How Britain ‘upholds' the Geneva Agreements

When the Foreign Secretary addressed the U.N. General Assembly on October 7th, he put forward some proposals about Vietnam which sounded deceptively reasonable. They included a firm guarantee against attack on both South and North Vietnam, and eventually a situation in which both the Governments were able "by their om free choice to determine their relationship to each other." These proposals are based upon a rejection of the Geneva Agreements of 1954 which the British Government claims to uphold. At Geneva it was agreed that the military demarcation line between North and South Vietnam was "provisional and should not in any way be interpreted as constituting a political or territorial boundary". It was also agreed that a general election throughout Vietnam would be held in 1956 and that it would lead to reunififation of North and South. Mr. Stewart's proposals, therefore, attempt to legalise violations of the Geneva Agreementse The British Labour Government clearly sees after the end of the war a permanently divided Vietnam. The temporary demarcation line is to be the permangpt national boundary, and the elections(if ever held) are not to lead to/unification. Since these were perhaps the two main points of the Geneva Agreements, it is in order to ask what, precisely, the British Government's support for the international agreements involves. The Foreign Secretary's proposals are very convenient for the United Gates because they could allow continuing U.S. domination of South Vietnam without the loss of American lives. Seen in the context of the latest diplomatic activity to help end the war, Mr. Stewart's speech has been delivered at a time most favourable to “/fashington.