U.S. Bluff

During the last three weeks, the Johnson administration has been deepening the credibility chasm with a series of maneuvers shamelessly worsening the quibble over a site for preliminary peace talks with Hanoi. In a frenzied propaganda effort calculated to cover Johnson's embarrassing decision to renege on his "anywhere at anytime" pledge, Dean Rusk Thursday affected eager magnanimity by offering ten new sites.

Rusk's proposal dripped with insincerity. He suggested such "neutrals" as Belgium and Japan, ignoring the newly-created United States criterion that an acceptable site must have adequate communications facilities for both sides. Conspicuously, Rusk's ten did not include Paris, the only Western capital with which the North Vietnamese are in touch and which they might accept.

Hanoi responded with chilling logic that "the absurd and insolent conditions" the United States has attached to peace talks show that our government is not seriously seeking to negotiate an end to the war. It seems likely that Administration hawks, cheered on by the liberation of Khe Sanh, are pressing for fresh escalation. And the record intensity of bombing raids these last two days suggests they have gotten what they wanted.

Had the United States sent representatives to Warsaw, peace talks might have foundered for any number of reasons; there is no cause to think that Americans and North Vietnamese could have quickly contrived an easy solution. But now, if peace talks fail the administration cannot convincingly maintain a pretense of clean hands and good intentions. The U.S. has yet to make a real effort at peace talks. So far, it hasn't even been bluffing very well.