History shows that boot-licking as a rule does not pay. The latest example of this was illustrated by a configential report that Chapman Pincher of the Daily Express made public on December 2nd. This revelaed that the Suez Canal remains closed, at the expense of at least £20 millions per month tn Britain's balance of payments, at the insistence of the U.S. administration, The explanantion is very simples "The U.S. Government, the only Government capable of exerting enough pressure on Israel to get the Canal opened, now prefers it to remain closed for two strategic reasons. The first is that bef6re the Arab-Israeli war the Canal was being used by the Russians to ship arms from Odessa, on the Black Sea, to Vietnam. Now that winter is about to block Russia's northern ports, Soviet supply vessels can reach Vietnam only by the long route around South Africa so long as the Canal is shut. Any improvement in the Vietnam situation is top priority for President Johnson. "The second reason is that the closure of the Canal blocks Russia's route to the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean where Britain has just left a power vacuum with the abandonment of Aden.s...For these reasons, which the Foreign Office fully appeciates, but cannot admit, Washington is putting no pressure on Israel to withdraw from the canal. And so long as they have U.S. blessing, the tsraelis are determined to stay there for military reasons. Nasser has moved his MIG aircraft back nearer Cairo because his airfields west of the Canal are now in the range of Israeli artillery. But from these new bases his planes do not have have enough range to make surprise low-level attacks on Israeli cities. "Further, by defending the Canal at the only points where Egyptian tanks could attack, the Israelis have a defence line one-third the length of their former desert border. So the Israelis intend to hold on to their Sinai gains, permanently if possible. And ‘asser has reaffirmed that he will not open the Canal so long as they are thereescee." So there we are: No one could have been more faithful to Johnson than Wilson has been over Vietnam, but these are his thanks. It would pay Wilson, even from his ow point of view, to stand up to Johnson and change his position on Vietnam. Maybe he hasn't the courage!
The WeekThe Week Vol. 8, No. 23, c. 6 December 1967
Johnsgn Shows His Gratitude to Wilson
The scan: The Week v8 no23.pdf (PDF, Marxists Internet Archive, opens at this page)
Uncorrected machine reading. This text was read by machine (Tesseract OCR) from a scan of a stencilled typescript and has not been corrected. Expect misread words; titles in particular are often garbled where the issue printed no contents list. Quote from the scan, not from this page.
How this article was cut and titled: capitals heading; heuristic; title from the OCR of the heading.