To the Editors of the Crimson:

I had thought that there was no longer any need to set forth the nature and causes of American failure in Vietnam or the case for complete withdrawal, but the renewed bombing attacks on Hanoi and Haiphong demonstrate that there are still those who have the delusion that it will be possible to sustain a viable non-communist government in the South. The notions of "Vietnamization" and an "honorable negotiated settlement" in Paris implied the delusion, but one could question how seriously they should be taken. When, however, we renew massive bombing raids with their indiscriminate slaughter, it seems clear that President Nixon and his top advisors either think that the South can survive as an independent entity, or they are committed to postponing its collapse until after the election. It if is the former, they are fools: if the latter, the most callous sort of political opportunists.

As a member of the infamous Michigan State University project in Vietnam from 1955-1957, I participated in that attempt to create an anti-communist regime in the South. By 1957 it was already clear that the Diem Government was moving towards a police state to offset its declining popularity, and that the massive presence of the U.S. was undermining Diem's legitimacy and encouraging his authoritarian tendencies. That was 15 years, 5 governments and how many dead and maimed Vietnamese ago? Everything we have done over the past 15 years has contributed to destroying the integrity, the rationality and the will of the people in South Vietnam while building up the commitment to national reunification in the North. We have trained a few people at the top of the South how to con us into great concern over the consequences of their defeat and therefore continuing support of their survival. Our leaders for 15 years have operated out of fear of being held responsible for a debacle (e.g. "who lost China"), and the false hope that they could create a regime that could survive.

The con artists in South Vietnam are not all venal. Some are; but many are just trying to exist in a terribly confused setting. What would happen to them if the North Vietnamese take over? The more corrupt, who have already made their fortunes, would probably flee, and wisely so. The rest would stay and try to make their peace with the new regime. I am sure that some of them would be killed and some imprisoned, but probably not many. There was no mass slaughter in the North in 1955 and 1956. Most Vietnamese with strong feelings about political freedom have already left the country and those who remain have learned how to compromise.

We have no right or reason to continue, much less to expand a completely corrupt and corrupting war either to save a few of our "friends" or to postpone an inevitable failure. We should recognize that there is absolutely no hope for an independent, anti-communist regime in the South. Given that fact, the only way we can help the Vietnamese people is to get out of the country completely--military aid, CIA, the whole works--and let the Vietnamese work out their own accomodations and solutions.

The U.S. Governmenn by its recent actions has demonstrated that it neither accepts these propositions nor is it following a consistent policy of withdrawal. So long as this is true and the Government remains unresponsive to the normal expressions of public opinion, there must be mass demonstrations as the only way of showing the degree of dissatisfaction with current policies. If such demonstrations can be kept non-violent and non-destructive they can help to build popular support for stopping the war. It is unfortunate that University buildings and research facilities become the lightning rods for absorbing the frustrations over tragic Government policies. A more fruitful line of action is to assure that the person elected President next November is unalterably committed to stopping our involvement in the war. David C. Cole   Center for International Affairs