Vietnam

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30447, 22 May 1964, Page 12

Vietnam

Sir,—Mr H. J. Walker’s intemperate emotional attack on Mr L. J. F. Ross can hardly be said to be a valuable contribution to our thinking on

the war in Vietnam. Mr Walker did not even tell us in his statement on Thursday whether he was definitely in favour of sending New Zealand troops to Vietnam. The war in Vietnam is a bitter war; atrocities have almost certainly been committed by both sides. But it seems .that New Zealanders, too (representatives of what Mr Walker

calls “our Christian community”) were capable of committing atrocities at Sarafand. After weighing the pros and cons, New Zealand may feel that she should send troops to Vietnam. But it Would be better if they were not sent in quite the spirit of selfrighteousness that pervades Mr Walker’s statement.— Yours, etc.,

I. J. CATANACH. May 21, 1964.

Sir, When Washington sneezes, Wellington catches a cold. Succeeding New Zealand Governments meekly submit to United States pressure and imitate that country’s bankrupt foreign policy. Mr H. J. Walker, M.P., appears to have caught a double dose of ’flu. To say that New Zealanders who openly protest against the nature of the United States-supported war in South Vietnam, are talking “absolute drivel,” is only lifting a rock to drop it on his own feet. The only foreign troops in South Vietnam are from the United States. No amount of rationalising can excuse the use of napalm and chemical warfare. United States economic, political, and military intervention in Southeast Asia is in defiance of the letter and spirit of the 1954 Geneva Agreement . and a gross violation of the U.N Charter. New Zealand’s interests will be best served by pursuance of a foreign policy of non-interference in other countries’ affairs and seeing to it that others keep their noses out of ours.—Yours, etc.,

JOHN STURT. May 20, 1964.

Sir,—Mr Walker’s visit to South Vietnam seems only to have impaired his judgment of the situation there. . No doubt he is in part correct, but he could not possibly obtain a rounded view of the problems of the area, as he was shown only what one side wanted to show him. Their propaganda was doubtless rather more subtle than Mr Walker’s own attempt. What did he do there? Did he try to meet Viet Cong leaders, or even Buddhist leaders in South Vietnam? Did he enjoy watching operations of the South Vietnam Government forces like those depicted in “The Press”, earlier this year? As Mr Ross said at Tuesday’s meeting, Mr Walker would have been better employed sitting at home reading a book such as “The Two Vietnams,” by Dr Bernard B Fall, who has made a rather deeper study of the area than Mr Walker has.—Yours, etc., G. A. LANE, R. D. LANE. May 21, 1964.

Sir, —Surely it is news to everyone that Chinese troops are not only fighting in South Vietnam, but are also, among other things, cutting up people alive. This is aggression, surely? Or is Mr Walker, M.P., talking a lot of drivel?—Yours, etc., T.M. May 21, 1964.

Sir,—We are indeed fortunate to have Mr Walker, M.P., to tell us the truth firsthand concerning his visit to the lands most of us only read about, and cannot contradict when wrongly informed about the doings of various so-called public bodies and authorities active in the world here and abroad. More power to his crusade for truth.—Yours, etc., FOR ENLIGHTENMENT, FOR DEFENCE May 21, 1964.