‘No Meaningless Agreement’

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30741, 4 May 1965, Page 17

‘No Meaningless Agreement’

(N.Z.P.A.-Reuter —Copyright) LONDON, May 3. The United States said today it would continue seeking a peaceful solution of the conflict in Vietnam but would not be party to any “meaningless agreement.” Mr George Ball, the Undersecretary of State, told the opening session of the Southeast Asia Treaty Organisation's Ministerial Council here that South Vietnam was “a victim of deliberate aggression by the Communists.” Mr Ball told the eight-na-tion alliance: “We have come to realise from the experience of the past years that aggression must be dealt with wherever it occurs and no matter what mask it may wear.”

He added: “The central issue we face in South Vietnam should. I think, be clear for all to see. It is whether a small State on the periphery of Communist power should be permitted to maintain its freedom. That is an issue of vital importance to small States everywhere.” Mr Ball earlier said the United States had provided assistance “for one purpose only—to help the South Vietnamese people resist aggression and maintain their independence." He declared: “We have no territorial ambition in South Vietnam. We are not there for economic gain. We seek no military base.” Mr Ball is deputising for

Mr Dean Rusk, the Secretary of State, who postponed his arrival here last night because of the Dominican crisis. Air Strikes He said the American air strikes on North Vietnam had been “limited, carefully measured and controlled.” “They have been directed at impeding the movement of arms and trained men into South Vietnam. They have been designed to bring home to the regime in Hanoi the risks and costs of continued aggression,” he declared. “The world has, 1 think, generally understood why those air strikes have been necessary. Yes, voices are raised here and there asking that they be halted either on humanitarian grounds or because they might lead to an escalation of the conflict. “1 understand the good intentions of those people. All of us deplore violence. But I still find It curious that many who bewail the destruction of bridges and munitions in the north speak so little of the torture and intimidation and loss of human life suffered in the south by the victims of the aggression.” Mr Ball said: “Let there be no doubt about the threat in Vietnam and the nature of the struggle now being waged. “The Victim”

“The evidence establishes beyond the shadow of a doubt that South Vietnam is the victim of deliberate aggression—a Communist ‘war of national liberation.’ “The Communists have sought to present their at-

tack as a ‘civil war.’ But this is a hollow disguise.” The American delegate went on: “We of course would welcome a peaceful solution of the Vietnamese conflict and we will not cease to search for such a solution. “President Johnson made clear on April 7, 1965, that we were prepared at all times for ‘unconditional discussions’ with any Government concerned.

“But he made clear at the same time that we were not seeking a solution that was no better than a meaningless agreement. “We are determined to do what is necessary to make it possible for the people of South Vietnam to maintain their freedom. We are convinced that—with our help and the help of other free nations —they can and will succeed.”