RUSSELL COMMITTEE RESISTS WHITE HOUSE PRESSURE |. ,
In our issue of September 30, World Cutlook quoted a dispatch from the Paris correspondent of the New York Times stating that on "one point France ‘wants no further aggravation of relations with the United States"; namely, permitting the War Crimes Tribunal sponsored by Bertrand Russell to meet in Paris.
In view of the fact that the de Gaulle regime felt that it would aggravate relations with the U.S. to permit the tribunal to meet in Paris, World Outlook suggested that the pressure emanated from Washington, that the State Department may well have hinted to the French that a ban would be well received, and that de Gaulle had probably decided to make a cheap concession to Johnson on this point.
Further substantiation of World Outlook's deductions appeared in the Paris daily Le Monde of October 8. Le Monde, as is well- known, has very good connections with top officials of the de Gaulle regime. Under the headline, "President Johnson Will Not be 'Tried' in Paris," Le Monde printed the following report:
"The ‘tribunal' organized by the philosopher Bertrand Russell, winner of the Nobel peace prize, to 'try' President Johnson and the principal American leaders 'accused' of war crimes in. Vietnam, will without doubt not meet in Paris.
"According to. the Home Office [ministére de l'interieur], in fact, the French government reportedly informed the British philosopher that it considered his project» ‘'unthinkable,' that a person- ality could not in any case substitute himself for justice, and that consequently there was no question of 'trying' President Johnson in France. Entry to French territory is not at all forbidden to Bertrend Russell, it is affirmed, but, they let it be understood , it would not be the same for the possible witnesses for such a trial. The philosopher had, in: fact, announced his: intention of having several citizens of North Vietnam and South Vietnam make depositions. Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir were sounded out about.taking part in the tribunal. In Japan at present, they have not.yet indicated their response.
"The 'tribunal' is to hold a preliminary meeting in London on November 1% and not in Paris as previously announced. The ‘'trial' will. not take place until the month of March. Bertrand Russell is thinking of organizing it in either London | or Stockholm, after the discreet warning of the French government."
The French Friends of the Russell Foundation sent a letter of correction to the editor of Le Monde. This was published by Le Monde October 11, with equal space and prominence (on page 2) being granted to it as was allotted to the report about the moves of the Home Office.
The following is a translation of this letter of correction:
‘ "Convinced ‘that the French government would not envisage conceding to the pressure | ‘exercized by the government. of the United
- mini Russell Foundation: declare, that the projects of the Russell Foundation remain. unchanged :- the. opening session of the tribunal will be held. in- London the coming “November 13; the inquiries in: Vietnam and in other. countries sponsored by the tribunal will’ then be: followed up for close. to three months; the hearings of witnesses: and the debates before the tribunal, “which will begin in March 1967, will take place in Paris.
-- "Le, Monde,.in addition, announced that Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir,. who had been sounded out by Bertrand Russell to take part in the tribunal, had not yet indicated their response. Le Monde was. certainly led into an error on this point. In fact, it was. in the month of July 1966 that Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir sent Bertrand Russell a positive ‘response. ne,
Meanwhile in “New York, Russell Stetler, Executive Director. of the Bertrand.Russell Peace Foundation, sent a letter to the New York Times: correcting its report. However, that mighty voice of Western Democracy and the Free World did not deign to publish the objection to its;Paris: dispatch, (The text of this létter as well as a:followup were published in full in the October 17 issue of ‘The Hiditent. 2
- According to ‘Russell Stetler, the members of. the tribunal: ‘are holding a preliminary meeting in London in November. That: this .meeting is being held in London, he said, "in no way implies’ a response to pressure from the French Government. On the contrary, we still “oc. intend to hold. the. full. proceedings of the tribunal in Paris, at a later date, and the French. Government has refused: to'‘ban the bribe nal, although under overt™ pressure from Washington to: no! ‘SO.
One fact stands out very clearly in all this -- “the Johnson. administration is very anxious to block the War Crimes Tribunal. It is so anxious to do so, in fact, that it would appear“that. not even its highly -publicized pique over de Gaulle's policies was. permitted to stand in the way of stéps seeking the - concession. colo. bg
The evident fear, if not anger, in Washington iéver: the. War, Crimes Tribunal leads one to suspect that Johnson himself is behind the pressure .on the de Gaulle regime. The head of the Great Society -is in the position of a criminal up to his elbows in blodd’and he wants no searchlight turned in his diréction and nov ‘microphone provided for the victims receiving his attentions: a
For de Gaulle to ‘bow to this pressure from the. White House is, of course, ignoble and another blotch on Western: "civilization." However, it should not be.forgotten that de Gaulle is nothing but an-imperialist politician like Johnson, concerned about ‘Power and not: morality. .
The concession, from’ de’ Gaulle* sS position, has much to. recommend it. The price tag is well within ‘the means of the French budget,
certainly being less: costly than an H-bomb, for instance. And it is easy to camouflage the dirty move by rising to the defense of "justice” against: its "perversion" by"personalities.
“In addition, a tribunal investigating the imperialist war crimes in Vietnam is not without an element of embarrassment to the French ruling class.. Is it not at least ironic that such a trial should be héld in Paris? Won't it stir consciences again about France's own role in Vietnam...and in Algeria...and in many parts of the world where de Gaulle is still hanging on to colonial empire and discreetly seeking to extend it?
“There is in fact a glaring gap between. the real policies of the de Gaulle regime and its pretensions at voicing opposition to Washington. At times the contrast between what'de Gaulle says and what he does is almost ludicrous. Take for example the show he has been putting on about encouraging Hanoi and then read the follow- ‘ing small but very instructive item which appeared in the October 12 ‘Le Monde and which we have translated in its entirety:
"The 'New York Herald Tribune' wrote Tuesday, under the Signature of Mr. Ronald Koven, that the National Liberation Front of South Vietnam is at present seeking to obtain authorization from the French government to establish an official bureau in Paris analogous to those it has in Moscow, Cairo, etc. According to information which we have been able to obtain from the best source, France nevertheless does not envisage accepting the installation | on its soil of an NLF mission. ;
Bertrand Russell and the other prominent figures who ‘have. Lo: agreed to serve on the international War Crimes Tribunal are to be commended for their firm stand in face of the blatant pressure from the war criminals in | Washington. But more ae ‘praise, they deserve support. 2 a
This support would seem to be especially called for in- ; France. The powerful working-class organizations there could mobi-. lize voices by the millions behind the War Crimes Tribunal. We have in mind in particular the French Communist party and. She unions under its influence: | boty eet
Action from them ona massive scale would certainly give, those officials in the de Gaulle government: who are unduly respon- Sive to commands and seductive voices from Washington cause to: stop and think. -and perhaps reconsider.
Let the French labor movement, particularly the French CP, speak up -- and in a way that shows they mean it!
It is within the bounds of possibility, however, that the French CP will display in this matter a gap between words and deeds at least matching the one shown by de-Gaulle if.not greatly exceeding it. The French CP generally deviates little from.the signals, it receives from Moscow. And with Soviet Foreign Minister Gromyko
engaged at present in intimate chats in Washington with one of the greatest war criminals of all time, wouldn't. the Soviet diplomats rather incline to indicate. to their French cothinkers that in tle interests of "peaceful coexistence" it would be best not to embarrass de Gaulle in a delicate matter like this?
Perhaps: they calculate, even Johnson would not be unappreciative if the French CP were to cooperate by simply playing | dead, a role for which it is perfectly cast.
RUSSELL