Sartre.
. . As a result efforts were made to get him to reconsider. The Students for a Democratic Society, for instance, cabled him March 25, inviting him to address a rally of 10,000 in Washington that is being organized April 17 to protest the war in Vietnam. The SDS offered to organize a speaking tour’ and forwarded invitations to Sartre to ~ speak over WBAI in New York and KPFA and KPFK in California, These three stations have a wide audience interested in cultural and political topless) hh ane :
In response to this pressure, Sartre wrote an article in the Paris weekly, Le Nouvel . Observateur, of April 1, explaining his position. As justification for a tactic of abstention, the philosopher's arguments will not convince either natural-~born fighters, trained political thinkers or those who really know the American scene. Nevertheless Sartre makes some observations about U.S. imperialism that are accurate and to the point and his position of opposition to the dirty colonial war being waged by America in Southeast Asia does him credit. As a reflection of the opinion of European intellectual circles, his article is of considerable interest. 7 . Sartre holds that the extension of the civil war into an imperialist assault on North Vietnam profoundly altered things. The bombings “represent an irreversible qualitative leap inasmuch as they reveal with brutal clearness the fact that the structures of American society rest on imperialism."
Up to that point, he holds, the American position was ; becoming more and more untenable and it*could be hoped "that the Americans would begin to take account of .the absurdity of their position" and would seek to withdraw.
-1l6-
But the bombings changed all this. Sartre came to the con= clusion that "the Americans understood nothing and there could be no common language between them and us."
He thinks it would be futile for him to go to America and try to make his voice heard. He sees the entire United States caught up in a war fever such as gripped France at the height of the Algerian war; and, the voice of opposition béing feeble, it doesn't count.
Nevertheless he expresses alarm about the situation. Effective action against the escalation must take place within “three months," in his opinion, "The arousal of American opinion can be provoked only by an acute crisis «~ a military disaster, the grave threat of a world war, The only way,we can contribute to arousing this opinion is by indicating brutal, over-all condemnation of American policy in Vietnam and by trying to stir up wherever possible -- that is in Europe. ~- some protests. tv a “Sartre condems Washington's propaganda in the most cutting way: “tWhat do the Americans say? ‘That they are intensifying the war in Vietnam, that they are bombing the North, that they are utilizing gas in the South, in order to make-,negotiations possible, The enormity of this is sufficiently impressive. Because, if you think it over, what does this mean? War is always made in order to end in peace, * obviously. In a certain peace. The one chosen, In certain negotiations. Those to-be. "imposed. But the problem is to determine if an outcome is. sought: that. is considered to be accept= able to the adversary or if. the. aim.is to destroy the adversary so that his successors will accept an outcome that constitutes capitulation. The government in Washington is saying: We're waiting for a sign of good faith :.from North Vietnam, This must be translated: We're waiting: for North Vietnam to admit defeat, entreat us to stop the bombings, and promise to no longei aid the Vietcong. In plain language. this. means that the Americans are for the extension of the war, It is necessary to grasp this. It is urgent. After grasping it, it is. necessary to draw conclusions from it. This is what I have done.
-.. In closing, Sartre describes the U.S. course in Vietnam as tan act of open, cynical, complete aggression, without justification or even a serious alibi.” He agrees that the U.S. is the mightiest military power, but he denies that it is "the center of the world." It is even the duty of a European, he contends, to stop considering the U.S. as the center and "demonstrate his- Interest, prove his solidarity with all the Vietnamese, the Cubans, the Africans, all his friends in the third world who gain existence and freedom and who prove each day, precisely, that the greatest power in the world is incapable of imposing its laws, that it is the most vulnerable, and the world has not chosen it as its center of gravity. The United States will evolve, of course, slowly, very slowly, but more rapidly if you resist them than if you address them with sermons."
-