READY TO ARM THE PEOPLE?
Probably the rashest promise to be made by anyone in either Washington or Saigon in the aftermath of the victory rolled up by the National Liberation Front, was the one ventured by Vice- President Nguyen Cao Ky.
The swashbuckling puppet, who has avowed that his greatest hero is Hitler, told newsmen after taping a statement for television that arms would be distributed to loyal citizens in South Vietnam "by next week."
"The former Premier, who was wearing a green combat uniform and had a flak jacket folded on the desk beside him, appeared calm. Not a hair was out of place. He spoke slowly, both in English and Vietnamese, puffing Salems as he considered the answer to each question."
He announced that he.was chairman of a task force assigned to restore security to Saigon and the countryside.
The rural areas would be armed first, he said, since the threat from "the Communists" was greatest there.
Next to be armed will be places where
"we are sure the people are anti-
Communist nationalists."
It might be suggested that Ky
would do well to speed up arming the peo-
ple, otherwise the U.S. forces and the
puppet government troops might face an
unduly high rate of loss of arms from
sectors burning to move into action. Or
the National Liberation Front might beat
him in distributing guns to the populace,
and how would he feel about that? It is
also questionable whether Ky will be al-
together pleased with the people's
choice of targets once they get their
hands on some guns.
But he may have had a completely
different objective in mind. He told the
press that it had become clear to him
that the 600,000 troops under his command,
and the 500,000 U.S. troops fighting with
them are not sufficient to meet the foe
and will have to be expanded.
Could he, by chance, be angling
for a few hundred thousand more GI's to
be shipped across the Pacific?
EDITOR OF “PRAVDA"
(Recently, the text of a speech, ascribed to Zimyanin, the editor-in-chief of Pravda, and reported to have been made in Leningrad on October 5, 1967, has been circulating in the Soviet Union.
{It explains better than anything yet available why Solzhenitsyn is having such difficulty in getting anything published since the remarkable success of his novel, One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich.
[The text of Zimyanin's speech as trans}ated by World Outlook, is as follows.
* * *
Lately, the names of certain of our men of letters have been appearing quite often in the Western press. This is because their statements and actions give grist to the mill of our enemies. The campaign over Tarsis and in his defense stopped only when they had him in their hands in the West and could satisfy themselves that he was really mad.
Now it is Solzhenitsyn who occupies an important place in the propaganda of the capitalist countries. He, too, is mentally unbalanced, a schizophrenic. He was a prisoner of the Germans; then, rightly or wrongly, he was sent to a concentration camp. He expresses in his works an injured person's resentment against the authorities. The camp theme is the only one to be found in his literary work: he cannot get away from it -it is his obsession.
His works are directed against the Soviet government. He can see nothing in it but ulcers and tumors; he is incapable of seeing the positive things in our society. Because of my work, I sometimes read unpublished manuscripts, and I have read the play, The Banquet of Victors. It talks about repressions against those returning from the front. It is really an anti-Soviet work. People used to be sent to prison for such things.
We cannot publish Solzhenitsyn. We cannot satisfy his requests on this. If he writes works conforming to the interests of our society, we will publish them. No one is taking away his livelihood. He is a professor of physics; let him teach physics then. He is very fond of speaking in public meetings where he often reads fragments from his works. Let him be given this opportunity. He thinks that he is a writer of genius.
Among other names often appearing in the Western press, Yevtushenko and Voznesensky must be cited. We have an excel-
DENOUNCES SOLZHENITSYN
lent poetic literature and many poets who
write marvelous verses. But in the West
all the plaudits are reserved solely for
these two individuals, because they find
useful elements for their propaganda in
their works.
We cannot consider the works of
these two poets anti-Soviet, however,
like Solzhenitsyn's works. They also
write good verses, patriotic verses.
They are no longer so young, even if
everyone considers them young, but their
works are not politically mature enough.
That is why they sometimes provide grist
to the mill of our enemies.
I know them personally and I have
explained this to them. But they also
consider themselves to be geniuses. For
example, Yevtushenko was criticized by
Pavlov in a small meeting. But he struck
back four, eight times harder. He made
fun of him in a poem. In this way he
marked him for eternity and this mark can
no longer be effaced. It was a low blow.
As for Voznesensky, last year he
went to the United States; he read his
poems and spoke to thousands of people.
His recitals were successful and also
economically advantageous for him. This
year again he wanted to tour the Ameri-
can cities. The trip was already decided
on; the visa had already been applied for
from the American embassy. The war in the
Middle East broke out. Our relations with
the United States deteriorated. The Admin-
istrative Council of the Writers Union
made a very clear hint that it was prefer
able not to go to the United States. At
the same time, it informed the [American]
embassy that Voznesensky was ill. What
did Voznesensky do?
I arrived Monday morning at the
editorial office and checked the mail. I
found a letter from him full of accusa-
tions against the Writers Union. I tele-
phoned him. I was told that he had gone,
no one knew where. I telephoned the
Central Committee and they said that they
also had received a letter from Voznesen-
sky and had called his home but did not
find him in. A day, two days, Voznesen-
sky was nowhere to be found. At a cer-
tain point they told me that the BBC had
broadcast Voznesensky's letter to Pravda.
Voznesensky turned up a week later.
He had spent this whole period in a dacha
near Moscow. I invited him to my home. He
denied having given the letter to Western
correspondents. But who gave it to them
then? Not I, nor the CC. I told him that
this one time we would go no further than
admonishing him and that would be the
end of it, but that if this were repeated
he would be crushed to powder -- and I
myself would do my utmost to smash hin. He has been thinking it over two months already. I do not know what he is going to decide.
Some people feel that it would
have been better to publish the letter
and then answer it. But why wash all
this dirty linen in public?
SOLZHENITSYN