2
UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Wednesday, December 6, 1967
U.S. allies and war policy
By now almost every European nation, either through a leftist faction, its chief of state or by expression of public opinion, has opposed continuation of the Vietnam war.
France, having experienced the same mess first hand, is quite loud about expressing her disdain for the war. The heads of state of other nations have put their feelings into more socially acceptable phrases such as, "Don't you think it would be advisable to tone this war down a bit, perhaps even end it someday?"
The fact that Prime Minister Wilson goes to great lengths to excuse similar utterances by his top officials only expresses Britain's fear of a rift with the United States, which she certainly couldn't afford for economic reasons.
Financial reasons also play a role in the opposition of Denmark, Sweden and West Germany to U.S. policy. Even nations not morally opposed to the war, saying that they don't mind if "the United States is fighting over there," don't want to help pay for it.
In addition to the moral and financial reasons for disinvolvement, there is yet another very important one: internal politics of such a nature as to keep that nation from fighting an anti-Communist war.
A political policy cannot be reduced to merely financial origin, especially not in the case of a country such as rich West Germany. The fact that for years the German government sent aid in one form or another in support of Israel is evidence of the fact that foreign aid is not doled out by a stingy hand.
The reason for Germany's reservation also can not be attributed to the existence of a belligerent socialist party, nor has there ever been any idication that anti-Communism is diminishing in Germany. In fact anti-Communism runs higher in Germany than any other western European country.
It's significant that the European nation which daily feels the breath of the Reds hottest on her neck, West Berlin, is not running amuck in the Vietnam deltas. She could be using the opportunity to take revenge, killing a Viet Cong for every East German bureaucrat holding captive a brother, mother or fiancé on the other side of the wall.
The fact is that Germany, owing to the proximity of the Communists in her eastern half, can't afford to be anything but subtle in her dealings with Communists—anyhwere in the world. As the United States is fighting the Vietnamese for reasons of "national security," so must Germany play an entirely different game to defend her security.
The fact that the subserviently-natured former Chancellor Erhardt unhesitatingly denned a cowboy hat and "ja, ja-ed" many of President Johnson's proposals had a pleasing effect but it didn't bring much real support as a result.
Keisinger has an entirely different personality. He doesn't feel the need to give verbal support to a policy which, in the long run, he cannot afford to back.
The opposition to the war, as voiced by small
Finland presents us with an entirely different case. Finland, a poor country with a strong socialist party, is, nevertheless, more pro-U.S. than against. Public opinion polls in that country reveal a large majority advocating termination of the war for humanitarian reasons. To these people war is "immoral" and that's that. But I believe this view is one that should be respected, for Finland, being a country that has suffered great oppression at the hands of a much larger power, can't help identifying with the smaller nation ravaged by war. Finland probably has more insight into the feelings of the Vietnamese than many other peoples.
Denmark, Norway and Sweden, although far more western-oriented than Finland, have been much more outspoken than Finland against the war. These countries, although totally free and democratic, are governed by their socialist party or by a coalition including the socialist party. The farther left faction of government often comes out on top in a disagreement on Vietnam policy, as can be seen in the recent Danish example where Prime Minister Krag was coerced into permitting the convention of Lord Russell's Viet war tribunal in Denmark.
Sweden has just moved her moderate socialism sharply to the left in a party congress which also featured Foreign Minister Torsten Nilsson's bitter attack on U.S. Vietnam policy. This was considered to be the first time that a cabinet minister of generally neutral Sweden has spoken so bluntly in public.
Nilsson's outspokenness seems quite natural, however, in view of the fact that the majority of Swedes are said to consider the war "immoral."
Demonstrations against the Asian war have erupted in major cities of the three Scandinavian countries.
Thus we see that the fact that these countries are democratic, no matter how far their political spectrum may swing to the left, and the present state of public opinion prohibits a Chief of State from righteously telling the U.S., "O.K., go ahead."
These leftist, placard-carrying rebels of Europe feel a bond with similarly oriented groups in the United States. In Europe the activities carried on by these dissenters are considered legitimate forms of expressing opinion. Even their opinions are heard as legitimate ones. In the United States the slightest tremor from such minute minority groups as the Students for Democratic Society is legal reason for arrest and accusation of treason. It's become obvious all over the world that the strong sentiments expressed by public opinion here against the war do not affect the Chief Foreign Policy Planner of the United States in the same way they affect leaders of other free societies.
This attitude of the president towards his people can only raise doubts in the minds of her allies, who might be more willing to support U.S. policy if the question of "Who really wants what?" were cleared up a bit.
—Solveig Eggerz
Letters
Sex vs. expression
To the Editor:
I'm sure that everyone who reads Kansan letters to the editor is aware of the letters that have appeared in the column concerning "the traditional dilemma of virginity versus the expression of love." But I wonder how many are aware of the narrowness of the tradition from which that dilemma arose.
If I remember my history of western civilization correctly, the dilemma arose primarily from the Victorian period—interesting, since the Victorians were among the most prolific procreaters in that history. The Victorians felt, if I remember correctly, that final culmination of a male-female relationship was reached when the couple coupled.
Virginity was to be preserved merely because too many "final!"
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY
relationships might rove confusing. And perhaps they had a point, though experience also counts for something, especially since the matter involves communication. Those who say that the initial sex experience is as good as those following are obviously virgin.
I wish I had space to reply fully to Mr. Heffron's letter. I will state that he has exhibited a rather fantastic lack of deep, careful thought. That he even wrote such a letter is clear evidence.
Further, I wish that I had made Miss X's acquaintance—not because she has need of the pill, but because she had the nerve to admit it. She must be pretty special herself.
Dave Cook Wichita junior
Newsroom—UN 4-3646 Business Office—UN 4-3198
Published at the University of Kansas daily during the academic year except holidays and examination periods, held every second month, mester, $10 a year. Second class postage paid at Lawrence, Kan. 66044. Accommodations, goods, services and fees payable to students without regard to color, creed or national origin. Opinions excerpted in necessarily these of the University of Kansas of the State Board of Regents.
Managing Editor—Dan Austin Business Manager—John Lee
Asst. Managing Editors, Will Hardesty,
Jerry Klein Paul Haney,
Gary Murrell, Rieb Lovett
City Ed'tor
Editor/Editors
Betsy Wright,
Allan Northcott
Associate Editorial Editor John Hill
Sports Editors
Rich Lunquist
Wire Editor Don Walker
Future and Society Ed., Kathy Vaughan
Asst. City Ed'tor Claudia Jeekins
Photo Ed'tor Dale Pippt
Advertising Mgr. John Cavady
National Adv. Mgr. Beverly Hathaway
Circulation Mgr. Warren Massley
Classified Mgr. Lyd Dur
Production Mgr. Joel Khaassen
HERBLOCK
"Where Do You Think You're Going, Mac?"
The Hill With It by john hill
Twas the night before Christmas, and all through the house . . .
Jolly ole Santa Claus blinked a few times in the bright light, then smiled warmly, his eyes twinkling.
"Hold it right there, grampai!" said a small voice sternly, as the living room lights suddenly went on.
"Hello little boy. What are you doing up on this wonderful Christmas Eve, this night of nights when..."
"One move and we'll be scrapin' you off the mantle for months," said the little boy, lifting the heavy shotgun.
"Who's the fireman, Joey," she asked. "Can I help kill him?"
A little girl about three years old scampered around the corner, and helped her five-year-old brother hold the shotgun.
"In a minute," said little Joey, not unlike Humphrey Begart. "What's with the sack of loot, fats?"
Santa was somewhat taken aback by all this, but he finally gestured toward his sack of brand new toys resting beside the Christmas tree.
"Uh, it's my bag . . ."
"Presuming his definition of the concept 'good' coincides with mine, how does he expect to get by subscription of 'U.S. News & World Report' into a little sock?" whispered Joey to his sister, not unlike W. C. Fields.
"If he starts to make a break for it," said his sister, "you hit him high, and I'll hit him low."
"Thought he looked like a hippie," Joey said quietly to his sister, not unlike Peter Lorre.
"Children," said Santa with a pleading voice, "I'm Santa Claus! You know, the spirit of Christmas. I'm here to bring you gifts for being good, and I'll put them in your stocking."
"Don't children today know about Santa Claus?" asked Santa. "Haven't you heard that I've got elves in my workshop, and reindeer on the roof?"
"Yeah, and bats in your belfry," said the little girl. "Joey, should I ask for the bunco squad or the narco division when I call the station?"
"What sort of children are you? Don't you believe in Santa, or Christmas, or the spirit of giving?" pleaded Santa.
"We'll give you thirty seconds to take your bag of materialistic bribes, and get out of here," said Jeey.
The two small children watched a disillusioned Santa slowly crawl up the chimney and out into the quiet, snowy night.
"Why did you let the burglar get away, Joey?" asked his little sister as they put away the shotgun and he helped her into her crib.
"Well, after all," said Joey, "it is Christmas."