I r Atr4tgau Batly r .: Seventy-Sixth Year EDJTED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD TN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS . w Whe Oilln M 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN ARBOR, MICH. NEws PHONE: 764-0552 Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints. THURSDAY, JUNE 1, 1967 NIGHT EDITOR: JENNIFER RHEA Peace Party: Why Not Make It a Foursome? IN WHAT CAN only be described as an excess of zealous naivete, a group of political amateurs launched this week- end a nationwide advertising campaign to draft Sen. Robert F. Kennedy for President in 1968, with Sen. J. W. Ful- bright as his running-mate. The "Citi- zens for Kennedy-Fulbright" began their projected year-long appeal to the grass- roots in the classic manner of the re- spectable Left-they placed an ad in the Sunday New York Times. The group's members premise their effort on their steadfast belief that Ken- nedy, whose checkered career has best been described as a "series of happen- ings," will yield to the outpourings of his notoriously quiescent conscience and volunteer for the good fight against Lyn- don Johnson and escalation. These well-meaning people seem total- ly oblivious to the simple fact that a crusade against LBJ would, for Kennedy, be a supreme act of political lunacy. IT SHOULD BE remembered that no in- cumbent President, no matter how un- popular, has, since the Civil War, been denied a renomination for which he ac- tively contested. And even if Kennedy could.somehow manage to wrest the npm- ination from Johnson, it would be at the cost of fragmenting the Democratic Par- ty to such a degree that even the elephan- tine Republicans could capitalize on it. But the almost comic miscasting of Kennedy as a peace candidate should not be used to destroy the intrinsic merit of the idea of an anti-war standard- bearer. A peace campaign in '68, perhaps building upon the success of Vietnam Summer, would provide an unsurpassed platform for political education and exert the Left's largest possible influence on a myopic American foreign policy. In its own manner, America's Weltan- schuung is the most circumscribed this side 'of mainland China. The porspect of a '68 presidential campaign with John- son, Nixon and Wallace debating the mer- its of bombing Peking will do little to widen this rigid perspective. IN ORDER to understand the political effects of a peace candidacy on the '68 election, it is helpful to glance at the parallel offered by Henry Wallace's 1948 quixotic crusade against Truman's "get tough with Russia" policy. Wallace, mak- ing almost every conceivable political er- ror and with almost the entire country convinced that the Progressive Party was a front, still managed to collect over a million votes. These votes were concen- trated in the large industrial states and managed to deprive Truman of the elec- toral votes of New York and Michigan. It is almost inconceivable that a peace candidate cannot do as well as Henry Wallace, and quite unlikely that he won't do significantly better. The effects of such a candidate of the '68 election are obvious. In a relatively close election a peace candidate would probably ensure the defeatof Johnson and the election of a Republican. ,This is not necessarily the unmitigat- ed disaster that the image of President Richard Nixon conjures up to cartooniAt Herblock. For due to the large Demo- cratic congressional majorities, and the fact that a peace candidate will drain off few votes at a congressional level, it is improbable the Democrats will lose control of Congress. A divided government of this nature will bring back the good old Eisenhower years when the govern- ment did little good, but didn't do that much harm either. And a Republican President will free the leftwing of the Democratic Party from their political ob- ligations to support our Asian misadven- ture. In short, a Republican President would be far less powerful than John- son, and it is Johnson's awesome person- al power which is perhaps the most frightening aspect of his administra- tion. THE FORMATION of Citizens for Ken- nedy-Fulbright is a regretable enter- prise, for its innocent indulgence in wish- ful thinking can only distract attention from more serious peace activity. The or- ganization of a peace campaign in '63, like all other forms of anti-war activ- ity, will not immediately revitalize American foreign policy. But given the depressing realities of contemporary American politics, it is probably the most realistic course of action the peace forces can take. And above and beyond all else, a peace candidate would, for a change, give the American people "a choice, not an echo." -WALTER SHAPIRO f t I." "ygt~ V4 r; ,' ?. , x,; ,.., a 9 , : , . s -0 i . r i if. w i rN r i/ 7Ra .i "Gentlemen, I think we have debated this question long enough .. ." Letters to the Editor Middle East Today, as in the past, United States policy in the Middle East is characterized by glaring incon- sistencies. With regard to free- dom of passage through the Straits of Tiran, the administration main- tains that it is taking its stand on the high ground of internation- al law. Yet for nearly 20 years the U.S. government has acquiesc- ed in the exclusion of Israeli shipping from the Suez Canal. The logic of the situation would seem to call for either forcing the issue at both the Straits and Suez or reluctantly recognizing a fait accompli at the former as we have done with the latter. Second, administration spokes- men wax very indignantly over the' blockade and mining of the Straits, calling this a violation of international law. It would appear to this observer that the U.S. would find itself on much firmer ground in upcoming UN debates, if it would publicly forswear any intention of blockading and/or mining the harbor of Haiphong. After all international law should apply to great powers as well as small nations. LAST. the administration and most pundits, including the usual- ly reliable James Reston, have given the impression that the Egyptians have absolutely no rights in the Straits. If these cri- tics would only scrutinize all of the statements of Secretary Dulles, they would discover that the U.S. position has always been ambigu- ous on this question. For exam- ple, at Mr. Dulles' press confer- ence on Feb. 19, 1957 (New York Times, Feb. 20, 1957, p. 8), the thenssecretary was asked if the Egyptians could stop a ship al- leged to be carrying war materials to Israel. His reply was as follows: "I don't think so unless there is some reason toesuspect the pass- age was designed in some way to injure one of the other littoral (coastal) states." With the Israeli attack on Sinai in 1956 as a case- in-point, the Egyptians could make a reasonably good argument for closing the Straits to Israeli shipping and with the blessing of Secretary Dulles as well! --Leland Bowie Denial I write in response to a letter written to the editor by Eric Wayne, '69, and published in The Daily on May 26 under the head- ing, "Silly Reasons." The letter attributes to me a statement to the effect that I believe that the site of the new Administration Building is off-campus. Had anyone made the state- ment to which Mr.dWayne ref er- red and which was attributed to me by a previous issue of The Daily, I would be among the first to acknowledge that it was drivel. However, I have never believed that the site was off-campus, and I did not make such a statement. -James E. Lesch Assistant to the Vice-President for Academic Affairs Support O(ur Boys? Linda Diller's letter on why we should support our boys in Viet- nam was largely disagreeable, not only in form but in content. Her conclusions are justified by her basic belief: ". . . it's not right for us to be over there and it's not wrong, let's just get the job done so they can come home." Sorry, Miss Diller, we don't see it that way. If you choose to be so totally lacking in responsibil- ity, concern or even common sense as to assume that we should do something simply for the sake of doing it, when it is "neither right or wrong," that is your choice. If you want to keep your head in the sand, do so. If you object, to people trying to im- prove their country by exposing its faults and working for changes in its policies, rather than pray- ing for them, it is you who should leave the country. DO YOU REALLY believe that the flag-a piece of cloth-is wor- thy of your worship and indig- nant protection, while the lives of Vietnamese and Americans are be- ing wasted? We respect human life, Miss Diller, not a piecerof cloth which happens to be red, white and blue. The ignorance of your letter is evident not only in your imma- ture and illogical assumptions, but in your callous and primitive con- clusions. I hope you can "sleep good," Miss Diller, knowing that our boys are being killed and are killing for no reason, as you put it yourself. You call us un-American. We call people like you inhuman, which, I feel, is a much graver condition. -Mary S. Roth Walter Lippnann Changes Format Walter Lippmann, whose col- umn runs on the Daily editorial page, is instituting a new for- mat for his essays. Instead of writing three times per week, he will write less frequent, lengthier columns. The follow- ing is a personal explanation of the change: As this is the last in the series of regular columns, a personal word of explanation is in order. For 36 years I have been writ- ing on a fixed schedule and at more or less fixed length. The production of such a column from Washington requires immediate and continual contact with the centers of decision. For about two years I have been coming to the conclusion that this immediacy and this continu- ity is too much of a strain. It was not a physical strain to write. But it was a strain to be so con- tinually and closely on the alert, so attentive, so up to the minute. More and more I have come to wish to get rid of the necessity of knowing, day in and day out, what the blood pressure is at the White House and who said what and who saw whom and who is listened to and who is not listened to. The work of a Washington col- umnist requires that kind of con- stant and immediate knowledge, and it is only too obvious that the job should be done by men in the prime=of their lives. SO I AM GOING to stop the regular column. But as I do not mean to retire and lapse into sil- ence I have been experimenting with new forms-with longer ar- ticles which cover a wider range of subject matter and can, if the editors choose, be broken up into a series of smaller pieces. I have already made two experi- ments with these longer articles-- one a review of the Manchester book and the other an article on public television. I shall experi- ment further during the summer when I am abroad. When I re- turn in the autumn I shall again write newspaper articles, without fixed schedules and with no dead- lines to meet. We shall see what I can make of it. (c), 1967, The washington Post Co. -.-mTRAN VAN DINH Questioning Legalit Of Viet Commitment Enough evidence has been gathered to prove that the U.S. military; presence in South Vietnam is a flagrant violation of the 1954 Geneva Agreements which ended the First Indochinese War (1945-1954). The Johnson administration knows this, even if it does not admit it. That is why since the last year, Washington cited its commitment under the South East Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) as to justify the U.S. military intervention in Vietnam. Secretary Rusk has said: "It is this fundamental SEATO obligation that has from the outset guided our actions in South Vietnam" (Statement of February 18, 1966, "Department of State Bulletin," March 7, 1966). South Vietnam has never been a member of SEATO which was created in Manila on September 8, 1954, as an anwser to the French defeat at Dienbienphu. But South Vietnam was covered under Article IV of the Treaty's Protocol and also under Article III of the same Protocol: "'Article III: The Parties undertake to strengthen their free institutions and to cooperate with one another in the further developments of economic measures, including technical assistance, designed both to promote economic progress and social well being and to further the individual and collective efforts of governments towards these ends. "Article IV: Each Party recognizes that aggression by means of armed attack in the treaty area against any of the Parties or against any state or territory which the Party by UNANIMOUS agreement may hereafter designate, would endanger its own peace an safety, and agrees that it will in that event act to meet the common danger in accordance with its constitutional processes. Measures taken under this paragraph shall be IMMEDIATELY reported to the Security Council of the United Nations. # "2. If, in the opinion of any of the Parties, the inviolability of the integrity of the territory or the sovereignty or political independence of anyParty in the treaty area or any other State or territory to which the provisions of Paragraph I of this Article from time to time apply is threatened in any way other than by armed attac or is affected or threatened by any fact or situation which might endanger the peace of the area, the Parties shall con- sult immediately in order to agree on the measures which should be taken for the common defense. "3. It is understood that no action on the territory of any State designated by UNANIMOUS agreement under paragraph I of this article or on any territory so designated shall be taken except at the invitation or with the consent of of the government concerned. (Emphasis added) It is clear from the above that the U.S. military intervention in South Vietnam did not meet with the unanimous, agreement of all parties-United Kingdom, U.S., France, Pakistan, Philippines, Thai- land, Australia, New Zealand. France and Pakistan refused to send their foreign ministers to the last meeting of the SEATO in Washing- ton, on April 18, 1967. It was also clear that the U.S. did not imme- diately report to the Security Council of the U.N. when it intervened militarily to South Vietnam. Most important, South Vietnam cannot legally accept the U.S. military presence. In fact, there exists, besides the Geneva agreements in the archives of the South Vietnam Ministry of Foreign Affairs a very important document which so far has never, been brought to light This document hereafter reproduced in full is "The government. (ol South Vietnam) declaration of April 6, 1956 regarding the withdrawa of the French Expeditionary Corps, the Demarcation Line and the Control Commission" "On March 30, 195, the French and Vietnamese delegations entrusted with military talks signed a minute fixing the time schedule of the withdrawal of the French Expeditionary Corps. This withdrawal has been requested by the Government of the Republic of Vietnam on January 19, 1956. "On the eve of this withdrawal which is bound attract inter- national attention, because of the problems which are raised by the departure of the French forces, the Government of the Re- public of Vietnam wishes to recall the permanent principles on which its policy is based. "This policy continues to be based on the defense of full and completessovereignty of Vietnam and the preservation of peace to which the Vietnamese government like the Vietnamese people, is deeply attached. It is therefore in the light of this twofold prin- ciple that the following problems concerning Vietnam will be solved. "I. Withdrawal of the French Expeditonary Corps: "For the preservation of its sovereignty and in the interest of peace, the Republic of Vietnam has considered that it could not accept the presence of any foreign forces or the cession of any military base on its territory. It has equally thought it un- necessary to join any military alliance. In conformance with this principle, the Vietnamese govern- ment, in agreement with the French government has decided on the withdrawal of the French Expeditionary Corps. The departure of the French troops which will have as its immediate consequence the decrease of the military potential belowthe 17th parallel cannot but prove in the most striking manner the wish for peace of the Vietnamese government." This document has been pub=shed in many official publications of the South Vietnamese government, especially in a booklet entitled "The Problem of Reunification of Vietnam" (Ministry of Information, 1958). Up until now no government in Saigon denounced or nullified this governmental declaration. Of course it is naive and even ridiculous at this time to talk about the legality of the U.S. military presence in South Vietnam but the document needs to be revealed for historical record. It is also interesting to note that this declaration of neutrality of the South Vietnam government has gained for South Vietnam many friends in the neutralist countries of the Afro-Asian world. The Burmese government, truly neutralist, which before accepted only the representative of North Vietnam, has since the end of 1957 agreed to the presence of a South Vietnamese diplomat. In October 1957, I my- self was the first South Vietnam Minister Plenipotentiary and Consul General of the Republic of (South) Vietnam in Rangoon. "Be Virtuous, My Dear, And Beware Of Strangers" Automated Errors THE COMPUTER has apparently elimi- nated the inept employe as office scapegoat. Managers and workers can painlessly attribute any delay or error to nebulous "computer breakdowns," even though they otherwise cite the infallabil- ity, and time-saving value of machine as justification for its cost. Take several local cases. A local apart- ment rental service provided clients at- tempting to fill vacancies with prospec- tive roommates of the wrong sex. The mistakes were blamed on the usual com- puter failure. The Office of Student Housing has been as much as six weeks behind schedule in assigning dormitory spaces for next fall; work was delayed by a computer failure which employes could not explain to worried freshmen who re- ceived no housing application. And now the Office of Orientation, un- able to fathom the mysterious whims of computers, has sent maize and blue "Welcome to Michigan" booklets to all transfer applicants, including those who have already been rejected by the Uni- versity. THE GUILT must actually lie with busi- nessmen and administrators who be- lieve computers are a bureaucratic mir- acle drug and expect inexperienced em- ployes to understand computer technol- ogy. Computer imperfections must be accepted as an unavoidable consequence of their complexity, and most of all, on their dependence on the still technically fallible human being. -MARCIE ABRAMSON d of Evening the Score Hey, Did You See Stokely?' "AT THIS HISTORIC hour of decision when the best values of humanity's heritage are at stake ... Egypt appeals for help by volunteers, arms or other- wise, to all those over the world who care still for the dignity of man and the rule of law in international relations. 'She needs your help'." This documented statement was pre- sented by the permanent representative of Egypt, Omar Loutfi, to the General Assembly of the United Nations on Nov. 6, 1956. Directing his comments primarily to the state of Israel, with implied ref- erence to the United Kingdom and France, who had taken belligerent ac- tions against a prone Egypt, Loutfi made it clear that further aggression against hic -1- -T -111 nn: P niratp+ . n r its citizens would rise "against the forces of evil in behalf of decency and a life worth living." EGYPT'S WARNING was a harbinger of the crisis that the world is presently witnessing. For 11 years, Nasser has been licking his wounds, both to his military and his pride-and biding his, time. Dis- agreeing with France and the United Kingdom, Nasser in the interim, turned more attention toward the Soviet Union, and received increased military aid to re- build the Egyptian army. This was done at the expense of improving the living conditions of his people, and the econo- my is now on the verge of bankruptcy. Furthermore, Nasser suffered a serious loss of prestige from the Suez episode. By JANET WELLS Collegiate Press Service ATLANTA-The little girl on the tennis court wasn't interest- ed in anything but her new pink dress and the imaginary game of hopskotch she was playing on the lines of the tennis court. She got too far away from the people clustering around the mikes and TV cameras, and her father - a moustached Negro man in a dark suit-reached out a hand to pull her back. "Did you see him, honey?" he asked. "Did you see Stokely Car- michael?" The little girl was only four or yive and too young to know who Stokely Carmichael was. She was >robably too young, too, to know anything a b o u t discrimination. She went on bouncing on one foot, her pink skirt bobbing, un- zoning of the pleasant Negro com- munity for business. Stokely, talked instead about black people. He told them about their his- tory, too often forgotten by the writers of textbooks confined to Western civilization. ("They teach us what they want us to know. They have brainwashed the hell out of us.") He informed them that the first university in the world was not in white Greece but in Negro Timbuctu. He even pointed out that if George Washington Carver had not invented peanut butter, whites would have to eat plain jelly sandwiches. His statements were provoca- tive if you were white, but every- one chuckled when he said, "We got love, we got nonviolence, we got morality. We got rhythm. We The card seemed to sum up what the young man was trying to tell them, and the faces of the people around him were lit with the same excitement that sparkled in the eyes of the little girl's father. Stokely had told them and made them believe what no one else had-that they were not only equal but beautiful, that one does not have to be white to hold his head with pride. They seemed to have awakened like the adolescent who realizes for the first time that he is a human being with a mind and a will and a 'future of his own and no longer needs or wants the con- stant supervision of his parents. There was a hint of teenage re- belliousness, too, which would be outgrown with the assumption of new responsibilities. When Stokely had finished, one a J StrtT 6i ', 1ti - r aFo k pQ rVPb CAr iipAT s "". 1 0 A U