FRONT BETWEEN PEKING AND MOSCOW ON AID TO VIETNAM?
In a special dispatch from Washington, which appeared in the April 12 New York Times, Hedrick Smith said that "United States officials" had come to the conclusion that Chinese and Soviet governments "had apparently worked out an understanding to speed the flow of Soviet military supplies to North Vietnam across China.
The news came through "good diplomatic channels," which indicated that an “arrangement was made by North Vietnam with the two feuding Communist countries in the last six weeks."
One of the methods for "sidestepping previous Chinese-Soviet friction... was for North Vietnam to take title to the Soviet shipments as they reached China's border with the Soviet Union, and then to safeguard them as they pass by rail across China.
While the Times did not identify the Washington officials, it apparently considered them authoritative enough to warrant giving the report top billing on the front page.
This was followed by an article by Harrison E. Salisbury in the April 16 issue of the same paper. Salisbury drew the conclusion that if the report received in Washington is correct, then "the Vietnam war may soon enter a new and dangerous escalation."
He quoted a message conveyed by Moscow through diplomatic channels more than a month ago warning the Johnson adninistration:
"We would like to see the war ended by diplomatic means...But, if as it appears, the United States is going to step up its action on the land and in the air, we will escalate our aid to North Vietnam step by step. If the United States sends in more planes we will send in more missiles, more rockets, more ‘MIG's. There should be no misunderstanding on this."
When this warning was delivered by a "high Soviet diplomat," Salisbury said, "there was considerable doubt in Washington that Moscow could fulfill its promise." The deepening of the Sino-Soviet dispute was cited as the reason.
"If Moscow and Peking have been able to put aside their deep differences even for the limited objective of facilitating the shipment of supplies to hardpressed North Vietnam," Salisbury continued, "this would represent a major lessening of the tensions which have beset Soviet-Chinese relations for several years. It would indicate a first step toward the formation of a common Communist front against the United States, at least in the region of Southeast Asia. The implications of such a step upon over-all United States policy would be far-reaching."
Recounting what he learned on his trip to north Vietnam early this year, Salisbury said that a major factor in the apparent willingness of Hanoi to "negotiate" at that time was "fear that the supply route might be closed by China, either deliberately or as a byproduct of the country ,§ internal and external quarrels...
A United front between Peking and Moscow would relieve this worry and strengthen Hanoi's ability to meet American escalation of the war in general. It could mean in addition delivery of weapons qualitatively superior to anything yet sent.
"If, in fact," he concluded, "the agreement has been made between Moscow and Peking, Hanoi probably will find it possible to counter effectively the escalation of U.S. pressure which has seemed inescapable for the next few months. A new and more critical time of testing in Vietnam may be at hand."
eee ( [eine i P ey lem |S 76p Tie WARIN VIETNAM 7, ‘9 ny vn a as Tones tons WOME ike,
4
AY
| US. Ger OUT oF
B
CM MIETNAM NI OW 45 a pp7nece
e -— ‘ Fee : BRAD
ad
>
|
4| VIETNAM a OR, /@
| THE VIE TNA, FEY, if 4s
eo a
PTT }
Kier eed i} !] \
4y Nuhecteee ty i 7 M
my pw eetnndday J Yy
EE ee, 7 (
a ptt ant ue Wetec: ¥ > y
h, te
(Laat eee
ce au wen
ee gal w waneat & ® a
we Viseeaey rs
qe peu’ rotnd t AN
pete gel Sarre ems PE ite ax iG K / re : " tenn we Bie od No PUERTO“? AY) pees reel ida ati CAN Go > WY, eet eras | iy PT NY y i We ercen a reels la. eee eee P — ' cu ae? toe Tree LY eeettetess te Re vonu Tio ON ay i WOMENS Of LEARN AMch LITE RaTure
— ‘ a oe HER Te
ty HALT ( / fangs in at
’ ic(t¥ i ‘ at \eneascey Ee fac tial eede
¢ d
won't Gis ENO WELLNO! pir cae ‘vo! we hr Pesca! het CT: ji oy ‘ an WONTLOs,
Jy. thy we — oe ati
vty At
ye \ 6s,
Creare, ee it pi iar
s
YOO
The Petrick Case
GI