Into the Breach

Amid the cacophony of attacks and recriminations emanating from hundreds of critics who oppose the Vietnam war, John Kenneth Galbraith's recent address to the National Citizens Committee to End the War in Vietnam stands out for its remarkable cogency and impact. Even when covering familiar ground Galbraith managed to achieve a level of sophistication and insight that few of the other critics have reached.

Where Galbraith fails, however, is in his attempt to outline an alternative approach--the so-called "moderate solution"--to the Vietnam war.

His key assumption is that large areas of South Vietnam are so firmly under the control of the Viet Cong that their capture is unfeasible. To avoid a reckless squandering of American lives and resources, the Administration, Galbraith argues, should limit its military action to securing "the maximum of security, tranquility and well-being in the limited but populous areas that we control." In this way Galbraith hopes to maintain a U.S. commitment in Vietnam with a minimum loss of life until a negotiated settlement is achieved.

Unfortunately, in his effort to eschew the two extremes of immediate withdrawal and intensified fighting, Galbraith has created a plan that will please few. The one point on which hawks and doves can agree is that the fighting should be ended as rapidly as possible. Neither group would complacently tolerate an extended, seemingly endless, defensive war. Much of Galbraith's proposal--his appeal for an end to the bombing and for a disassociation from General Ky and his coterie--is obviously laudable, but, because it does not hold out the possibility of an imminent termination of the war, it is unlikely to elicit any significant following.