90. Memorandum for the Record1
SUBJECT
- Presidentʼs Meeting with SEATO Delegates
The President met in the Cabinet Room on April 19 with delegates attending the SEATO Ministers Conference. The meeting lasted from 5:15 p.m. to 6:15 p.m.
[Here follows a list of participants.]
Secretary Rusk opened the meeting with a review of the SEATO Ministerial Council discussions to date. He said that Secretary General Vargas had provided a review of SEATO activities—military and civil. There was a general feeling that “the organization is in good shape.” He said there were signs of greater solidarity among the free nations in the treaty area. The delegates had reviewed the situation in Communist China. Also, the situation in Viet-Nam in some detail.
There was general concern about the inadequate understanding of the real issues in Viet-Nam on the part of many people in other parts of the world. All agreed more effort should be devoted to promoting a better understanding.
Foreign Minister Hasluck (Australia) said he was more and more impressed each year with the growing cooperation among Asian and Pacific states and with the progress that was being made. He said that [Page 218] with all the new cooperative efforts, a great problem in the future may be the need to coordinate all the efforts being made. He underlined the fact that peace is a global problem and that the security of Asia is a major part of the world security problem.
Prime Minister Holyoake invited the SEATO Ministers to meet in New Zealand next year. He said it was important that people understand that communism is the outmoded wave of the past. The actions in Viet-Nam were a demonstration of the unity of the member nations. SEATO has New Zealandʼs full support.
Foreign Secretary Ramos (Philippines) said the meetings had “renewed our confidence that SEATO as an organization is important and vital to us.” He said his country was grateful for the protective shield SEATO provides. It was grateful for the support of the United States.
Foreign Minister Thanat (Thailand) said “the fact that the United States has undertaken to defend Southeast Asia—your defense of Viet-Nam—is an action of great historical importance.
“As far as the Thai are concerned, we are ready to bear our share of the responsibility.”
He was concerned with the political repercussions of the war in Viet-Nam which were the result of a major step-up in Communist propaganda.
He hoped that SEATO members could “begin to initiate a counter campaign against this Communist propaganda.”
Foreign Secretary Brown (UK) noted that he had spoken in favor of SEATO when it was before the House of Commons in 1954. He was happy to see how well the organization is doing.
He said that Viet-Nam “will one day be part of history.” But the growth and progress of Asia will go on.
Foreign Minister Do (Viet-Nam) said his people were “more confident of success” and confident of the future of their country. He described major political events—the Constitution, elections, etc. He noted the new program of Reconciliation just announced by his government. He expressed the hope the “other side” would be willing to accept a peaceful solution by the end of this year.
Secretary General Vargas (SEATO) complimented Secretary Ruskʼs handling of the SEATO sessions. He noted new staffing programs. He said SEATO should help member countries in countering subversion, which he said was the greatest threat to peace and security. He had visited Viet-Nam and was happy to see the progress that is being made. He said the VC “cannot hope to win by force.” There was a need to step up Revolutionary Development.
[Page 219]Prime Minister Holyoake said he could not let the opportunity pass to express “our amazement and gratitude for the fortitude and courage you are showing in Viet-Nam.”
President Johnson said “I hope each of you know how glad we are to have you in our country.
“Our viewpoints may vary, we may have some differences, but I know I am in the presence of friends.
“I did not vote to ratify the SEATO Treaty,” he said, “because I was in the hospital.” (He noted former President Kennedy also had not voted for the SEATO Treaty.)
He recalled a comment made by the U.S. Secretary of State at the first SEATO meeting: “I am confident of one thing—the way of the aggressor has been made harder.”
He noted that the Senate had held extensive hearings on SEATO. The Foreign Relations Committee (“of which you may have heard”) had approved it with only one dissenting vote (Langer of North Dakota). The full Senate had approved the Treaty by a vote of 82 to 1.
“That, I think, expressed the feeling of 200 million Americans—the feeling that it would make the way of the aggressor harder.
“We were born as a country with the words: ʼGive me Liberty, or give me death.ʼ We attach a high price to liberty. And it is so good that we want everyone to have a share of it.”
He noted that the United States had entered into more than 40 alliances.
“We have given our word. We are in great trouble today. I donʼt like to see men get killed. But our word has been given that in moments of danger we will act.
“If we reach the point where the word of the United States is not respected, is not ʼgood as gold,ʼ we will have a very dangerous situation loose in the world.
“If our word is not good in SEATO, tomorrow it will be no good in NATO, or in ANZUS, or with the Japanese or our other allies.
“Our enemies would say that the United States does not take its commitments seriously. We would telegraph to the world that aggressors are now free to roam.
“We have been engaged in two wars in Europe in my lifetime and two in the Pacific. And now we are in Viet-Nam. Each time we were involved so that aggressors were not free to roam.
“We could get our tomorrow. But that would mean that hundreds of thousands would be slaughtered.
“So, as difficult as it is, I do want you to know that we think we are right, and we think that right will prevail. I am not going to throw overboard my word.”
[Page 220]He said this was meant as “no criticism of others.”
The President said he had recently received a letter from a widow. She said that he had killed her husband just as surely as if he had pulled a gun and shot him. There were not many letters like that, but each one hurt.
He recalled visiting a veteran of the fighting who was a triple amputee; he had lost two arms and one leg. He was 20. His wife was 18. When he visited, the wife could only say: “Mr. President, arenʼt you proud of him?”
So this isnʼt easy for us.
“But we want your people to be free Mr. Minister (looking at Vietnamese Foreign Minister Tran Van Do). If you are not, the Thai wonʼt have freedom next week. The Philippines wonʼt have it the week after that.
“We donʼt want to bomb people. We donʼt want to punish people. We arenʼt there for territory or for treasure.
“We are there because we want the people of South Viet-Nam to have self-determination.
“And I want you to know that if there is a common danger, we will be there.”
He recalled that his father had told him: “When you get into a disagreement, try to put yourself in the adversaryʼs place; look at it as he does.
“If we put ourselves in the Vietnamese position, we see men coming into their country from the North to kill them. We see them killing our public officials, and bombing our busses, and attacking an embassy.
“We can kill them by the thousands. But we would rather stop their trucks from moving down. We would rather put their steel mills out of action—and their power plants. So they canʼt make war.
“People keep saying: stop the bombing! But they arenʼt ready to stop their bombing.”
He said: “We are not going to tie our hands behind our backs” and tell our Marines and soldiers not to do anything until the enemy is on top of them.
“We try to be reasonable.” We stopped the bombing five times. He noted that he had written directly to Ho Chi Minh. During that time, many people, some Senators and others, were criticizing him for not being willing to negotiate. Yet he didnʼt release the letter.
Despite the failure of all moves toward peace, “we are going to keep trying.” Our goal is “maximum deterrence with minimum loss of life.”
He said we did not want to “invade North Viet-Nam.”
“We just want those people to have a chance to have their own way of life.”
[Page 221]He said he shared the general optimism expressed about Asia and its future.
He said we would like to use our resources “for bread and babies”—for food, and health and education.
“And this (Asia) is where mankind is—two-thirds of it—in Asia.”
He said Europe was now strong.
“The other side of the world needs us more than Europe ever did.
“To those of you who are with us in Viet-Nam, be strong of heart. To the others, I ask: try to be as understanding as you can.
“Iʼve got enough troubles without getting them from my brothers.
“I am not as patient as an assistant I once had. He was, I think, the most patient man Iʼve ever known. He had a young son named Lyndon. One morning, as the man was sleeping, little Lyndon climbed up to the bed and kicked him in the teeth. My assistant jumped up and said: ʼNow, Lyndon, if you kick me in the teeth once more Iʼm going to take you by the arm and sit you down in a corner.ʼ
“I donʼt think I would have said it quite like that.
“I want you to know: we are there; we are going to stay there; but we are flexible.
“We have said ʼyesʼ 35 times—to the British proposal, to the Indian Prime Minister, to the United Nations, to the non-aligned nations.
“We keep saying ʼyes.ʼ They keep saying ʼno.ʼ And I get blamed.”
But, he added: “We think weʼll find a solution.”
The President said he wanted to see SEATO “stronger, not weaker.”
And he said that “we donʼt want this war to spread—but if it does, it will not be our fault or our wish.”
- Source: Johnson Library, National Security File, Agency File, SEATO. Secret. Drafted by Jorden on April 20.↩