"The February 17 issue of *Comment* a Commmist Party journal carries
a rather unfortunate, not to say untimely article entitled "Diversious
in the fight for peace", by Betty Reid.
The article is, in the main a frontal attack on the Vietnam Solidarity
Cempaien,;while also enntaining sundry snipings at "The Week", *Inter~
national Socialism, ‘Solidarity’ end the Maoists. Betty Reid's main
point ssens to be that Vi tnan demostrations orgamised on » nom solid~
arity position would attract larger crowds md the cmsequence would
be that Wilson “ould he forced to dissassociate from U.S. policy.
"I propose to quote some of the assertions and statements aerate in
the artiale, md then to answer then,
Throughout the article we are assured that the C.P.G.B. supports the
N.L.F. and Hanoi, (Surely nobody doubted this myway) epparently it is
just not politic for demonstrations to let Wilson md Co know this, So
~the argument goes= we must make minimal demands, and then thousands of
liberals, clerics and even confused imperialists will come pouring into
the streets.
"We are told that "the attitude md activities of V:S.C. are obstacles
to the building of such a (mass) movent..." Me article continues
by calling attem s to turn Peace in Vietnam Committees into saciid
Committees "ai eruption".
a this point in her article Hetty Reid lamches a attack on the Fourth
International. While it is easy to criticise aspects of the Foufth Inter
rational = thidugh for different reasons then those of Betty Reid —- this
shovld not be used as an excuse for sectarian refusal to work with its
supporters on areas of agreement, such as Ve tna,
"On returning to the question ef Vietnan demonstrations we are advised
that whatever the differences "this would not cause us to create divis~
py in my genuine united effort far Vieiman, "The issue is too eneteting
ten inpertarts too central for that".
The article even challenges the concept that the only lasting +Ming that
can be done by the British Socialist movement,to assist in the fight
against imperialism,is the overthrow of Inperkaliat Government, This
section continues by advising that it is not the peace movement's task
to fight for a socialist solution, but should concentrate on bringing
people together on a clear platform of immediate demands,
“In answer to the point ebout attracting larger crowds,it should be noted
that the October 22 demonstration was the largest yet on the Vietnam
issue,and thet on the previous day one called under the'peace' slogan attracted dgisory support." aos
Ve Shee ase : .
"Then one should consider what the minimum demands of the C.P.Gem. end others have led to in the past, for every time the movement kas called for peace on U. Thant's proposals’ Johnson and Wilson have made similar noises to Hmoi, and when Hanoi has qiite justifiably rejected the agressors terms, then Johnson and his lepdeg have pointed em accusing finger at Hanoi, The result being a considerable mumber of very confused people. "We now come to the question of attacking U. Thant, this point has been generally covered in the last paragraph, but 1 would add that Betty Raid might do well to consider his background, . wie 8 "
"With regard to "division in ey united effort for Vietman". is is indeed regretable that the C,P.G.B. should find it easier to form alliances ; with Liberals and vicars etc., them with Socialist®-Although we are advised that "The issue is too immediate, too central, too important" for divisiczs, it is infact the C.P.G.B. who have continually stood aside whem faced with a denonstration which would have forced them into the opsn, nOn the questiom of lasting help far the Vietmamese and other revolutions, I an sure that Hetty Reid will agree with me when I say that a British Government of the present ilk is certain to aligm itself against any people likely to challenge imperialism, (Guyea, Vietman md the Yenen are examples). It is therefore true to say thet the only lasting thing we can do to assist suck movensnts is to snash the present and replace it with ~ a socialist ome. "To even suggest that the peace mover nt should limit itself to "bringing people together on a clear platform of immediate demands", is ludicrous. I wonder what Betty Reid would say if it were suggested that the Trade’ Uniers limit themselves to econanic demands," Frem.a Yorkshire: reader "Jeeel think Betty Reid has a nerve! She never criticised the Cemmunist Party when it was giving full support te the British Council for Peace in Vietnam when that organisation's line was "we do not seek to apportion blame." The Vietnamese had occasion to criticise Lord Fenner Breckway last year fer as they put it "misrepresenting their views." Betty Reid was conspicious by her silence in thet matter, She fails to mention the War Crimes Tribunal and the Free Speech Campaign, both of which were staffed by V.S.C. supporters, Would she describe those campaigns as diversions and splitting activities? The Tribunal - never supported by the B.C.P.V. ~ had the active support of the Vietnamese, both North and N.L.F. The Free Speech Campaign united nearly 80 Labour Parties and 60 M.P.s, the Morning Star could scarcely bring itself to report it! If there is sectarianism in the anti-Vietnam movement Cemment should look at itself, In the same issue as Betty Reid's article appeared in there was a list ef activities concerning the Vietnam war. There was one notable absence guess which, Yes! you are right, there was no mentien of the March 17th demonstration, I doubt very much whether any Communist Party members or sympet— hisers will be dete red from taking part....."