VIETNAM TRAGEDY DRAGS ON

"More than 300 Americans have been killed and 2000 wounded in communist offensives in the past week. The losses were the highest in six months and the highest since the Paris peace talks moved into a serious stage. The South Vietnamese forces have had 572 troops killed during the week". - The Australian, March 3.

Since February 23, when the Communists launched their post Tet offensive, there has been a progressive build up of pressure by the Viet Cong and their North Vietnamese allies. As usual, the Communists have suffered heavy losses, one estimate being over 7000 killed. But the Communists are not unduly worried about sacrificing human lives, so long as they are making progress towards their ultimate objective, which at present is primarily political and psychological. The latest Communist offensive has shattered the myth that ex-President reached a firm understanding with North Vietnam before announcing the American bombing halt late last year, just prior to the American Presidential Elections. A spokesman for Hanoi has bluntly said that no such understanding was ever accepted by the Communists, and that American troops must be completely withdrawn from South Vietnam.

Press reports of the interview between South Vietnamese Vice-President, Air Vice-Marshall Ky, and President Nixon in Paris, indicate that President Nixon rejects Ky's view that the Americans must now respond to the post-Tet offensive with a harder line. Mr. Nixon believes that he can get together this year with the masters of the Kremlin and work out meaningful agreements. When Mr. Nixon arrived at the London airport he spoke of "peace in our time", which struck many as rather chilling in view of what happened after the late Mr. Neville Chamberlain, British Prime Minister, made the same remark in 1938. So far from taking a firmer line with the Communist because of their increased aggression in South Vietnam, and intensified activities in Laos, President Nixon has, according to The Los Angeles Times, consented himself with asking the Soviet Union to protest to Hanoi. But the report says that there is no suggestion of any ultimatum.

The lack of will by the Nixon Administration is already clear for all to see. The Soviet strategists must be quite pleased. They feel free to produce yet another Berlin crisis, moving up between 200 and 300 heavy Soviet tanks to close the road link between West Germany and West Berlin while intensifying their world-wide revolutionary activities. If the West is to survive, then it must find the will to do so.

DEFICIENCY FUND PASSES $2000

MORE DOUBLE- TALK ON RHODESIA

"Why should Australia take action against Rhodesia when most Australians disagree with the action and even African leaders within Rhodesia and its neighbouring countries such as Malawi and Botswana disapprove of sanctions. They know that the Africans, whom sanctions are supposed to help, are being the hardest hit by them through unemployment.... For the Australian Government to refuse to allow Rhodesian sportsmen to visit this country at the behest of the Wilson Government is both weak and ridiculous. Rhodesian Rhodes Scholars are in residence at Oxford but the Australian Government refuses to allow Rhodesian children to come to Australia under an education exchange plan. How stupid can we be?

Russia says her invasion of Czechoslovakia was an internal matter, which it wasn't, then said that it was no threat to world peace, which it was. "Britain said Rhodesia was a matter for the United Nations which it wasn't. It is strictly an internal matter. The United Nations sanctions were imposed on the grounds that Rhodesia was a threat to world peace, which is ridiculous except as a figment of the imagination in the minds of such as Mr. Kaunda of Zambia, who shelters the Zimbabwe terrorists on their way to Rhodesia and South Africa..." -Sir Wilfrid Kent-Hughes, M.P., in Intelligence Bulletin, February 18.

Presumably the new Minister for External Affairs, Mr. Gordon Freeth, is not too familiar with Rhodesian facts, because in answer to a question by Sir Wilfrid Kent-Hughes at Canberra last week, Mr. Freeth spoke about "groups of people" in Rhodesia seizing power. No power "seized" was by any "groups" of people in Rhodesia. On November 11, 1965, there was a Rhodesian Government freely elected under a Constitution, which had the approval of the British Government. The British also accepted at that time that the African people in the tribal areas had been properly represented through their chiefs. The properly constituted Government of Rhodesia formally declared on November 11, 1965 that it no longer recognised the right of the British Government to interfere in Rhodesian affairs. Rhodesia had complete internal self-government since 1923. Rhodesia is today an independent country in fact. No double-talk can alter this fact.

Prime Minister Gorton and his Government would be well advised to note that increasing numbers of Australians are becoming opposed to the Australian policy. A similar development is taking place in the U.S.A., where a recent national opinion poll taken by the Long National Opinion Poll, conducted by W.H. Long Marketing Inc. revealed that
(1) 83.7 percent of replies opposed the U.S. backing U.N. sanctions designed to force Rhodesia to adopt majority rule;
(2) 86.2 percent, do not agree with the U.S. supporting the contention that Britain has any right to specify voting requirements in Rhodesia; and
(3) 81. 7 per cent believe that the U.S should refuse to become involved in the dispute and should follow a policy of friendliness towards all who are friendly with America.

It is symptomatic of the rot in the Western world that a bulwark against Communist strategy in Southern Africa is attacked in association with the Communists, while every effort is made to appease the Communist criminals.

THE BOOK OF THE MOMENT

SOVIET CONTINUES TO WIN IN MIDDLE EAST

"Among Palestinians in Jordan, now about half the nation's population, popular support for the commando movement is large and has mushroomed in recent months. How strong in has become politically is a matter of debate. In the past, a fragile peace has been established under which the Jordanian Army did not seriously impede commando activities and the commandos refrained from menacing the regime's stability." - The Australian, February 19, quoting from the Washington Post Service.

With half his total population refugees from their homeland in Palestine, it is not surprising that King Hussein is, in the absence of any firm support from the West, is attempting to walk a tightrope. The frightful Palestinian refugee problem is one of the major aspects of the developing Middle East crisis. It has provided the Communists with fertile soil in which to develop terrorist activities. King Hussein's latest offer to Israel is one, which has received comparatively little publicity. Hussein has offered to enter into a firm agreement of peace with Israel, and guarantee no commando raids from Jordan, providing Israel will hand back to Jordan the west bank of the Jordan taken over by the Israelis in 1967, who have since then been by various tactics forcing the Palestinians out.

There was a storm in Israel when a report circulated that the late President Eskhol was prepared to hand back the west bank of the Jordan in exchange for a firm agreement with Jordan. Those in charge of Israel are making it clear that they do not propose to hand back the Jordanian territory they have taken by force. Zionist propaganda keeps on insisting that the Palestinian refugee problem is not the responsibility of Israel, that the refugees left their homes and properties during the war. No one has ever suggested that large numbers of French who left their homes and properties in advance of the German conquest of France during the Second World War, had no right no return to their homes and properties when the war was over.

The Soviet continues to exploit the situation, and must continue to win in the Middle East - while in Western policy is so one-sided and completely ignores the moral issue involved in the refugee problem.
Political Intelligence Weekly (England) of February 28, carries the following revealing report from a Middle East authority:
The foreign press has reported that the British Forces Middle East Commander-in-Chief, General Gordon Jones, paid an official visit to Israel on 21st January 1969. He was for five days the guest of General Bar Lev, the Israeli Chief of Staff. While in Israel General Gordon Jones met Aharon Yaniv the Chief of Intelligence, Ezer Weizman the Chief of Operations and Mordechai Hod, Commander of the Air Force. The visit follows the report published in the Cypriot paper KHARAVYI that a British naval ship recently carried a large shipment of arms to Israel following President de Gaulle's embargo on arms. To keep this shipment secret, Britain dispensed with Cypriot labour and used British Servicemen for loading.

The most remarkable aspect of General Gordon Jone's visit to Israel is that it has been kept very secret and no mention of it seems to have appeared in the British press. The Middle Eastern authority also observes that by agreeing to be the guest of honour at a dinner to mark the 20th anniversary of the JEWISH VANGUARD, organ of the Leftist Labour Zionist movement in Britain, Poale Zion, Mr.Wilson "detracts from Arab Willingness to listen to British in views".

It cannot be stressed too often that not only Britain but also the whole of Western Europe is still dependent for most of its oil supplies from the Arab world. And this world is also of tremendous strategic importance. The West's refusal to take a firm stand in the Middle East, against both Arab and Israeli aggression, leaves the way completely clear for the Soviet Union.

THE WEEK IN BRIEF