THE MEANING OF JOHNSON'S "CARROT" SPEECH
President Johnson's April 7 speech, delivered two months to the day after American planes on his orders began bombing North Vietnam and escalating the war in the direction of a nuclear culmination, was received with extravagant praise and thanksgiving by all his friends, supporters, well-wishers and cringing bootlickers, from the august New York Times to the ineffable Harold Wilson. In common chorus they eulogized this great "carrot" speech by the great leader of the "Great Society" as having offered a “way out" from the increasingly ominous situation created by the military aggression of Ameri-
can imperialism, But what did this capitalist statesman actually offer in the way of "carrots"?
He said he was prepared to engage in “uneonditional discussions."' He said that if a settlement was achieved that met undis-~ closed specifications, the United States would provide $1, 000, 000, 000 for the development of the “countries of Southeast Asia." The num~ ber. of years pyer which this would be stretched was not indicated, nor which countries would benefit most, nor whether it would be in loans or gifts, nor the proportion of "private investment," nor the strings attached to the dollars.
_ The offer about “unconditional" discussions was just as counterfeit as the billion-dollar bill dangled by the president. The discussions must be only with the "governments concerned." Johnson made no reference to the National Liberation Front of South Vietnan, whose heroic fighters are backed by at least eighty per cent of the population, and which constitutes their real government. Other spokesmen of the White House clarified this point by stating that the National Liberation Front was specifically excluded from the "unconditional" offer made by Johnson.
Johnson's "generosity" would be comparable to George III proffering “unconditional discussions" with the "governments con~ cerned" when he had lost his war against the thirteen American colonies, while excluding Sam Adams, George Washington, Benjamin Franklin and any other subject in rebellion against His Majesty's government.
Johnson got the answer he deserved from Hanoi and Peking. They called his speech what it was -- a fraud.
Meanwhile, on the level of action, Johnson continued to escalate the war as if his speech meant no more than his election propaganda. American bombers continued their "measured" dumping of napalm and high explosives on the villages of North Vietnam. Fresh contingents of Marines were landed, bringing the total number of American military "advisers" in South Vietnam to some 32,000.
What then was the essential meaning of Johnson's speech? It was war propaganda...a belated attempt to justify the military assault. Up to now, warmongers have considered it an essential part of the preparations for war to brain-wash the public in advance, Johnson apparently believed that world opinion, including American public opinion, could be flagrantly and contemptuously disregarded. The H-bomb more than outweighs what the world might think!
_ The result was a crisis. Allies as faithful as Wilson had nothing to sell. The American press was caught just as short. Even a sector of the American capitalist class had grave doubts. That was why, two months after launching the war, Johnson had to reconsider and at least make a propagandistic gesture of favoring peace,
ALGERIAN ROLE IN