THE SENATE ON VIET NAM: Anxiety & Assent

The U.S. Senate takes with dedicated seriousness its traditional role of watchdog on foreign policy, stemming from its constitutional powers of advice and consent on treaties and the appointment of ambassadors. Senate sentiment about present U.S. policy toward Viet Nam therefore becomes of vital concern. How do the members of the Senate feel about Viet Nam? Last week TIME'S congressional correspondents interviewed almost a score of the Senate's members--a sampling ranging across regional, party and ideological lines. Among those who were not interviewed were Senators whose views have long been on the record--such as Oregon Democrat Wayne Morse, who thinks the U.S. has no business in Viet Nam (said Morse, in a Senate speech last week: "I have been asked by more people than I would have thought possible if there is not grounds for impeachment of the President"), and Republican Leader Everett Dirksen, who has professed himself willing to follow wherever the Democratic President may lead militarily in Viet Nam.

TIME'S interviews disclosed a wide range of Senate unhappiness. But mostly, despite their uneasiness, the Senators seemed willing to substitute anxiety and assent for advice and consent. Senatorial quotes:

Georgia Democrat Richard Russell, chairman of the Armed Services Com mittee: "The West has made about every conceivable blunder in Viet Nam since the time the fighting started over there. But there isn't a way out just now. We are deeply committed, and it's been a growing commitment. We can't leave now without breaking our word, and that would be worst of all."

Mississippi Democrat John Stennis, chairman of the Senate Preparedness Subcommittee: "Within the Senate, there is solid support for standing firm in Viet Nam. Within the group, there are a great many regrets that we are in there. But we are in there. Our flag is committed. Our boys are committed. We've got to back them up. We would invite much more serious trouble elsewhere in Asia and throughout the world if we set a precedent in being pushed out. I regret that we got in there. And I regret the extent to which we have become committed--particularly because we are committed alone. I don't think we can continue to go it alone indefinitely. I continue to think that others will help us in Viet Nam. We can't pull out."

Utah Democrat Frank Moss: "I have misgivings because I can't see what the ultimate outcome will be. My problem is the same as it is for so many others. When I'm asked what to do, I am at a loss to answer."

Tennessee Democrat Albert Gore: "We now find ourselves involved in a war that defies analysis in traditional military terms, in a war that makes little sense as it is being waged, in a war that we have scant hope of winning except at a cost which far outweighs the fruits of victory, in a war suitable to the enemy, in a place and under conditions that no military man in his right mind would choose, in a war which threatens to escalate into a major power confrontation and which could esca late into a nuclear holocaust. I am sure the President has carefully contemplated the danger of permitting the United States to be bogged down in an endless war in Asia, thus leaving the Soviets free to work their machinations in Latin America, in the Mediterranean basin, in Europe, and perhaps elsewhere. Vacuums are tempting--they might be irresistibly so. We are closing the breach in the Communist world. We should minimize our involvement rather than maximize it. No one is suggesting that we duck tail and run. It's a question of priorities."

Iowa Republican Bourke Hicken-looper, ranking G.O.P. member of the Foreign Relations Committee: "We're in the quicksand and we've got to get out. The Senate is quite generally--practically universally--in support of a vigorous pursuit of this situation in Viet Nam. There's a difference between approval and support. Many things and actions that have happened have not met with my approval. We may be injuring our cause somewhat by the constant and repeated assertions that we want to settle--which we do. But I'm afraid we create the idea that we are in a situation of desperation, and that hardens their attitude rather than softens it."

South Carolina Republican Strom Thurmond: "If we are going to follow a non-win policy, as we have in practically all of our conflicts with the Communists since World War II, then we might as well get out now, rather than be negotiated out later, resulting in eventual surrender and the loss of many young American lives. I still believe, as did General MacArthur, that there is no substitute for victory."

Vermont Republican George Aiken: "The Senate now is more inclined to let the Administration assume the responsibility to get out of the mess the best way it can. There's a tendency to give less advice on Viet Nam. There were those who thought we should get out, lock, stock and barrel, and those who thought we should take on everybody. I think opinion has moderated at both ends. We can't afford to clear out of Viet Nam. Many of us agree that negotiations are highly advisable and that the U.N. hopefully is an effective agency to deal with the situation."

Democratic Leader Mike Mansfield of Montana: "I don't know anybody in the Senate who's happy about it. A good many are disturbed. If they can't come up with alternatives, they see nothing to do but let the President take the responsibility. It hasn't been easy --and it won't be. It can't be settled soon--because it can't be."

Florida Democrat George Smothers: "We're not looking for any glory out there. It's not a question of how we got there or why. We're there. The question is, what do we do?"

Oklahoma Democrat Fred Harris:

"We can't predict that we will have the right results in Viet Nam, but our actions are rightly conceived. I know this is the only course we can follow. Nobody is really happy about it. Events are controlling us, and no one likes to be controlled by events. Within the limits of his options, President Johnson is doing his best to control events. There isn't anything to do but what the President is doing."

Louisiana Democrat Russell Long, the majority whip: "Congress is going to stay with the President and give him what he asks for. We have no choice.

There's general agreement that we have to stand firm."

New Mexico Democrat Clinton Anderson: "The Senate's current sentiment is not so much disquiet as uncertainty. We all want to support the President, and we're going to support the President, but we don't see much headway. Where does it end? We don't know. That's disturbing and somewhat distressing."

Maine Democrat Edmund Muskie: "I don't have any alternative that I consider realistic or any more effective than what the President is using. Trying to play the game looking over his shoulder without seeing his cards is difficult to do. On the face of it, I can't accept the idea of withdrawal. I feel unhappy about Viet Nam--but I'm not particularly rebellious. The idea of the measured response is what bothers people. They'd like a more clear-cut way to reach objectives. I don't see how he could go further on the peace offensive than he has without some indication that the enemy is receptive."

Ohio Democrat Stephen Young: "There really isn't any government in South Viet Nam at all, and there are too many hard-nosed militarists prevailing nowadays. We're trapped there."

Pennsylvania Democrat Joe Clark: "I don't think that you can scuttle and run. I think that as you watch the

President's position, his last performance means he's going to play it very sotto voce for the rest of the year. It's just another indication of his political genius."

Rhode Island Democrat John Pastore: "The question of whether we should have gone in there in the first place is subject to debate. The situation that confronts us now is not de batable. We have a commitment. Our men are engaged. The Administration, with the backing of Congress, has stated the policy. It's firm. It's fixed. It does us all well to support it unequivocally. By and large, the great majority of the Senate--with very few, very, very few exceptions--supports the President in his position."

Wyoming Democrat Gale McGee: "In Viet Nam today, we are experiencing a clandestine form of international Communist aggression which stands as the greatest remaining threat to peace in the world. This insidious aggression, known as 'wars of national liberation,' stands on trial in Viet Nam. If it succeeds, it can only lead to further aggression elsewhere. But if it fails, we can hope that aggression may be over forever."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.