‘U.S. Means Limit Ends'

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30939, 21 December 1965, Page 21

‘U.S. Means Limit Ends '

GV.Z. Press Assn.—Copyright) SAIGON, Dec. 20. One thing seems fairly clear in Saigon: the ends and means of American policy are out of balance, reports James Reston of the “New York Times.”

American speeches are outrunning supplies and something is going to have to give. Either American objectives in Vietnam will have to be brought down into line with American power here or American power will have to be increased to meet the objectives. At the end of last summer, the United States had enough power here to deal with the Viet Cong offensive, but the main new fact is that North Vietnam is now beginning to commit its regular divisions to the battle and the indications are that they will probably be able to supply five or even six divisions in Vietnam. The stated objective of American policy is to hunt out and destroy the main units of both the North Vietnamese and the Viet Cong and either force a negotiated settlement or scatter the op-

position enough to permit pacification of the country. There does not seem to be a single top American official —civilian or military—here, however, who thinks this can be done with the present American and South Vietnamese forces.

To stop the supplies in a natipn with more than 1000 miles of coastline; to find, fight and destroy the enemy in the jungle when he has the privileged sanctuary of neutral country at his back—this is quite an objective for 200,000 Americans or even

400,000. “The force ratios are running against us,” said a military spokesman, “they are replacing regular fighting units faster than we are. They are sending cadres of regular North Vietnamese officers and technicians to form new units . of the Viet Cong, and at the . present kill-rate this war could go on for ever.” The American officers here . are at least not deceiving thrmaohres

They do not think bombing Hanoi or Haiphong trill enable them to avoid fighting the enemy on the ground, and they concede that the only strategy they know for destroying the enemy’s forces

that is, for achieving the objective they have been given —also happens to be the strategy that will cost the most American casualties.

“We can do it if we pay the price,” one officer said, and this is the central question-

The Administration is saying it will provide whatever forces are necessary, but it is not providing them. It knows that the* most effective way to deal with its manpower problem is to call for reserves, but that is politically awkward. The Republican leaders are also avoiding the realities of the situation. They want to bomb Haiphong without considering the vulnerability of Saigon. The docks here are full of ships and there an dozens

more waiting their turn outride Use mouth of the Saigon river.

One merchant ship blown up in the channel of this river would block river traffic for six weeks and this is the channel for more than 80 per eent of-United States fuel and ammunition. At some point then, either the politicians or the soldiers are going to have to do some adjusting.

If they will not provide the means, which means the lives, to destroy the’ enemy’s forces, then they will have to limit their ends.

The vast majority of the South Vietnamese people live in. the area of Saigon, in the cities of the north-east, and in the provincial capitals. These areas can be defended and fed without anything like the losses involved in trying to carry the battle to the enemy in the hills and rice paddies.

The estimates here are that a wide perimeter around Saigon, including from six to eight million people, can be secured with three American divirions on the outer perimeter, five South Vietnamese divisions on the inner perimeter and a well-organised militia. The task in the northeast, around the Chu Lai-Du Nang area, is perhaps easier for there the Americans have the sea at their backs and sufficient firepower to protect themselves against almost anything that can be thrown against them. This is certainly not a pleasant prospect, but it is one alternative and it is being discussed here.