the price paid for peace was too high. The general reaction to the armistice terms, particularly to the partitioning of Vietnam, the largest of the three Associated Indo-China States, with the Communists in control of the north, was one of unhappiness, discouragement, and disappointment However, foreign affairs authorities in both the Senate and the House of Representatives recognised that the terms had been imposed through the realities of the deteriorating military situation of the French and native anti-Communist forces. Senator Hubert Humphrey (Democrat, Minnesota), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said: “It is good that hostilities will cease; but there should be no delusion that the political problems on th% area have been settled at all.” It was time now for the United States, Britain, France, and other allies “to really develop united political, economic and military action in South-east Asia to stop further Communist advances.”

Senator Mike Mansfield (Montana), another Democrat committee said: “The committee recognised the realities of the situation which has brought about the Geneva agreement and while we are unhappy about the terms, perhaps they represent at most the best of a bad bargain. “It is a defeat on the pattern of Korea.”

Mr James Fulton, of Pennsylvania, a Republican member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said “The tragic disappointment of the Geneva terms will be something which the free world will regret. “No-one can feel any satisfaction with any partition agreement which leaves people under Communist slavery. It is a terrible let-down for the people in Asia whom we have been encouraging to stand up against communism.”

Mr Jules Moch, of France, chairman of the United Disarmament Commission, commented: “It is a victory of will and courage. It will relax international tension a little, not immediately/ but in the future. It will help us relax the cold war, and bring the disarmament proposals to a better atmosphere. Peace promotes peace as war breeds war.”