from a Welsh reader Colwyn Bay, Llandudno and district trades council has appealed to every trades council in Britainurging that Llandudno and Colwyn Bay be boycotted as conferenco centres by trade unions. This is because of a dispute over trade union recogrit ion at the Colwyn Bay factory of Quinton Hazell Ltd., manufacturers of motor car components. More than 550 letters to this effect went out on February 10th.
UeSe SOCIALIST PARTY~gporr—sr oP “TitTNAM DEBATE from Harry Ring cee war and the discussion within the antiewar movement has led to a: Sion within the Socialist Partye Along with SANE (editorial note: \ ¢ nearest approach to CND in the USA) and the Communist Party, the peat Party stauds on the right wing of the antiewar movement, refusing _ Support the denand to bring U.S. troops home at oncee The SP leadership insists on counterposing a call for negotiations to the demand for immedi~ ate US withdrawal, This position has now provoked an opposition within the partys . The issue will be resolved by a membership referendum, according to a report in @ recent issue of the party paper, New America. Two motions are being presented to the membership ~ one for negotiations, the other for immediate withdrawal,Tho negntiations motion is being presented by Norman Thomas and has already been adopted as official policy by the party's national committee, The motion favouring immediate withdrawal is described as the "Oppenheiner resolution” as "updated and rewritten by NC members Saul. Mendelson and Debbie Meiers" The party position, as presented in the Thomas motion, makes clear that while the party leaders would like to see an end to the war, they don't want to see it end in a way that would be a defert for the Johnson administration which Thoras and most of the SP leaders support as part of their "coalition" policy of working with the Democratic Party,s The resolution states: "The Socialist larty calls for an end to the war in Vietnam, We Urge the president and the U.S. government to propose an immediate censefire and a prompt beginning of negotiations convened by the Geneva nr tions of 1954 or by the United Nations, in which all parties concerned, including the National Liberation Front, the politic.l arm of the Vietcong, taks parte"
In an accompnying statement to the motion, Thomas explains why he is against U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam. "A simple withdrawal of Anericcn forces," he declares, "would almost certainly mean a Conmunist military victoryeeolle have to recognise the existence of the Vietcong and the reasons for its existence," he adds, "but we are not Communists and we are aware of Vietcongts type or terrorisms We do not want to go out of our way to add strength to a Chinese imperial communism (or to a Russian) in Southeast Asia and that would be the effect of simple withdrawal,” The withdrawal motion is based on two considerations: (1) The negotiations position does not square with the principle of self-determination for all. nationse (2) Prosecution of wars such as the one the U.S. is waging in Vietnam is not the wy to defeat Communism, The resolution proposes; "The Socialist Party unequivocally condems the present policy of the %,S, Governnent in Vietnaneeewe favour an orderly nd unconditional withdrawal of American men ond materials of war from the Vietnam area, beginning innediately." The resolution adds; "Our policy has served to resolidify the support of both the Soviet Union snd Communist China for North Vietnan and has played directly into the hands of extrene elenents of the Com-unist sides" U.Se policy, it says, " can increase popular support for the Vietcong and the N.L.Fee It can increase North Vietnam and the N.L.F.‘s dependenc3 on Chineseee"Discussion in the pages of New Anerica indic:tas some degree of support for the withdrawal position on the basis of respecting the principle of self-determination, although there is no public indication thet anyone in the party supports the struggle of the south Victnanese for freedon as expressed in the National Liberation front :.-..: guerrilla movements.