The following is the text of a- letter sent by Labour C.N.0. to ir, Wilson recently:
The above conimittee = which is composed of active Labour Party members ~ has asked us to write to you to voice the widespread concern within the Labour Party and among Labour Party supporters about the drift of the Labour Government's foreign and defence policy and especially over its failure to dissociate itself from American action in Vietnam. We know - that like all of us = you are profoundly concerned over the dangers of further escalation and the dangers of the "thaw" breaking up involved in that conflict. But we feél you have been very bedly advised, For a long time Labour has been committed to a series of independent peace initiatives and Vietnam presented a classic occasion for an initiative of that kind. We have no alliance with the U.S. over Vietnam, Our policy has differed from theirs since Britain agreed. to become co-chairman of the Geneva Conference of 1954. When that policy was abandoned by Lord Home you rightly criticised him....The whole of the labour movement was grateful to the United States’ for helping us to bring a Tory Government to its senses over Suez. Labour Britain should have performed - and can still perform a similar service for the U.S. over Vietnam.
Unpublicised protestations over the telephone - if indeed they were made = were bound to be ineffective, But there is an opposition to American policy over Vietnam building up in the United States, ranging from Senators to students, <A: strong British denunciation would have = and still could substantially strengthen that opposition and thus help to modify the intransigence of the Fresident of the United States. Settlement of the Algerian conflict and settlement of the post-war Franco-Vietnam conflict was substantially delayed by a refusal to negotiate with the guerillas who were doing the fighting, Today Hritain must tell America that. they must negotiate with the Vietcong. This they have so far refused to do. Secondly, they ought to be told that they must be prepared to accept - as was provided in the Geneva agreement of 1954 - the reunification of Vietnam at a later date, Thirdly, they must be made to realise that they cannot impose a regime of their choosing on South Vietnam - the South Vietnamese must be left free to determine their own future,
Britain cannot make any effective contribution to the settlement of that conflict - or indeed retain the respect of the uncommitted world « uniess she clearly and publicly dissociates herself from American policy. Failure to do-so may well have contributed to the further breach of the United Nations Charter involved in American aggression against the “Dominican Republic. When Lebour was elected to office it was committed to abandon British nuclear weapons, to promotedisengagement in Central Europe and to take independent initiatives for disarmament and the relaxation of tension. It is a major disappointment to many inside and outside the Labour Party that the policy of abandoning nuclear weapons has itself been atindorned, Instead -we are still pushing the ANF - a scheme opposed by the same NATO coutries that opposed the MLF and seen by the Russians as a cover for proliferation. Disengagenent is being given a lower priority than the maintenance of the disintegrating cold war alliances. And a Labour Government which believes it has come to terms with the colonial revolution and the new nuclear realities should realise that Britain has no military role "East of Suez", You rightly said at the post-election Labour Party Conference: "Rarely in world history has this country been given such an opportunity to give a lead towards peace, disarmament and world brotherhood" .sesesees