THE STATE OF FRANCE

We have seen little reference in the international "news" media about the deeper significance of the last French Presidential contest, which de Gaulle won in the run off with a humiliating small majority. The most significant feature of the contest was that 45 percent, voted for a Communist-backed candidate. But the victory for de Gaulle was not one for a strong anti-Communist policy. de Gaulle is all for "peaceful co-existence" with the Communists. He openly supports a Western retreat in South-East Asia.

Some superficial observers have claimed that by entering the European Economic Community Britain would increase the strength of what is claimed to be a "strong bastion against Communist expansion". A Communist-riddled France can hardly be regarded as a very reliable ally.

If a strategy is to be initiated for the defeat of Communism in place of the current defeatist strategy of containing it, that strategy must be based upon a firm alliance between the British Crown Commonwealth, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and Canada, and the U.S.A. If this association of nations would evolve a strategy for winning, and give notice to the Communists that they meant business, it would have an electric effect on what remains of the Free world.

U.S.A. NO-WIN POLICY CONTINUES

In our issue of January 21, we referred to the criticisms of President Johnson's "peace offensive" by American experts on International Communism. We observed "Real victory calls for the effective bombing of the vital North Vietnamese port of Haiphong and the North Vietnamese industrial complex". The resumption of strictly limited bombing must not be permitted to mask the fact that those American policy makers favouring a "compromise" agreement in Vietnam still have the upper hand in Washington.

Coinciding with the resumption of limited bombing, President Johnson publicly announced that he would welcome "unconditional" talks with Communist China and North Vietnam. And even more disturbing, he made an approach to the United Nations Security Council. This is most cheering news for the International Communist conspiracy. It will enable the international campaign of political and psychological warfare to be intensified, particularly in the U.S.A. and Australia.

The most frightening aspect of the South-East Asian crisis is that the news media of the world persistently carry the myth that the Soviet Union is a "moderating" influence. This myth is accepted as truth by numerous Western politicians; some who claim to know something about Communism. Typical of how the myth of Soviet "moderation is spread is a front-page story from Australian Associated Press, source New York, in "The Age", Melbourne, of February 2:
"...the U.S. was said to fear that debate (in the U.N Security Council) would drive the Soviet Union closer to North Vietnam and provoke an open clash with Washington."

As the ''New York Times'' is regarded as one of the bibles of the Communist appeasers everywhere, we quote the following item from this journal of January 23:
"...the Chinese Communists signed an agreement with the Russians on March 30 to transport military materials by rail to North Vietnam free of charge. Soon after, Soviet technicians and heavy shipments of equipment for SAM (missile) sites and other arms started moving over the trans-Siberian railway to Manchouli in Manchuria and by express train down the Chinese rail trunk. The backlog was so large that it initially strained the Chinese railway system and for a time regular schedules were disrupted and foreigners barred from travel on some lines. Shipments were hauled in about 10 days into the area of the North Vietnamese border town of Langson where some material went into depots constructed with the help of Chinese Communist engineer troops."
All this raises the question of who is fooling whom about the Moscow-Peking "split"!

The "Times" report continues:
"Apart from SAM missiles and antiaircraft guns, the Russians have sent heavy infantry weapons to North Vietnam to supplement the small arms - Chinese Communist copies of Soviet arms - provided in large quantities by Peking…A new aid agreement signed in Hanoi during the recent visit of Aleksandr Shelepin, a Soviet Presidium member, may broaden the flow of Soviet arms."

How much "closer" must Moscow get to Hanoi before Western policy makers realise that Moscow and its satellites have thrown their complete weight into the Vietnam struggle?

The "World Marxist Review" for November, 1965, carried an article entitled, "Solidarity with the People of Vietnam", in which the various aid agreements between the Moscow satellites and North Vietnam were cited.
Phan Van Dong, the Prime Minister of North Vietnam, was quoted:
"The fraternal socialist countries and the specialists from these countries are helping us to increase both the economic and defence potential of North Vietnam and to build up our armed forces."

And so, while Prime Minister Harold Wilson and President Johnson are joining with the Communists to "crush" anti-Communist Rhodesia, they both are encouraging more economic aid to the Soviet bloc, which in turn is supplying the sinews of war to defeat the West in South-East Asia. This criminal madness is supported by the Australian Government.

Until the Complete truth about the International Communist conspiracy is faced, and appropriate action taken, it is obvious that the criminal madness will continue. And a further terrible price will be paid. If Australians have any genuine concern for their fighting men in South Vietnam, they will back them up by challenging the present no-win policy and economic aid for the enemy.

SIR HUMPHREY GIBBS TO RESIGN IN RHODESIA?

We are not surprised to read the Australian Associated Press report that Sir Humphrey Gibbs no longer recognised as Governor of Rhodesia by the Smith Government, is considering appealing to the Queen to relieve him of his post. Following his return to London from Rhodesia, Mr. Reginald Paget, Q.C., and Labour M.P., wrote an article for the London "Sunday Express" later republished in "The Sunday Mail", Rhodesia, of January 23, in which he said that he had spent the last two hours of his visit to Rhodesia at Government House with Sir Humphrey Gibbs and Sir Hugh Beadle, the Chief Justice.

Mr. Paget reveals that Sir Humphrey gave him permission to quote him as saying:
"When you get back, for heaven's sake convince them that they have got to negotiate with Smith. There is no one else. The alternative is disaster."
But Socialist Harold Wilson prefers disaster.

The attempt by the British Socialist Government to use Sir Humphrey against the Smith Government again reveals the unrealistic and wishful thinking of the Fabian Socialists. Hypnotised by their own propaganda into believing that the Rhodesian paternal, but responsible attitude towards the Africans must be widely unpopular, they have frantically searched for a respectable opposition in Rhodesia. With the impending refusal of Sir Humphrey Gibbs and his close friend, Sir Hugh Beadle, to be used as ideological stooges, the barrel is almost empty. All that Mr. Wilson is left with are those unrepresentative preachers of disorder and violence like Sithole and Nkomo, and a few embittered politicians who were rejected constitutionally in free elections by their fellow Rhodesians. We do not include Sir Roy Welensky amongst these; this political opponent of the Rhodesian Front Party has shown statesmanship by urging all Rhodesians, irrespective of party political affiliations to support law and order.

DR. ALBERT SCHWEITZER'S REALISM

At a time when it is fashionable to condemn European colonialism it is well to note the wise observations of the late Dr. Albert Schweitzer on African realities. A Christian with a lifetime's experience of dedication to the Africans, Dr. Schweitzer's views carry more weight than those of some idealistic academic or axe-grinding politician. The following are quotes from his book, "Out of My Life":
"What so-called self government means for primitive and semi-primitive people can be gathered from the fact that in the Black Republic of Liberia, domestic slavery, and what is far worse, the compulsory shipment of labourers to other countries, have continued down to our own day. They were both abolished in October 1, 1930 - on paper."

Speaking on the stupidity of concentrating on higher education in primitive countries Dr. Schweitzer says:
"For their civilisation it is more important that the natives should learn to burn bricks, to build, to saw logs into planks, to be ready with hammer plane and chisel, than that they should be brilliant at reading and writing and even be able to calculate with a + band x + y."
"We proceed as if not agriculture and handicraft, but reading and writing were the beginnings of civilisation. From schools, which are mere copies of those in Europe, they are turned out as 'educated' persons, that is, who think themselves superior to manual labour. ...All those who are unable to secure acceptable employment in the offices of business houses or of the Government set about as idlers and grumblers."

ASSEMBLY HALL RALLY.