BLACK PANTHER PARTY - PART ONE

ANNOUNCER Nightline will not be presented this evening so that we may bring you the following special program from ABC News. PETER JENNINGS Good evening, I'm Peter Jennings. Tonight, we're going to talk about subjects which are very painful for many Americans: Vietnam and Cambodia, then and now. We're going to talk about some old wounds, some of which are still open, and about fear and violence in people's lives today. ANNOUNCER This is an ABC News / Time Forum: Beyond Vietnam. Reporting from New York, Peter Jennings. JENNINGS For this ABC News / Time Magazine Forum, we have been joined by a group of individuals, all of whom, we believe, have strong opinions, to say the least, on the issues we have asked them to debate. Some, like William Westmoreland and Tom Hayden and Liv Ullmann and Dith Pran, are probably familiar to you. Others, such as Bobby Muller, Bui Diem, Thomas Pickering, Kassie Neou and Susan Walker, who arrived from the border between Thailand and Cambodia only hours ago, you may know less well. But they also are indispensable to the evening. It is 15 years this week since America withdrew from Indochina. ABC News and Time believe it's an important moment to look at US policy in Vietnam and Cambodia now, so we're also joined by Stan Cloud, the Washington bureau chief of Time, former Saigon bureau chief who wrote much of this week's issue and who, like us, went back to Indochina to prepare these anniversary reports. Earlier this evening, some of you, I hope, saw our hour on Cambodia today. If you didn't, we can't summarize it in 30 seconds. But it is important to know that the United States supports a political and military coalition which is trying to overthrow the present Cambodian government installed by Vietnam. That coalition includes non - Communist forces, but the most powerful faction is the Communist Khmer Rouge. The leader of the coalition, the United States' main man, is Prince Norodom Sihanouk. Here is an excerpt from the hour. (Cambodia) JENNINGS Vietnam These are the foot soldiers of the Khmer Rouge. The last time the Khmer Rouge ruled in Cambodia, they killed more than a million of their fellow citizens, maybe even two million. Today, the Communist Khmer Rouge are back, advancing on their own people again. WILLIAM COLBY, FORMER DIRECTOR, CIA You know, for a while there, if you wore glasses, you were killed, because you were an intellectual. JENNINGS Why does the United States, the Bush administration, have anything to do whatsoever with the Khmer Rouge? REP CHESTER ATKINS, (D), MASSACHUSETTS It's a policy of hatred. We're still fighting the Vietnam war, and this is the last battle of that war, and if we have to use the Khmer Rouge as a pawn in that, we'll use them. PRINCE NORODOM SIHANOUK There are a few Americans who appreciate the efficiency of the Khmer Rouge army on the battlefield. BERTIL LINTINER, JOURNALIST Well, basically, the Khmer Rouge does most of the fighting, and afterwards they give some credit for this fighting to the non - Communist components, in order to make it respectable from the international point of view. JENNINGS And if they were fighting together, side by side, you would find that, in your words, unacceptable? RICHARD SOLOMON, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE Absolutely. And we have indicated so very clearly to Sihanouk and the other non - Communists. JENNINGS What would we do about it? SEC SOLOMON We would have to cut off arMs Up to now - JENNINGS To the non - Communist resistance. SEC SOLOMON - correct. We are not supplying - I'm sorry, support, we do not supply lethal support. But we would have to cut off our support to the non - Communists. Our - JENNINGS In fact, you just said we would have to cut off arms to the non - Communist resistance. SEC SOLOMON - well, I made a mistake there. PRINCE SIHANOUK Sometimes, the CIA, Central Intelligence Agency of the USA, give weapons to the non - Communist forces. DR EDWIN PUGH, RELIEF WORKER Anybody who supports the Khmer Rouge - and the United States may say they do not, but by supporting the coalition you are support - in part, supporting the Khmer Rouge - anybody who supports the Khmer Rouge, in my eyes, is taking a morally indefensible position. MR COLBY They still run the people under their control with the same draconian hand. JENNINGS And our government supports the coalition in which they are the strongest partner? MR COLBY I thing wrongly. Yeah. No, I'm very firm on that. I don't get emotional here, because I think that in order to try to get the American government to move, you have to convince them that it's in our interest, our interest in decency, that we end any relationship whatsoever, even indirect, with the Khmer Rouge. JENNINGS Here in New York tonight we also have a large audience in our studio, and an overflow audience in another studio at ABC's headquarters, and from time to time this evening, we'll want members of the audience and encourage members of the audience to talk to the panel as well. But let us begin. Let me introduce Kassie Neou. He's the chairman of the Human Rights Commission of the Cambodian Network Council. He's the founder of the Cambodian Documentation Commission. You were an English teacher on television and radio in Cambodia, weren't you? KASSIE NEOU, CAMBODIAN NETWORK COUNCIL Yes, I was. JENNINGS What did the Khmer Rouge do to your life? MR NEOU Well, like many other Cambodians, they came to the city of course, like The Killing Fields movie, not too much different from that. JENNINGS Killing Fields is an accurate movie? MR NEOU Yes, it is accurate. JENNINGS How did you get out of the country? MR NEOU Well, like other refugees, we escaped through the jungle to Thailand. JENNINGS You lost your wife? MR NEOU Yes, I did. JENNINGS Did you ever find her again? MR NEOU We've been trying to, but I don't know where she is now. JENNINGS Did the Khmer Rouge punish you? MR NEOU Well, 14, 15, years ago, they did, but this is now 15 years later, the situation of Cambodia is different. The matter of the fact is that Cambodian is now caught between a tiger and a crocodile. It is not only the Khmer Rouge alone. The Cambodian people are victims of the Khmer Rouge in the jungle, the Khmer Rouge in Phnom Penh, under PRK, and the Vietnamese invasion. JENNINGS We'll come back perhaps and try to explain PRK and your view of the Khmer Rouge, as you call them, in Phnom Penh, the capital. But the Khmer Rouge we've seen in the broadcast tonight, the Khmer Rouge we see in the movie, The Killing Fields, have they changed? MR NEOU Well, the Khmer Rouge I saw in the broadcast, looking at their age, they are 14, 15, 16, 17 or 20. Mathematically, if you calculate it, 1975, were they even present? Were they born yet, or they were still babies? How can you condemn babies who didn't know anything about the genocide? This is my point. The real Khmer Rouge who participated in the killing fields, the majority of them, of course, are in the jungle, but a great number of them are in the PRK, the People's Republic of Kampochea, who are officers - JENNINGS You mean - MR NEOU - who are commanders, Bhutang himself, the Khmer Rouge. JENNINGS - you mean in the present government of Cambodia - MR NEOU Yes. JENNINGS - the one that was installed by the Vietnamese. MR NEOU Yes. JENNINGS Is Pol Pot still the leader of the Khmer Rouge in the jungle? MR NEOU Well, according to my sources, he is still the leader of the jungle Khmer Rouge. JENNINGS Dith Pran is a photographer with The New York Times. It is his story which The Killing Fields tells. Everything we heard about the Khmer Rouge true, from your point of view? DITH PRAN, "NEW YORK TIMES" PHOTOGRAPHER Yes. What I learned that they forced the refugees along the Thai - Cambodian border that they control to carry all the weapons and ammunition into - inside Cambodia, they try to get it back. And I'm glad that you informed the public that Cambodia is still at war. I think that your show tonight, it helped our people a lot, and helped the public to understand that we're caught between the tiger and crocodile. We talk about the Vietnamese also inside Cambodia, and the Khmer Rouge. Both of them, as long they live inside Cambodia, the peace never can come to the Cambodian people, because the Khmer Rouge leaders that is very hard for the Cambodian people to tolerate. JENNINGS It's possible, Mr Pran, that a lot of people didn't see the hour earlier this evening, and it's possible some people didn't even see the movie, The Killing Fields. But is it true, what Mr Colby, the former director of the CIA says, that someone could be killed simply because they wore glasses and they were regarded as an intellectual? MR PRAN Yes. It was true that, you know - I must say that during four years under the Khmer Rouge, when I was there, they killed not just only the intellectual, not only doctor or teacher, they killed the whole family, the children also were killed, because they believed that they had to kill the whole family in order to run the country. They don't - they believe that when the children grow up, they would seek revenge against them, so in order to control the whole country, they got to try to eliminate a lot of people as possible. That's why they killed the children, they killed the students, they killed the high - class people, and we, the Cambodian people, were shocked, and we were trapped there, and we were surprised that the world did not pay attention. JENNINGS The world didn't pay attention. Do you think the world is paying attention now? MR PRAN Now, it seems to me like it's a little bit better. At least they try to bring all the Cambodian factions together, try to talk and we hope that someday all the Cambodian political leaders would try to bring peace for Cambodia, agree or accept some kind of common agreement. For me, my position - JENNINGS Can I stop you, just for a second, before we get to politics, because it gets complicated. Let's keep it, if we may, simple for a moment. One of our guests can't be with us here in the studio, but is with us in Washington. Senator Bob Kerrey, Democratic senator from Nebraska, the holder of the country's highest military honors, the Congressional Medal of Honor, a Navy SEAL in Vietnam, has recently been back to Vietnam and back to Cambodia. Senator, begin, if you would, briefly, by giving us your impressions of the Khmer Rouge, based on your recent visit to Cambodia. SEN BOB KERREY, (D), NEBRASKA Well, they're very impressive. They've got a committed rationale, and I personally don't believe that they've changed their ways, and I think they sell a nationalist anti - Vietnamese message that unfortunately there'll be a lot of people, particularly in the rural parts of Cambodia, that will buy. They will increase their strength, I believe, if we don't change our policies. JENNINGS Susan Walker is the Indochina director for Handicap International. You work primarily with Cambodian refugees along the Thai - Cambodian border. There are 360,000 of them, I believe. SUSAN WALKER, SOUTHEAST ASIA DIRECTOR, HANDICAP INTERNATIONAL Right. The actual figure in the UN counts is 276,000, but there are anywhere between 30,000 and 60,000 people in camps that are inaccessible to the United Nations. JENNINGS In broad terms, you're an American relief worker. MS WALKER Right. JENNINGS What is your own sense of the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia today? MS WALKER Well, I think the Khmer Rouge, certainly on the border, have not changed. I don't think their policies have changed. The only thing that has changed is that they're not murdering hundreds of thousands or millions of people, but their repressive policies are the same, and the most frightening thing is that they are the best - organized, I think both in the field, in the camps, in the jungles, and also on the diplomatic field. I have colleagues that were at the Paris talks, at the Jakarta talks - JENNINGS Before you get to the Paris talks - I apologize, I don't mean to cut people off in trying to get to politics too soon here. But tell us just - give us a feel for what it's like on the ground. You say they're repressive on the ground. What does that mean? MS WALKER Well, for instance, the camp of Site Eight, which a Khmer Rouge camp - JENNINGS It's a camp controlled by the Khmer Rouge? MS WALKER - yes, controlled by the Khmer Rouge. JENNINGS As there are camps controlled by the non - Communist resistance. MS WALKER Right. There are - for the three coalition members, you have Sihanouk and then the Khmer People's National Liberation Front and the Khmer Rouge. And this camp is supposedly civilians in a UN camp. It's a population of about 35,000, but there are three satellite military camps nearby, and as I mentioned in the documentary, there were 10,000 children in those camps, and those 10,000 children should not be in military camps. There was a polio epidemic; we tried to have an immunization campaign, it was not completed. All of those children have been moved back into the malaria - infested jungles and just in November and December there were 350 children under the age of 14 brought back to Site Eight from the occupied zones for treatment. JENNINGS As far as you're concerned, the Khmer Rouge are a threat? MS WALKER Definitely. JENNINGS Mr Neou, the Khmer Rouge are a threat, yes or no? MR NEOU Not only the Khmer Rouge who are a threat. The Khmer Rouge and also the Vietnamese are a threat to the Cambodians. JENNINGS But the Khmer Rouge are a threat? MR NEOU Of course. But my feeling is you only concentrate on the Khmer Rouge - JENNINGS No, no, I just want to start so that people understand the Khmer Rouge. We'll get to the Vietnamese, I promise you. MR NEOU All right. JENNINGS The Khmer Rouge are a threat. Would you like to go back and live under a government of the Khmer Rouge? MR NEOU Which government? JENNINGS A government, Cambodian government which is run by the Khmer Rouge? Would you like to go back and live under that? MR NEOU As long as they are Communists, there'll be no peaceful Cambodia. JENNINGS Mr Pran? MR PRAN I don't trust them at all. JENNINGS All right. You can feel the urge here to talk politics, and it makes sense, because this is a human story and it's a political story. We'll be back in just a moment. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) JENNINGS As we said at the beginning, it's 15 years this week since America retreated from Indochina. All this talk, Stan Cloud, about Cambodia now, and Vietnam now, why is now a critical time, or is it? STANLEY CLOUD, "TIME" WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF Oh, I think it is. I think it's been a critical time for some time, you know. Cambodia by itself has suffered as much, if not more, than any nation on the face of the Earth in the last 20 years. Vietnam is trying to recover from the effects of the war and the economic isolation that has been imposed on it for several years. I think the US, along with other countries, have treated Cambodia for a long time as a sideshow, a country that we used to further our policy ends, sometimes rightly, sometimes wrongly, but with little regard for what went on inside that country, and I think it's time that changed. JENNINGS Policy. Ambassador Thomas Pickering, longtime, highly regarded, regarded as a brilliant American diplomat, served in Central America and the Middle East, never served in the Far East, am I correct, sir? AMB THOMAS PICKERING, US REPRESENTATIVE TO THE UNITED NATIONS That's correct. JENNINGS Or Indochina, but is now America's ambassador to the United Nations, and therefore has to explain the Bush administration's policy to the rest of the world. Would you mind explaining to Dith Pran what our policy is? AMB PICKERING I'd like to explain it to everybody, Peter, because I rarely have ever said that I'm appalled by a program, but I'm certainly appalled by what you presented tonight in three specifics. First, the question of the United States support for the Khmer Rouge. It doesn't exist. We have no relations, no contact and no support, period. It is very clear, the Congress sits here and watches us on a daily basis. If there were any, I'm sure you'd hear from our congressional friends. Secondly - JENNINGS Can I stick on that - AMB PICKERING with respect to the non - Communist resistance - JENNINGS can I stick on the one point - can I deal with one point at a time? AMB PICKERING - when I'm finished, please. JENNINGS All right. AMB PICKERING Secondly, with respect to the non - Communist resistance, we provide no lethal aid to the non - Communist resistance. The author of the legislation is here. Third, with respect to your conclusion that we're behind the wave of history in our policy, we have broken our behinds for the last year to get negotiations going in the United Nations, among the permanent five members of the Security Council and everywhere else that you can think of. The next meeting will take place here in New York in May, at the end of May. But these are negotiations designed to do three things. First, give the Cambodian people the opportunity through elections to choose their own future government. Second, to make sure that the Vietnamese get out and stay out in the context of a peace settlement. And third, and most important, the point you've been drumming on here tonight, to make certain the Khmer Rouge never return to a position where they can hold power or dominate the situation. It's a tough problem, but we are certainly working on it. We haven't left it behind, and we are certainly not supporting the Khmer Rouge. JOHN MCAULIFF, DIRECTOR, US - INDOCHINA RECONCILIATION PROJECT Mr Ambassador, I think in fact, effectively we have supported, we've helped recreate the Khmer Rouge since 1979. Mr Brzezinski claims with some pride that he helped bring about a marriage of Thailand and China to provide a new home, a restoration of the Khmer Rouge. JENNINGS Mr McAuliff, before you go any further, can I just introduce you? John McAuliff is the executive director of the United States Indochina Reconciliation Project. He believes that the United States and Vietnam and Cambodia should have dialogue, at the very least, and reconciliation. Please continue, sir. MR MCAULIFF We've given the Khmer Rouge the one thing that they needed, which was legitimacy. We brought about a marriage between the Sihanoukists and the Sun Sen group, being the - JENNINGS Sun Sen - can we - non - Communist forces, right? MR MCAULIFF Non - Communist resistance. That they were very reluctant to have, but the United States and China were the powers that pushed them into that marriage. Every year we voted to seat a government in the United Nations which is not a government, it doesn't meet any of the normal criteria for representation in the United Nations, and everyone who follows it closely knows that the Khmer Rouge are the dominant factor in that. And, as I recall, legally are the residual holders of the UN seat, should that coalition break up. And every year we have effectively supported their continuing to hold that seat. JENNINGS Is this the basis on which you argue that the United States does have a relationship with the Khmer Rouge? MR MCAULIFF I would not say the US has a relationship. We're very proper in that sense. But we have effectively politically given them what they essentially needed, which was a way to reenter the political arena, to continue to get arms supplies from China. I also think it's a shell game, that your documentary does an excellent job of pinpointing, on are we supplying lethal aid? No, we're not supplying lethal aid that's appropriated by Washington, but on the other hand, our closest ally in the region, Singapore, is providing lethal aid, and as you pointed out, the US is sitting on the committee, or observing and present at the meetings of the committee which decides how that lethal aid is going to be used. So whether - whichever pocket it's coming out of, or whether we're doing it directly or indirectly, we clearly are a major factor in the lethal aid going to the combat right now in Cambodia. JENNINGS Ambassador? AMB PICKERING Let me address these three points. First, the Brzezinski - Carter administration, the assistant secretary who dealt with that issue is standing here. I am talking about the current situation, and it's an important distinction that you want to be very clear. Secondly, the question of the seat is extremely important. The seat, in our view, should remain in the former government not to reward the Vietnamese who invaded Cambodia at that time and who are not, in our view, have not been a superior claimant. And the important point is, that even the Vietnamese and the Soviets have never voted against this particular approach in the United Nation's General Assembly. You'll have to ask them why. I don't understand it, but nevertheless, it is a firm and big majority of the General Assembly that has continued to provide this, and I'm delighted to hear John say we don't provide lethal aid - JENNINGS But Prince Sihanouk, the leader of the coalition, Ambassador Pickering - AMB PICKERING - the question of the - JENNINGS - said we do provide aid. Now, who are we to believe? AMB PICKERING - Prince Sihanouk obviously misspoke himself in this particular regard, because we - JENNINGS And did Richard Solomon, the assistant secretary, misspeak himself when he said we provided lethal aid? AMB PICKERING - he said on your screen of course that he misspoke himself. But would you ask our congressional watchdogs if you don't believe me on the case? Finally, the Khmer Rouge exist. They have 35,000 to 40,000 armed troops. They are a factor in this particular equation because the other Cambodian parties, including the PRK, consider them a factor. JENNINGS PRK, the government in Phnom Penh. AMB PICKERING The present Hun Sen regime. MR MCAULIFF Because we created them as a factor. Rep STEPHEN SOLARZ, (D), Chairman, House Subcommittee on ASIAN/PACIFIC AFFAIRS Peter, can I - JENNINGS Congressman Stephen Solarz, who is the chairman of the House Subcommittee on Pacific and Asian Affairs, Democrat of New York. And can I just add one thing by way of background? Was first alerted to the Cambodian thing, your explanation, because you thought there was a second Holocaust in the making? REP SOLARZ That's right, Peter. I went there in 1975, to the Thai border, and was brought to the camps which then existed in the wake of the Khmer Rouge takeover in Phnom Penh, and found out for the first time about the unfolding genocide which was taking place in Cambodia. I had hoped, and I had prayed, after the last Holocaust in this century, the destruction of European Jewry, that nothing like that would ever happen again. And then I found out, to my absolute horror, that it was happening again, and the world didn't know about it and didn't seem to care about it. But let me, if I might, say a word or two about this question of whether we're providing lethal assistance to the Khmer Rouge, which was alleged in the course of your documentary, and also to the non - Communist resistance forces. Peter, I've spent the last 15 years of my life trying to shape an American foreign policy which would prevent the Khmer Rouge from returning to power in Cambodia. I wrote the law which makes it illegal to provide assistance which in any way, directly or indirectly, strengthens the Khmer Rouge. I haven't been shy about criticizing the Bush administration. Perhaps, next to Jesse Helms, there was nobody who was more vocal in his criticism of the Bush administration's policy toward China in the wake of the massacre in Tiananmen Square than I was. So if I thought for a moment there was a shred of truth to the allegation that we are providing assistance directly or indirectly to the Khmer Rouge, let me assure you, I would have blown it out of the water. I would have held public hearings. I would have subpoenaed witnesses. I would have put them under oath. But I've looked into it, not just in my capacity as chairman of the Subcommittee on Asian and Pacific Affairs, but also as a member of the Intelligence Committee, which has jurisdiction over our covert operations. JENNINGS Can I stop you - REP SOLARZ I can tell you, so far as I know, that there is no truth to this whatsoever, and if you have the evidence, or if anybody else has the evidence, if you know the names of people who are involved, let me know, because I'll haul them before my committee and expose them. JENNINGS - may I give you a name and ask you to think about it for one second? REP SOLARZ Sure. JENNINGS General Sakh, the commander of the non - Communist forces in Cambodia, who said in this broadcast that he got military supplies and went to the Cambodian working group at the American embassy in Bangkok. Just think about it for one second, and we'll come right back. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) JENNINGS The question on the table is whether or not the United States provides lethal aid - arms and ammunition - to the non - Communist resistance, as it's called, in Cambodia. And Congressman Solarz asked me if I knew anybody who said so. I can only give you - I can give you two names, to begin with. Prince Sihanouk says it to us, in our hour - long broadcast, and he's regarded, I think, as America's principal character in Cambodia. And General Sakh Satucsan, who is the commander of one of the principal organizations in the non - Communist resistance not only says to us he gets arms from the United States, but tells us where he goes to ask for them, which is to the Cambodian working group at the United States embassy in Bangkok. REP SOLARZ Peter, General Sakh and Prince Sihanouk are simply wrong. They may be getting arms from China, they may be getting arms from Singapore - JENNINGS Why would they say they're getting it from the United States? REP SOLARZ - they may be getting arms from other countries, but as a member of the intelligence committee who has looked into this matter, I can tell you that it's simply not true, and if I thought it were true, I would have public hearings to expose it, because I wrote the law which makes it illegal to provide any assistance to the Khmer Rouge. JENNINGS Can I assume, Congressman, that now that two of America's major players in Cambodia have said this publicly, you'll hold hearings? REP SOLARZ If you can give me the names - if you can give me the names of any Americans who are alleged to know about this, who I can bring before my committee, I'll have the hearing. JENNINGS General Sakh is an American citizen, as you know. REP SOLARZ Peter - JENNINGS I mean, I don't know where to go with you on this, I really don't. REP SOLARZ - yeah, Peter, I can only tell you that I've had hearings over the years. We've asked these questions in both open session and in closed session, and I can tell you that it simply isn't true. Now, unless there's some kind of monstrous conspiracy going on here, a massive cover - up - BOBBY MULLER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, VIETNAM VETERANS OF AMERICA FOUNDATION The monstrous conspiracy is a cover - up of the truth - REP SOLARZ - within - MR MULLER - that's the monstrous conspiracy here. REP SOLARZ - the United States - MR MULLER I recommend anybody who doubts the veracity of what Mr Jennings is saying, get a copy of the documentary that just aired tonight. It's the best documentary that network television in this country has aired in who knows how many years. JENNINGS May I - MR MULLER It portrays you, it portrays Pickering and it portrays the United States government as being shameful in supporting the worse genocidal regime since Hitler. And you, my friend, have been the leading proponent in the Congress pressing to introduce more lethal aid into the environment, and you profess to be so sensitive to the Holocaust and genocide should be leading the charge in the other direction. Shame on you, Mr Congressman. JENNINGS - may I introduce our speaker? No, I don't mean to make light of that at all. His name is Bobby Muller. He's the executive director of the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation, and though you may not be able to see it very easily, he's sitting in a wheelchair, having paid clearly a very high price for his participation in Vietnam. Why are you so upset, Mr Muller? MR MULLER I'm upset to see our elected representative, our appointed ambassador, come before the American public, deceive them, purposely lie, misrepresent the situation, and sit there - these guys have absolutely no shame. Anybody who is familiar with southeast Asia, Indochina, knows that they're putting out a lie. Anybody who doubts, you know, what can be said here in these representations, ought to get the documentary that you put together, that was aired tonight on ABC. I know not everybody in the viewing audience got to see that documentary, but it's an hourlong analysis of the situation. We're not going to get an hourlong analysis and truthful representation in this give - and - take. Get that documentary. JENNINGS Well, we can - MR MULLER It ought to be required viewing in schools in America. JENNINGS - we can - Mr Muller, we can try to have a debate here, by all means, and please, let's not just rely on the documentary. Ken Adelman is a nationally syndicated columnist. He is a former deputy representative to the United Nations and a former director of the Arms Control Agency. Mr Adelman, you wanted to get in? KENNETH ADELMAN, FORMER DIRECTOR, ARMS CONTROL & DISARMAMENT AGENCY Yes, I just think that the outrage we feel about the Khmer Rouge and any involvement with the Khmer Rouge and our friend here felt, is absolutely right. But I think the facts are absolutely wrong. What the facts have been is that the United States government, in several administrations, has been trying to do everything it can to keep the Khmer Rouge out of power, not to back them. We do not - MR MULLER How can you say that, Mr Adelman? They created the Khmer Rouge. After the Vietnamese went into Cambodia and drove them out, who was it but the United States, with Holbrooke's administration, and Brzezinski, that fed them, that clothed them, that went to China, went to Thailand and said, "Hey guys, resuscitate the Khmer Rouge, they're going to be our tool to continue our war against Vietnam". Now, that's fact. JENNINGS Mr Holbrooke, Mr Holbrooke - let's hear I beg your pardon, Mr Muller, let's hear from Mr Adelman and then let's hear from Mr Holbrooke. MR ADELMAN - yeah. The fact is that the Khmer Rouge came to power in 1975 when the Vietnamese won, the North Vietnamese won in Vietnam, and they came at the same time. The Vietnamese were very close to the Khmer Rouge. The Vietnamese helped put the Khmer Rouge in power, and a lot of the Khmer Rouge - bashing today that I think everybody in the room shares is to say it's better to go with the Vietnamese - installed government in Phnom Penh right now. And that doesn't make any sense. These guns running that government were Khmer Rouge people, leaders, at the height of the atrocities. They didn't get out for a good number of years later. MR MULLER That's not true. MR ADELMAN So I think that the point to be made is not let's bash the Khmer Rouge, everybody wants to bash the Khmer Rouge - MR MULLER That is the point to be made. MR ADELMAN - and let's keep them out of power. Everybody wants to keep them out of power. But the fact is, is it true or is it not true that the United States government is trying to do that? I'm not in the administration, but I believe at everything in my bones that the United States government is doing everything possible to keep the Khmer Rouge out of power. JENNINGS Let's come at that question specifically. What is the United States doing to prevent the Khmer Rouge from making a comeback? Mr Holbrooke - Richard Holbrooke, presently one of the managing directors for Shearson Lehman Hutton, served in Vietnam for three years as a diplomatic officer, former assistant secretary of state for Pacific and Asian affairs - I hope I have it right. Mr Holbrooke, in the Carter administration, when many people believe this policy of benignly, at least, supporting the Khmer Rouge was born, are the accusations about this creation of the Khmer Rouge accurate, from your point of view? RICHARD HOLBROOKE, FORMER ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE I don't agree with Mr Muller's characterization of the origin of the Khmer Rouge, but I want to get off that point and stress the central thesis of your program, which is incredibly important. You have stated in the program that the United States is, in effect, supporting the Khmer Rouge and then there have been some very complicated specifics, lethal aid, the seat in the UN, and so forth. I know the people on my left very well, they're all friends of mine, Senator McCain, Tom Pickering, Steve Solarz, Bob Kerrey in Washington. And I don't believe for a minute that any of them want to help the Khmer Rouge have any part of the power in Phnom Penh, nor does Dick Solomon. I think, in fairness to Dick, he did misspeak. On the other hand, I have very serious problems with the policy as it's going forward. Steve Solarz and I have had long discussions on that. JENNINGS Be more specific, Mr Holbrooke. What do you mean, you have serious problems with the policy? MR HOLBROOKE Because - I don't think that the issue - we're not going to resolve tonight whether Sihanouk was telling the truth, or engaged in one of his fantasies. I meam, he's a man who's clowned his way through history on the one hand, and on the other hand has embodied his nation's state. He's a very complicated figure, as you and Stan - JENNINGS Do you believe the United States should have anything to do with the Khmer Rouge? MR HOLBROOKE Absolutely not, and that is my problem with the current policy. JENNINGS What is the United States doing, in your view - MR HOLBROOKE Peter, let me state what I have - JENNINGS - in your view, what is the United States, in your view, doing - MR HOLBROOKE - that is wrong. JENNINGS - to inhibit the Khmer Rouge. MR HOLBROOKE Let me answer your question by reversing it. Why do I, having said that I believe in the good faith and integrity of my friends, also have a disagreement with part of the policy? It is precisely for the following reason. The coalition of Sun Sen, Sihanouk and the Khmer Rouge - JENNINGS Let's call it non - Communist and Khmer Rouge, if you don't mind. MR HOLBROOKE - okay. The non - Communists and the Khmer Rouge are allied. We don't - I don't think we give lethal aid to the Khmer Rouge, but we give the rest of the assistance to the non - Communist resistance. In 1979, Deng Xiaoping proposed that he would supply the Khmer Rouge with their - what they needed, and the United States could help through Thailand and the others. Now, at this point, Sihanouk, in my view, is fronting for the Khmer Rouge, for Pol Pot. Even though his own children were killed in the Holocaust which Steve Solarz accurately described, the fact is, he wants to play on center stage once more. He can only do it with the Khmer Rouge backing him. And my problem with the policy is that inadvertently, and against their own objectives, I think the policy we're following allows the Khmer Rouge to walk unchallenged from the border where they are now, with Susan Walker's camps, to Phnom Penh instead of being isolated. Therefore, Peter - JENNINGS Stan Cloud. MR CLOUD Isn't it fair to say that the bedrock of this policy, what makes it so complicated for a succession, now, of US administrations, but the bedrock of this policy is that we were more opposed to the Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia in 1979 than we were to the Khmer Rouge. That remains the basic problem of our policy. MR HOLBROOKE Stan, if you're asking me to explain what happened in '79, give me a minute and I'll be very clear - MR CLOUD You were there. JENNINGS No, I don't want you to explain, Sam, and I don't want you to answer something very simple. Just - let me start with Senator John McCain. Senator McCain, former Vietnam fighter pilot, prisoner of the North Vietnamese for five and a half years, senator from Arizona, do you know what we're doing to inhibit the Khmer Rouge? Do you know what we're doing to undermine their influence? SEN JOHN MCCAIN, (R), ARIZONA I know that we are doing everything we can in the way of negotiations. Tom Pickering mentioned past attempts. The Australians have been involved, every nation that I know of, practically, in the western world has attempted to bring this unhappy situation and tragic situation to some kind of conclusion. And let me point out, Peter, that this situation, strange as it may sound, is not unlike Lebanon, in that there are outside forces here, mainly - primarily the Chinese and the Vietnamese, and by the way, in your program the word Soviet Union was never mentioned once. They have supported the Vietnamese to an incredible degree in their takeover of that nation. MR HOLBROOKE But they're cutting way back, Senator. SEN MCCAIN And I'm very grateful for that. But the fact is, for years and years they'd never have gotten where they were without Soviet help to the Vietnamese and to - (crosstalk) - $350 million bucks in last year. I guess my point is that I think that this nation - and I think that every western nation - recognizes that this situation is incredibly tragic, and we have to prevail not just on Khmer Rouge or non - Communist or Communist forces within Vietnam, but we have to prevail on the Thais, the Chinese, the Vietnamese and the Soviet Union to try and get this thing settled, otherwise we're going to end up with a situation very much like Beirut. JENNINGS When we come back, we'll try to figure out whether or not there is a solution that some people around here have for Cambodia. (The Khmer Rouge ruled Cambodia from 1975 to 1978. During that time, it's estimated up to 2 million Cambodians died, out of a population of 7.5 million.) (COMMERCIAL BREAK) JENNINGS Is it complicated or is it simple? We're in persuit of simple answers, perhaps they're not always aimple answers but let's try again. Ambassador Pickering, specifically, in a sentence or two, if it's possible, what are we doing to inhibit the Khmer Rouge? What are we doing to make life really, truly difficult for them? AMB PICKERING It's complicated. Let me try to simplify it. There are really two options, peace or war. If war continues, the best minds tell me the Khmer Rouge will gain at the expense of the other parties. If there is peace, and it is configured in a proper way, the Khmer Rouge will not gain. They will lose. The proper way is elections. I don't know anybody who, in their right minds, believes that if elections are actually achieved in Cambodia, with the help of the UN, that Cambodians will vote the Khmer Rouge into power. That is certainly our view of the way the process will proceed. That is what motivates all of the parties to push ahead in this effort to negotiate elections. JENNINGS Can I stop you there? Senator Kerrey in Washington, is that the way it looks on the ground in Cambodia? SEN KERREY Well, first of all, I mean, I would point out that I think the United States is the only government that really cares about the Cambodian people. I don't believe the Vietnamese do, I don't believe the Chinese do, and I don't believe the Soviets do. And the most important thing for us, if we're going to engage, as I think we should, is to commit ourselves long - term. I mean, I first of all think we should vacate the seat in the United Nations, because we do legitimize the Khmer Rouge as long as we continue to recognize the coalition that includes them. It's not going to be simple on the ground. I mean, if we're going to radically democratize that society, as I think we should have as a long - term objective, it may take 20 or 25 years for us to do it. JENNINGS Senator, why should the United States radically democratize Cambodia? Didn't we try that once in Vietnam? SEN KERREY Well, no, we didn't try that once in Vietnam. Now we've got a much different situation, now we've got the possibility, I think, of participating in the development of a coalition government that all the parties seem to want. They disagree on exactly how to accomplish it, but they all seem to want it. And I mean, I believe if we take the first step of vacating the seat at the United Nations, and if we commit ourselves to the long - term, it seems to me that we can put into place a mechanism whereby the United States can help achieve long - term democracy for these people. JENNINGS Congressman Solarz, please keep it simple. What do we do to inhibit the Khmer Rouge? REP SOLARZ What we do, Peter, is to seek, as we are, a political settlement of the Cambodian conflict that will bring the fighting to an end, bring a termination of all outside assistance, and make possible an internationally supervised free and fair election, on the grounds that the best way to prevent the Khmer Rouge from battling their way back to power in Phnom Penh, is to shift the struggle for power in Cambodia from the battlefield to the ballot box. Australia, as you may know, has proposed a solution which would require the UN to come into the country and to assume supervisory responsibility for the administration of Cambodia between a cease - fire and the holding of an internationally supervised free and fair election. MR CLOUD Congressman, I have read that plan, and it is the most complicated plan on the face of the earth, any element of which the odds are a thousand to one against - REP SOLARZ Do you have a better idea? Mr Cloud, let's hear it. MR CLOUD I do have a better idea, but that's not the point. I'm not a diplomat. LIV ULLMANN, ACTRESS / HUMAN RIGHTS ACTIVIST You know, I think I have to say something, because there have been so many men talking, and you are playing war games. And while we are talking here, children are victims in this male ritual, which is no more played in private battlefields, it's played where we are battlefields, where children are battlefields. While we are talking now and looking for these politicians' solutions and politicians bespeaking themselves, children are not getting health care, children are victims of war, children are losing their feet because they are walking on mines, children are denied health care and humanitarian aid inside Cambodia, inside of Vietnam. Children are paying the debt for all your short - term solutions. We say, in my country, the emperor is without clothes. I see a lot of naked men around here. REP SOLARZ Ms Ullmann, we all want to save the children of Cambodia. JENNINGS Then, Congressman - MS ULLMANN So why don't you give humanitarian aid inside of Cambodia? JENNINGS - why don't we allow medical supplies - why don't we allow American relief agencies in Cambodia to spend American money to buy medical supplies? REP SOLARZ I think we should. I have absolutely no problem with that. I think it would be a good idea. But I'll tell you this, Peter, if we want to save future generations of Cambodian children from either the horrors of a return of the Khmer Rouge or a future of endless internecine conflict, we've got to find a way to bring the fighting to an end, and the only way to do that is through a political settlement. That's why this Australian initiative, however complicated it may be, is the last best hope for peace in Cambodia. JENNINGS Let - REP SOLARZ And if it fails - MS ULLMANN But children cannot be paying the debt while you take your time to do this. JENNINGS - Dith Pran. MR PRAN Peter, can we bring our government to become a mediator between the east fighting the east? Right now, in Cambodia, we're trapped between the Soviet bloc and the China's bloc. Can we bring our government to become in the middle, and can we ask our government to become a real peacemaker, don't talk about weapons, and can we ask our government to support the Thai government that proposed to have a cease - fire and to have a neutral side for the refugees? I think in this way we can save a lot of life of the Cambodian people, if it can bring our government that we all feel that is the hate of the world, that we can make the world from war to peace, from peace to war. Everybody knows, if our government stands in the middle and tries to say to the Soviet Union, stop providing weapons into Cambodia, and tell the Chinese, stop supplying weapon, if you're rich, bring medical supplies, let's bring rice, bring gasoline, bring education, bring all things that - that's only my point, that I want to see our government stay neutral instead of talking about who brings weapon into who, Chinese bring to the Khmer Rouge, our government try to bring to the non - Communist, and the Soviets and the Vietnamese try to bring to Hun Sen All of them have to stop. I want to hear the Cambodian people, the Cambodian politicians, say let's stop fighting for a while. I never heard that story in my country, in my lifetime. Always war, war. Twenty years, we've insuffered, and we're so grateful to the world that last year and this year it seemed like more attention to my country. And I'm glad that ABC keep putting up to inform the world that the plight of Cambodian people, and the Cambodian people need help, need peace. JENNINGS The thing I hear from you is that you want to enlarge this conversation, so let me try to enlarge it with our panel, and see whether or not I can get an answer to a couple of questions. Should we have any relation with the Khmer Rouge, and do we have to deal with Vietnam in order to get a settlement in Cambodia? Frankie FitzGerald, author during the Vietnam war of Fire in the Lake, now a writer for The New Yorker magazine. What do you think? FRANCES FITZGERALD, AUTHOR I hope this UN initiative works. I don't know how promising it is; I hope it works. If it doesn't work, what do we do then? Our problem is that we have been behind the coalition government, whose strongest force is the Khmer Rouge, for practically a decade now. Can we change our position? Can we, if this UN initiative fails, turn around and start over and say we were wrong? We cannot leave the Soviets and the Vietnamese to save Cambodia from the Khmer Rouge. We have to help. JENNINGS Do you have any difficulty with your government having any relationship with the Khmer Rouge at all? MS FITZGERALD Of course. JENNINGS Should it be severed? MS FITZGERALD They say there's no - there is no immediate relationship, and I believe them. But - it's just effectively that's the case, because we are supporting the coalition, of which the Khmer Rouge is the strongest member. And when these negotiations began a year or more ago, our secretary of state said, "Well, if Sihanouk says that the Khmer Rouge should be part of a quadropartite government, that's fine with us". Somehow we are allowing Sihanouk, who has, against his will, made a Faustian bargain with the Khmer Rouge, to dictate our policy. I don't think we can do that anymore. MR ADELMAN But then you would rather have a policy that supports the Vietnamese. MS FITZGERALD Absolutely. MR ADELMAN Okay, but then you are saying a policy of (A), the Vietnamese, who invaded Cambodia, (B), the Cambodian leaders who were put in place by the Vietnamese, who were members of the Khmer Rouge during the height of the launching of the genocide. That doesn't make much sense. MS FITZGERALD I think you forget, though, why the Vietnamese went into Cambodia in the first place. It was because the Pol Pot forces invaded Vietnam. MR ADELMAN Well, they had put the Khmer Rouge in place, they had encouraged them to take power (crosstalk). MS FITZGERALD They then went to war. MR ADELMAN - the Chinese. I'm not defending the Chinese, I think the Chinese are bad, too. MR HOLBROOKE Ken, your facts are wrong. Your facts are just wrong on that. MR ADELMAN No, that is not true. MR HOLBROOKE No, John is correct. Senator Kerrey made a point - JENNINGS What do you mean, "John is right"? You're talking about John McAuliff? MR ADELMAN I said the Chinese helped, too. I said that. MR HOLBROOKE Peter, Senator Kerrey made a very important point we ought to go back to. We all want the UN plan to succeed, and we ought to acknowledge Congressman Solarz's role in formulating it. JENNINGS Gosh, you're polite, Mr Holbrooke, to everybody. MR HOLBROOKE If it fails, however, and even before it fails, we ought to do what Senator Kerrey suggested. The time has come to stop supporting the Pol Pot - Khmer Rouge coalition group in the UN The seat ought to be vacated as a way of detaching ourselves. You've asked over and over again tonight what can we do about the Khmer Rouge. That is the one point of our policy - and Stan has already pointed out that I was involved in it at one time and therefore all the more reason that I say to you tonight that we ought to change it. JENNINGS Think that's a good idea, Ambassador Pickering? Ambassador Pickering, how about leaving the seat at the United Nations vacant? Who would you talk to? AMB PICKERING There would be, first, no representation for Sihanouk or Sun Sen Secondly, the important thing about the seat is, that the seat is not going to change the negotiations. The seat will reflect the endpoint of negotiations. If the negotiations produce a supreme national council, it is very likely that that supreme national council will take the seat. If the negotiations produce a new government, certainly the new government will take the seat. MR HOLBROOKE Then leave it vacant until that happens, Tom. It semi - legitimizes the Khmer Rouge now. MR CLOUD Why should the government in Phnom Penh agree to a UN plan when a member of the UN, according to our own policy, is a coalition which includes the Khmer Rouge? It doesn't make sense. Why should Hun Sen go along with that? REP SOLARZ I'll tell you exactly why, Mr Cloud, because it's been made very clear to Mr Hun Sen that in the context of a political settlement which would provide a major role for the UN in the administration of Cambodia as a prelude to an election, that the problem of the seat at the UN would be resolved in a manner which would be satisfactory to him, either by leaving the seat vacant, or by giving Hun Sen the right to participate in the seat itself. So that's quite clear - JENNINGS Could I ask a very simple little question about this question of administering Cambodia? Susan Walker, seen from the ground, could the United Nations come into Cambodia and administer the country? MS WALKER Oh, I think it will be very difficuLt JENNINGS What - why? MS WALKER Well, just the infrastructure - there is no infrastructure. But I think plans are being discussed and made. What I would like to come back to, actually, is, it's very hard for me to sit here and listen to all the political discussions going on when I've just come from Thailand and the border where I see the results of this ongoing conflict. There are people suffering every day, amputees as the result of land mines that they step on every day, on both sides of the border. And the whole question of what can we do to pre - what is the US doing to prevent a return to power of the Khmer Rouge? I'm convinced that the US government does not want the Khmer Rouge to come back in power. I mean, no one wants the Khmer Rouge to come back in power. But the reality is, by voting for them in the United Nations - and I would guess that most average Americans do not know that the United States votes for the Khmer Rouge. Granted, it's part of a coalition, but we still vote for the Khmer Rouge in the United Nations. And that gives them a moral legitimacy to continue their games. And my great fear is, while all these political discussions are going on, the Khmer Rouge are going to push people back forcibly into Cambodia, and it will be too late by the time there's a solution. JENNINGS Can you answer a question for me that I couldn't get - with respect, gentlemen - an answer from the politicians on. What specifically does the United States do in the region to inhibit the Khmer Rouge? MS WALKER To inhibit? Well, I don't know if aid is going directly to the Khmer Rouge or not. I mean, it's stated that it's not. I mean, aid goes to the non - Communist resistance. But to inhibit, I think one of the first steps is to stop voting for them in the United Nations. I don't know of specific steps that are being taken except, of course, to pursue political negotiations to bring the war to an end. AMB PICKERING But let me make clear, there are no votes in the United Nations for the Khmer Rouge. JENNINGS Can I go to a - AMB PICKERING There was a vote years ago to seat them. That vote has never been challenged, but there are no regular votes by the United States in the United Nations for the Khmer Rouge. Secondly, I think it's a good idea for you to come up with some ideas - MS WALKER That's procedural, Mr Ambassador. TOM HAYDEN, (D), CALIFORNIA STATE ASSEMBLYMAN What are you talking about? JENNINGS Mr Tom Hayden, California assemblyman, a symbol for many in America of what was wrong in America at the time of the Vietnam war. I don't know how else to introduce you except in an obvious way, Mr Hayden. MR HAYDEN I don't understand this - I came all the way from Los Angeles, and I don't mean to make light of what is a serious discussion about a tragedy, but I feel, in the words of Yogi Berra, that "This is deja vu all over again". During the Vietnam war, we had the official policymakers telling us, as the bombs dropped and as the war expanded, that the war was winding down or there would be no wider war. And we're caught again in this discussion about whether we support the Khmer Rouge. Well, no one in their right mind is going to say that we officially do. Yet there's some relationship there, it's clear. And the strange thing to me, having watched this for 30 years, is that as I recall as a young man the rationale for our entry into that region with our troops was to stop the expansion of Chinese Communism. Then sometime later, a decade or so, we opened diplomatic relationships with China. That was seen as a counterweight to stopping the Soviet Union. As part of that arrangement, we became implicated with the Khmer Rouge because they were China's allies in Cambodia. Now, the original rationale having been shattered, we find ourselves in partnership with the people that we were there to stop, the Chinese. And, with what's happening in the Soviet Union and eastern Europe, the argument that we need to support China and the Khmer Rouge to stop Soviet agressiveness makes no sense. Where are we? We don't have a policy. A policy ought to start with some principle, we ought to go back to square one. And I think those who are saying that at the very least, the policy should prohibit our being involved in any way with promoting conditions that keep the genocidal Khmer Rouge alive, that policy is bankrupt. We've got to find a different policy. And if everybody agrees on that, the discussion now should be, how can we disarm and dismantle the Khmer Rouge? JENNINGS One of the other things we want to discuss is whether or not the United States should have a reconciliation with Vietnam. We'll be back in just a moment. (From 1969 to 1973 the US flew more than 16,000 bombing missions over Cambodia, dropping nearly 500,000 tons of bombs.) (COMMERCIAL BREAK) ANNOUNCER The ABC News / Time Forum, Beyond Vietnam, continues. Once again, Peter Jennings. JENNINGS In those immortal words of Yogi Berra, "deja vu all over again". In a recent poll, 63 percent of American high school seniors could not locate southeast Asia on a map. Sixty - eight percent of adults could not correctly identify Vietnam. Ten years after Vietnam, this is 15, 48 percent of Americans between the ages of 18 and 30 didn't know whether we were fighting for the north or for the south. Let's give you a brief impressionistic glance of what was happening 15 years ago this week. (15 Years Ago) WOLF LEHMANN, DEPUTY CHIEF OF MISSION, US EMBASSY, SAIGON (1973 - 1975) On that day, we were largely engaged in documenting and busing evacuees, primarily Vietnamese but also remaining Americans. CHERIE CLARK, OVERSEAS ADOPTION DIRECTOR (1972 - 1975) We received a telephone call from the US Embassy saying that indeed, we would be leaving that day, and we began organizing the children. We had about 150 orphans with us at that time. I have these memories of babies everywhere, the floor was just full of them. DIRCK HALSTEAD, PHOTOGRAPHER (1975) There was an entire block around the central market which had been burned down, and people were wandering around and smoke was rising, and you certainly got the sense that the war had finally come to Saigon. MARK GARDINER, ARMY WARRANT OFFICER (1972 - 1975) The last four days, almost the entire time was spent in the helicopters. Things were happening very rapidly, and as the days got nearer, it got worse. KEN KASHIWAHARA, ABC NEWS, VIETNAM (1975) The entire country of South Vietnam was in panic. The North Vietnamese and the Viet Cong had systematically marched southward without much resistance, and they were literally on Saigon's doorstep. MR LEHMANN Things came, of course, to a head, and the North Vietnamese aircraft attacked the flight line at the Tonsunhut Airport. We could no longer, at that point, continue the airlift out of the airport with fixed - wing aircraft, because it was too risky. The remaining evacuation went on from the embassy compound in downtown Saigon. JIM LAURIE, NBC NEWS VIETNAM (1975) The helicopters came in. People boarded - Vietnamese, Americans, journalists, diplomats. Anybody that could get out were just simply hysterically getting out. It was a very, very chaotic time. MR LEHMANN Tension throughout the city palpably increased. You could almost feel it physically. So by the morning, or early morning, of April 29th, the embassy was surrounded by crowds. MS CLARK And there was this feeling that if they could somehow touch us or get close to us that they could get out of that panic situation. MAX CLELAND, ARMY CAPTAIN (1967 - 1968) Looking back, you know, we never made the ultimate decision about Vietnam. We were always on the strategic defensive, never on the strategic offensive. And you don't win wars, or win military engagements, just by being on the defensive. MR GARDINER You know, we should have gone in there and six months, to a year, ended - have done what should have been done, and pulled out of there and left. MR HALSTEAD It changed my ideas about how war should be fought, because it was - it changed all the good guys and bad guys perspectives, all those things you thought we stood for, we really didn't. MR CLELAND It was - it was a very tough moment for me, because I left behind a part of myself, and part of my life in Vietnam".April is the cruelest month," and for me it was, in terms of Vietnam. I was wounded April 8th, and of course Cambodia fell in late April. Those were the final days of Saigon and South Vietnam. MR HALSTEAD A lot of this you think about in your dreams at night. And the faces come back to haunt you. MR GARDINER As we were pulling away, you could just see the faces of those people that knew that they were not going to get a ride out. MR LEHMANN We left behind 18 million people, and that's the bottom line, and sadness, I think, for our country, for the United States, that after having invested 50,000 lives and a lot of treasure and a lot of effort, that things had to end this way. JENNINGS America's most famous soldier in Vietnam, commander of all Vietnam combat forces between 1964 and '68, Army chief of staff from 1968 to 1972. Welcome, General Westmoreland. Do you think it's time to make our ultimate peace with Vietnam, reconcile with them, open up relations? GEN WILLIAM WESTMORELAND, FORMER COMMANDER, US COMBAT FORCES, VIETNAM I think not. Not until the situation has been resolved in Cambodia. And I think that should be an overriding criterion. JENNINGS So Vietnam and Cambodia are, in your mind, inextricably combined? GEN WESTMORELAND In the context of normalizing relations with Hanoi, yes. JENNINGS What do you mean by that, until the situation is resolved? GEN WESTMORELAND Well, the matter that we've been discussing for the last couple of hours, the situation that exists in Cambodia today, where Cambodia is dominated by Hanoi, by the Communist north. And at this time, the Communist forces very definitely have the upper hand. They've got 75,000 troops in Cambodia, whereas the non - Communist forces are only 25,000. JENNINGS I'm sorry, who has 75,000 troops in Vietnam? GEN WESTMORELAND The Communists. JENNINGS The Khmer Rouge, you mean? GEN WESTMORELAND The Khmer Rouge and the Communist government that they installed before they left. JENNINGS Roughly 40,000 Khmer Rouge, roughly 40,000 government troops. GEN WESTMORELAND No, about 75,000. Seventy - five thousand government troops and Khmer Rouge. And about 25,000 of the Sihanouk forces and the other non - Communist forces. JENNINGS Some people listening to you, General Westmoreland, say that you can't do one without the other. We'll say that in Cambodia we're still fighting the Vietnam war. Fair comment? GEN WESTMORELAND Well, it certainly is a carryover from the Vietnam war, but I think it's - there's a different purpose involved, and it's a different war in many respects. JENNINGS Erwin Parson, Marine medic in Vietnam, now a psychologist. You take veterans who are suffering from post - battle stress back to Vietnam to help them out of it. Do you think we should reconcile with Vietnam now? DR ERWIN PARSON, CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST I think at some time, Peter, we ought to reconcile with Vietnam. I think that as a nation, our healing is bound up in that relationship that has been destroyed and has never had a chance to be knitted back again. I was amazed by the response that I had, as a former soldier. I returned to Vietnam with 14 other men and women who fought there as well during the war, and to get a sense as to what it meant to go back there and to intermingle with the Vietnamese people. We thought that more important than going to Vietnam was the issue of immersing ourselves in a culture, meeting with people, talking with them, visiting orphanages, visiting hospitals, visiting the cities, the towns, the hamlets and so on, and immersing ourselves once again in the experience. JENNINGS So does it lead you to think, Dr Parson, that we should have a formal relationship with Vietnam again? DR PARSON I think we should, when the right time comes. JENNINGS I shouldn't say again, really. Can I just ask the same question of you, Mr Muller, as you are the executive director of the Vietnam Veterans Foundation? MR MULLER I think you're ahead of the game. The question should not be, "Is it time to establish normal diplomatic relations with Vietnam?" The question should be, "Isn't it time that we ended the war with Vietnam?" We are still fighting the Vietnam war. Make no mistake about it. The United States has purposely - and that's what the situation in Cambodia is an extension of - sought to economically and politically isolate and devastate, which they effectively have, Vietnam. The United States continues - JENNINGS General Westmoreland, what's your answer to that? MR MULLER - an absolute, total economic embargo against Vietnam. It blocks all developmental aid for Vietnam. It has supported the fighting in Cambodia and China with its surrogate, the Khmer Rouge, as we had under the Holbrooke - Brzezinski, that we talked about before, going to China and saying, "Hey, resuscitate your tool so we can continue to punish Vietnam". JENNINGS Do you think that's the case, General Westmoreland? GEN WESTMORELAND Well, certainly we would not have the situation in Cambodia today if it hadn't been for our commitment to Vietnam, and this is an aftermath of that. To solve the problem in Cambodia is going to take a lot of diplomacy. I'm afraid it's going to result in the death of many civilians, as has taken place during the course of this period. JENNINGS Some people have already taken the initiative, one of whom, in a small way, is Dr Donna Shalala, who's the chancellor of the University of Wisconsin at Madison. And among other things, you've established a sister relationship with two universities in Vietnam, one in Hanoi and one in Kan Tho. Why did you do that? DR DONNA SHALALA, CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN - MADISON Well, because we don't believe the children of Vietnam should suffer for one more day while the politics of southeast Asia is being sorted out. And because that's what universities do. We're helping the Vietnamese establish some rural health clinics. We believe that educational exchanges are the ways to begin to start some healing. And since we're not bound by this broader politics, we can talk to university people, have some educational exchanges and certainly help the children with health projects. JENNINGS Do you come to any conclusion about the overall relationship? DR SHALALA Oh, I think that we should start healing that relationship with Vietnam, and it's time to establish diplomatic relationships. JENNINGS Deborah Stone is the former editor of The Dartmouth Review, which was founded, I think, in 1980 to give young conservatives at Dartmouth a greater voice in public affairs than you thought you had at the time. Your opinion. DEBORAH STONE, FORMER EDITOR, "DARTMOUTH REVIEW" I think there are a lot of important questions that have to be answered before reconciliation, including questions about our POWs, questions about the Vietnam presence in Cambodia. And I think one of the most striking features is that the American press has failed to ask a lot of these questions and has often actually offered some misrepresentations. There have been questions about misrepresentations in this show, and reading Stanley Cloud's interview with the Vietnam foreign minister in the current issue of Time magazine, he lobs three softball questions to the foreign minister, to which he receives three bogus answers, in my opinion. JENNINGS You want to enumerate what you think they are? MS STONE Well, his first question - JENNINGS In general terMs What were your three "softball questions," Mr Cloud? MR CLOUD By the way, it was an hour interview, and those were three questions excerpted from it. The first question was, is there anything going on between Vietnam and the US that we don't know about? MS STONE That's right. And he answered that all of the - MR CLOUD He answered no. MS STONE He answered that all of the issues that were problems between the two countries had been resolved, which is absolutely ludicrous and wrong, because they haven't been resolved at all, and I was disappointed, actually, that you didn't challenge him further on that. I certainly would have, had I been there. MR CLOUD What would you have said? MS STONE I would have said, "What do you mean, the POW issue has been resolved?" It hasn't been resolved at all. There are thousands unaccounted for. What do you mean - MR CLOUD Does the US government agreement agree with you? (crosstalk) MR MULLER The POW issue is the biggest propaganda ploy that's ever been created. They're not there. Everybody knows that. The war has been over for 15 years. All of the intelligence assets of our government have been applied to try and get this POW issue. And they have said there is no evidence to support any Americans being held against their will in Vietnam. That's what the Reagan administration's final report to the Bush administration was. It's a propaganda issue, okay? Read the facts. JENNINGS Mr Muller, can I - Mr Muller, it may be in your view a propaganda issue, but heavens knows, it's an emotional issue, and there are Americans - MR MULLER That's what propaganda's about, it fuels the emotions. JENNINGS - and there are Americans we all know, there are Americans you know and I know who remain firmly convinced that there are Americans alive somewhere. MR MULLER It's the object of propaganda. Peter, read the reports. All the intelligence that the United States has been applied to trying to answer this question: are there Americans that are still in Vietnam. And they said no. JENNINGS I was going to - SEN MCCAIN I have to speak up here now. JENNINGS - precisely the man I want to speak up. SEN MCCAIN Jim Vessey, who was the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has been over there on several occasions - JENNINGS As head of a commission, right? SEN MCCAIN - as a head of a commission. He has said the Vietnamese have not fully cooperated with this final accounting. He says that there are numerous cases that have not been resolved. General Vessey is a man who has served this nation, and frankly, the overwhelming majority of those of us who served will not rest nor allow any real accommodation with the Vietnamese until that issue is resolved. They can resolve it tomorrow. JENNINGS A supplementary question. Am I correct or wrong that General Vessey also believes there are no men still missing in southeast Asia? SEN MCCAIN General Vessey has not arrived at that conclusion yet. He wants to see what the Vietnamese response to these outstanding cases. He certainly believes that it's difficuLt We all do, after 20 years or whatever it's been, more than that. But we can't abandon those families to just say, "I'm sorry, we've made this decision". (crosstalk) MR MULLER Senator, what you're saynin is inconstistant, it's not true - JENNINGS Mr Muller, here's the question I'd like to come back and discuss, as to whether or not this is the principal issue on which we should have no relationship with Vietnam, or whether, as some people suggest, it might be decoupled from the rest of our policy? We'll be right back. (47,355 American soldiers were killed in Vietnam. 10,796 died from sickness or accident. 2,303 are still listed as missing in action.) (COMMERCIAL BREAK) JENNINGS I'm not sure we're going to resolve this question, whether or not General Vessey believes there are prisoners alive in southeast Asia or not. There's a vote either way in this crowd, but in fairness, none of us are sure. But the question is whether or not the issue of POWs/MIAs should be the deciding one in terms of whether America has a reconciliation with Vietnam in any way, shape or form. Let's go to Washington and listen to Senator Kerrey briefly. Senator, you have just come back from Vietnam and Cambodia. Have you reached a conclusion? SEN KERREY Well, I think they should be decoupled, as a matter of fact. And by the way, I do agree with Senator McCain. I think the Vietnamese government could resolve this issue just like that if they chose to, and for some reason they don't. One of the dilemmas that we've got, and people like Ambassador Pickering have to help us try to figure this out, is that we've to get a presence somehow in Vietnam and in Cambodia, otherwise we can't help the people who are in urgent need of that help, particularly in Cambodia. Now, where children and families are suffering, if you see that kind of suffering, if we had a presence there, it seems to me we'd develop the urgency that I think is going to be needed to sustain ourselves through a political settlement. JENNINGS It's interesting, in the current issue of Time magazine, which is devoted to this issue, you did a poll on this subject among Vietnam veterans, is that correct? MR CLOUD Vietnam veterans and the population as a whole. JENNINGS What does the population as a whole believe? MR CLOUD Sixty - eight percent believe that there are POWs still alive in Vietnam. A huge figure. JENNINGS And among veterans? MR CLOUD Among veterans, it's at least as high. I've forgotten the exact figure. Also, however, the Time / CNN poll also shows that there has to be a strong plurality believes that, among US citizens, believes we should normalize with Vietnam. JENNINGS Should normalize relations? MR CLOUD Should normalize. Forty - eight percent to 32 percent. BUI DIEM, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL CONGRESS OF VIETNAMESE IN AMERICA Peter - JENNINGS Bui Diem. Sorry, sir, been a while getting to you. Mr Diem used to be Ambassador Diem, the South Vietnamese ambassador to the United States, from 1966 until 1972, if I'm not mistaken - MR DIEM Right. JENNINGS - during the Nixon and Johnson administrations. Do you think we should have a formal reconciliation with your country? MR DIEM Well, nobody opposed reconciliation. But in terms of normalization, I would like to point out today that this show tonight is almost completely dominated by the problem of Cambodia. And all of us would like to solve the problem of Cambodia, and well, there is an urgent concern about Cambodia. And if we talk about a problem of Cambodia, we have to talk about a problem of Vietnam. I think that Vietnam has a very strong influence on Cambodia, and it is not wise at all right now to talk in terms of normalization if we want to try to solve as quickly as we can the problem of Cambodia. If we try to solve the problem of Cambodia, let us not try to take away from our hands the kind of leverage that we have right now in terms of asking the Communists in Vietnam to influence the government in Cambodia, along with asking the Chinese to influence the Khmer Rouge, in view of coming to a solution. And that is very clear in my mind. JENNINGS Mr Diem, I just want to warn our affiliates all over the country that we're going to go, as they may already have anticipated, longer than we had planned. Having said that, I'm not quite sure what America gains by not having relations with Vietnam. Can you explain that? MR DIEM Well, it has been said quite often that our policy right now is too much punitive. In my point of view I think that the North Vietnamese Communists, they put themselves into this corner. It is up to them to get out of this corner, and by then we can concede there is a problem of normalization later on. JENNINGS We have an audience member. Yes, sir, would you identify yourself? TED SAMPLEY, VIETNAM VETERAN, AUDIENCE MEMBER Yes. My name is Ted Sampley, I'm a Vietnam veteran. JENNINGS Where do you come from? MR SAMPLEY I come from Kingston, North Carolina. JENNINGS Welcome. MR SAMPLEY Thank you. I have a question for Pepsi - Cola. JENNINGS Oh, I'd better introduce him first. I didn't realize you were laying for him like. This is Chris Sinclair, who's the president of Pepsi - Cola International. We invited Mr Sinclair tonight because we thought it important to hear a businessman's point of view on foreign policy, also because I know that Mr Sinclair's company is keen to do business in Cambodia and Burma and Afghanistan. Go ahead, sir. MR SAMPLEY As a person that's been in the POW / MIA movement, I've found that we don't get much help out of the politicians. And Mr Solarz is one of them we haven't had a whole lot of success with. But maybe we can turn to the Pepsi people. And I ask this question, since they have such a financial arrangement in Russia, and then I believe that that would probably feed on into Vietnam and Cambodia and the sale of Pepsi. And it is, would you use your influence to maybe influence the politicians in both Vietnam and the United States to allow an international team to go into the prison facilities, whether it be a cave or a prison in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos, and to look, an international team? Would that not help? JENNINGS Mr Sinclair? CHRIS SINCLAIR, PRESIDENT, PEPSI - COLA INTERNATIONAL Well, I think you may be overstating a little bit the influence we can bring to bear. I certainly - we would support an initiative like that. I think we would share your concern. Frankly, I think the representatives of our government are much better equipped to host an event like that, but where we could lend our support, certainly we'd be happy to. JENNINGS Do you think, and your friends in the business community think we should reconcile with Vietnam and Cambodia? MR SINCLAIR Again, Peter, I think it's a policy decision that needs to be debated by the government, and we need to get a consensus before we can act. JENNINGS You must have an opinion. MR SINCLAIR We do. We have a longstanding opinion that trade affords us an opportunity to positively affect relations. It builds bridges, it allows for communication, ultimately it affects attitudes and behavior. MR SAMPLEY How can we even think of doing this with Vietnam, as long as Vietnam - the people that are in charge of Vietnam, many are the same people that run the war, the same cadres that were responsible for the massacre. We haven't mentioned Vietnamese genocide or the murder of their own people, but 3,000 Vietnamese at one shot in the Tet offensive of 1968, after the North Vietnamese had taken that ancient city of Hue and then they murdered these people, and many of them they buried alive, how can we even think of dealing with these people? MR MCAULIFF Ted, there were two million people killed in Vietnam during the war. They were killed in a lot of different ways by a lot of different people. And that's really a question that historians are going to debate, who did what, when. The issue now - (crosstalk) - yeah, but the issue now is what happens in 1990, is the issue. It has been - I know, but we're going to run out of time and not get to the core question. JENNINGS Well, why don't we let Mr McAuliff speak, and then you, Mr Adelman MR MCAULIFF I mean, the problem is, what happens today. I think we should do what we essentially, up until a year ago, promised to do, which is normalize with Vietnam once they were out of Cambodia. And essentially they were out of Cambodia in October. They've gone in a little bit more, no one seems terribly upset by it, because it's what kept the Khmer Rouge from taking Battambang. But whether they're there or not - JENNINGS The second - largest city in Cambodia. MR MCAULIFF But the point is that there's some things that, even if we're not going to normalize, we could do. I think you have to recognize in both societies there are great bitternesses and pains. The only thing that can heal those pains is more communication, whether it's what Dr Shalala talked about, of formal university relationships, the kinds of trips that we take or that the veterans take, those things at this point are fundamentally illegal for Americans to organize without a license, and only a couple of us have gotten licenses. Travel agents can't organize trips to Vietnam or trips to Cambodia or they'll get hit, as Lindblad was, by the Treasury Department and driven out of business. Vietnamese - Americans and Cambodian - Americans and people like us who work with Vietnam and Cambodia all the time cannot pick up the telephone or turn on our fax machine and communicate with people in Vietnam or Cambodia because the trade embargo says that it is illegal for us to make that kind of communication. JENNINGS Mr Adelman. MR ADELMAN Just the point was that, as you say, a lot of people were killed in the way and everything. What's interesting about Vietnam, before we have too much of a gloss that we should normalize because Vietnam is such a wonderful little country these days is what happened after the war. In the months following the war, the Vietnamese killed more South Vietnamese than Americans died during our entire involvement. So we were there for many, many years, and they killed more in the months following, as you know. MR MCAULIFF Well, I know that's a highly conjectural and polemical issue. MR ADELMAN Excuse me, I let you finish. We had a million and a half boat people from Vietnam, probably another half a million died escaping. Now, you can say it's because the economy is bad. The economy in Vietnam has always been bad, for a thousand years or more, but there were never mass exits from Vietnam until the Communists came and (unintelligible). And Mr Muller, who I do believe is very sincere about wanting to stop the killing in Cambodia, he should realize, sir, when you defend Vietnam, there's been a lot of killing in Vietnam by the Vietnamese. JENNINGS Senator. SEN MCCAIN We have relations with countries all over the world - JENNINGS I feel a certain obligation to say that all the applause is coming from Vietnamese at the present moment, I think, and then defer to Senator McCain. SEN MCCAIN As you know, Peter, Congressman Solarz and I are not of the same party. He and I served on the Foreign Affairs Committee together when I was a member of the House of Representatives. He devoted untold thousands of hours of effort on this issue, and I think he deserves credit for it. And Ted, I disagree with this. Congressman Solarz has worked incredibly hard on this issue. One quick comment. Your poll also showed that the majority of Vietnam veterans were proud that they served, which is a very interesting number. And maybe it's time those of us who feel that way should stand up and say maybe those who were in the anti - war movement might have been a little wrong, because of what Ken Adelman just said, a million and a half boat people, reeducation camps. Whatever happened to the National Front for Liberation? Whatever happened to the free elections that were going to take place as soon as the dirty Americans were out of Vietnam? Whatever happened to all those promises of a bright future for the Vietnamese people? Change is taking place all over the world, let's have some of that, like a free election in South Vietnam. MR CLOUD Senator, could I just ask you one question. You said that Vietnam, Hanoi, could resolve the MIA issue overnight. SEN MCCAIN I believe so, yes. MR CLOUD What, precisely, should they do, in your judgment? (crosstalk) No, no, but I mean, what gesture should they make to the US? SEN MCCAIN For example, we have credible and convincing evidence that they have a warehouse with bodies in it. They return bodies three or four at a time that we know they've had for many, many years. They could allow us to send teams to places where there have been these sightings, and I think within a matter of weeks we could get that totally resolved. JENNINGS A member of the audience. Yes, sir, will you tell us who you are? GREGORY PAYTON, VIETNAM VETERAN, AUDIENCE MEMBER My name is Gregory Payton, I'm from Vietnam Veterans Against the War. I just recently returned from Vietnam. I just recently returned from Vietnam. I don't believe that there's any MIAs or POWs. One of the things that I wanted to ask the panel out here is the fact that during World War II, we still have MIAs from World War II, but we still negotiated with Japan, Germany and Italy. And I don't see why we have to now make this kind of discussion about the situation. As we do, people have pointed out that people are suffering, children are dying, and we're just debating this, that and the other. If in fact these people are dead, what about the living? What about the living people now that are being wrecked and the pain that's being caused by all this dialogue? I think it's time for us to stop dialogue and start dealing with the real issue. The real issue is that there's a cover - up going in the government in terms of like really negotiating with Vietnam. And I think it's because they are people of color. When we were dealing in Europe and they were white people, we wanted to deal with these things. But now we're dealing with situations of people of color, then there seems to be a lot of dialogue. JENNINGS Congressman Solarz. REP SOLARZ Sir, the answer between World War II and Vietnam is that we were able to go to the battlefields and make the best accounting that we had after World War II. We've been unable to do that in Vietnam. JENNINGS You raised a question, I'd like to take just a simple opportunity of. Mr Hayden, have you changed your mind about your views then? MR HAYDEN I wanted to say that the new president of Nicaragua, the person who defeated the Sandinista candidate - JENNINGS Mrs Chamorro, President Chamorro. MR HAYDEN - was inaugurated yesterday, and I saw the statement she made, which was very interesting. She said that reconciliation is more beautiful than victory. And I think we ought to ponder that. It seems to me that after our having gone to Vietnam, our problem is becoming that Vietnam has somehow invaded us. It's invaded our hearts, minds, you can feel it in the studio, people yelling at each other. It's unbelievable. And I do think reconciliation is more beautiful than victory, and I do think that it's harder, it's very difficuLt We all went through a very shattering experience, most of us when we were very young, and have to live with it the rest of our lives. And the experience was, the one common thing that I think everybody experienced, whether they were opposed to the war or they were drafted or they volunteered, is they came away from the experience feeling that we didn't know the whole story. And tonight, I think we still don't know what's going on in Cambodia. Those statistics you gave - JENNINGS Ambassador Pickering, you have a - MR HAYDEN - about kids not knowing where anything is, is an awful legacy. And I think we've got to reconcile not only ourselves with our former adversaries, and if the United States could do it with Germany and Japan it can with Vietnam, but reconcile ourselves with ourselves, and admit - JENNINGS - Ambassador Pickering, is this - MR HAYDEN - that we made some mistakes, all of us. All of us. And that admission is the step to healing that I think we have to take, otherwise it will be deja vu. JENNINGS - Ambassador Pickering, do you have a personal view of this? AMB PICKERING I have, of course, a personal view of it, and I think that my personal view has always been where it can be done, diplomatic contacts, personal contacts are very important and should be pushed forward. But not at the expense, obviously, of two policy imperatives at risk here. One we've discussed extensively, the missing, the POWs. The other is clearly the question of the Vietnamese role which the ambassador mentioned in terms of a settlement in Cambodia. I believe very firmly if those two issues can be put behind us, the question of official relations can be moved ahead very, very rapidly. But those are the kinds of impediments, those two issues, that now block the way in that direction. JENNINGS I see two or three people who want to comment, and we're going to come back in just one moment. Just before we go away, perhaps you'd like to see and hear the President's views on this. Here's what President Bush has to say about it. PRES GEORGE BUSH (January 20, 1989) .war cleaves us still, but friends, that war began in earnest a quarter of a century ago, and surely the statute of limitations has been reached. This is a fact: the final lesson of Vietnam is that no great nation can long afford to be sundered by a memory. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) ANNOUNCER The ABC News/Time Forum, Beyond Vietnam, continues. Once again, Peter Jennings. JENNINGS There are a lot of people here who want to have their say, and what could be more understandable? One of them is Dean Kahler, who was wounded on that day at Kent State when the students were protesting against the invasion of Cambodia. Yes, sir. DEAN KAHLER, FORMER STUDENT, KENT STATE UNIVERSITY Yes, sir, Peter, thank you. I hear the general and the politicians continuing to talk about - well, actually, they're playing dominoes yet, they're still playing dominoes. They're still raising the red flag, they're still pulling out the sword and dividing the society apart, using the rhetoric that Richard Nixon used back in 1970. You know, these people don't know how to talk about peace and work about peace. I've heard three of the women in this room tonight talk about the children and talk about the starvation and talk about the medical needs. If we really in earnest stopped the arms going in, because we know how to do it, we know who's doing it, we know how to control those forces, when are we going to start talking about peace? And if we did this, and if you actually started working on it, would you be out of a job, because you don't know how to work about peace? I mean, do you really know what peace is all about? And General Westmoreland, as a general in the war in Vietnam, you saw the atrocities and you saw the immorality that was going on there, and as a commanding officer, you had the ability to say no, let's stop this. And why didn't you do that? GEN WESTMORELAND This question is directed at me? MR KAHLER Yes. GEN WESTMORELAND Well, your perspective, I must say, is somewhat simplified. There were very few atrocities that took place in Vietnam, but when you're on the battlefield, people are going to get killed. There are going to be accidents. And you are going to destroy the enemy when you can before he destroys you. And that happens to be the job of the soldier on the battlefield. It's what the country sent our troops to South Vietnam to do. And that happens to be a fact of life. So, if there's any incompatibility with that and your philosophy, maybe you can be a little more specific. MR MULLER Let me be specific, General, because I fought in that war, too. The war was an atrocity. Forty - five percent of the people killed by virtue of our Senate Foreign Relations Committee itself which is not, with all due respect, a liberal body, our Senate Foreign Relations Committee says that 45 percent of the people that were killed in Vietnam were civilians, General. Remember those indiscriminate H&I fires, those free - fire zones you set up, all the search and destroy operations, the 7.5 million tons of bombs, three times the total of World War II, we dropped on Indochina? Half the people that we killed were civilians. If that's not an atrocity, General, what is? MS ULLMANN And I would also like to ask why is it always simplified when one talks about health and children and humanity? We were just in Hong Kong trying to talk to officials about the situation of the Vietnamese refugees in detention camps, concentration camps, in Hong Kong. And they told us that we were talking about little things only, because we were talking about the suffering of the children inside of these camps. Why is it always that these things are simplified, and little things, while your games are the facts of life, and the reality - JENNINGS Why is that - MS ULLMANN - I don't understand it, General. REP SOLARZ I'm a little uncomfortable with the general being - JENNINGS Why is that so, Congressman? I don't think we can lay all the problems of now at General Westmoreland's feet, by any means. I think she may be talking to you, Congressman. REP SOLARZ Well, I'm not - JENNINGS I did mean that in jest, as you know. REP SOLARZ I'm not certain that she was, Peter, but I'll say this. I think that it would be wonderful if we could bring an end to all arms supplies going into Cambodia. But let's recognize that 95 percent of the arms being shipped into that country are coming from China and the Soviet Union. And our influence in Beijing and Moscow, for better or for worse, is unfortunately limited. You asked a little bit earlier whether the time has come for us to normalize our relationship with Vietnam. Fifteen years after the end of the war, I think the time has come for reconciliation between our two countries. But I also believe we have to ask ourselves whether our priority is Vietnam or Cambodia. If our priority is Vietnam, if that's what's most important to us, then by all means, we should establish diplomatic relations and lift the embargo. But if our priority is preventing another genocide in Cambodia, then we've got to recognize that the only way to do that is to get a political settlement of the conflict, which cannot be achieved without a willingness on the part of Vietnam to lean on the puppet regime in Phnom Penh in order to get Hun Sen to make the concessions which will be necessary for a settlement. And Vietnam's incentive to lean on Cambodia in order to get a settlement is related to their desire to have normalization with the United States, for us to establish a diplomatic presence in Hanoi and for us to lift the embargo. If we give them that now, their willingness to contribute to a political settlement will be greatly diminished and we may very well have thus unwittingly contributed to another genocide in Cambodia. JENNINGS Congressman, just before I ask Ms FitzGerald to comment, am I correct in believing that the prime minister, Hun Sen, in Phnom Penh, to whom you refer, agrees to internationally supervised elections? REP SOLARZ Hun Sen has made ambiguous statements on this issue. What he has said clearly is that he is prepared to have an election, supervised by his government - JENNINGS By the United Nations. Am I not correct? REP SOLARZ - with international observers. The key question is whether he is prepared in the period between a cease - fire and an internationally supervised - JENNINGS To invite the Khmer Rouge into partnership. REP SOLARZ No, not to include the Khmer Rouge in the government - and this is where your documentary was unfortunately nine months out of date - that used to be the position of the administration. They were supporting the inclusion of the Khmer Rouge in a so - called quadropartite interim government. They no longer support that. They now support the proposal put forward by Australia to have the UN come in to assume responsibility for the government and to exclude the Khmer Rouge and the other Cambodian factions from any role in the government - JENNINGS Including the government in power. Ms FitzGerald. MS FITZGERALD I just wonder why it is that we don't seem to have a little more influence, not just on China at the moment, but on Thailand, because after all, all the supplies for the Khmer Rouge are going through Thailand. And you say that we could have this wonderful influence on Hanoi and Phnom Penh, but somehow it seems impossible we have no influence at all on the other side. MR MCAULIFF The issue is the reverse, it's why doesn't Thailand have more influence on us. And the Thai prime minister has called for neutral camps, as Dith Pran said. He's called for stopping military supplies, he's called for a cease - fire. REP SOLARZ Why doesn't he do it, John? He's the prime minister of Thailand. MR MCAULIFF Because the United States is undermining him rather than supporting him. MR CLOUD But Mr McAuliff, wouldn't you agree that the Thai government is divided on this issue? The Thai military is not exactly going along with the Thai prime minister. MR MCAULIFF Well, some of the Thai military is. (crosstalk) MR MULLER The point is 20 percent of the aid that Congressman Solarz has covertly put into that country, tens of millions of dollars are going on covertly. MR MCAULIFF But the point is that we could, by supporting the prime minister in Thailand, instead of undermining him, contribute to what he's trying to accomplish. That would be the crucial difference right now. You're right, the Thai government is divided, but one of the reasons it's divided is because we've put our support on the side of the military that want to keep the fighting. JENNINGS Senator Kerrey, in Washington. SEN KERREY Well, I mean, I guess I would get back to the need, and I think it's fairly urgent, particularly in Cambodia, to get some kind of presence. That's why I continue to talk about the need to vacate the seat at the United Nations. Ambassador Pickering said earlier that he was concerned that that would not give Sun Sen and Sihanouk a voice, but earlier than that discounted their voice when they talked about getting lethal aid, military aid, from the American government. I don't believe that they are, but what we're doing by seating that coalition is we're giving the Khmer Rouge a voice. And It seems to me that if we were to unseat that that might - and Ambassador Pickering, I would ask you, would - is there any way that in doing so that we could get an American presence without legitimizing the Hun Sen government? I don't want to do that. I think the elections should determine what the legitimate government is. But we need a presence there, because I think a presence would enable us to see that these people are really hurting. There's a lot of suffering, not just in the refugee camps, but also in the country itself, with abysmal health care, with babies dying from diseases that should not cause children to die at that early of an age. It seems to me somehow we've got to get a presence. I think the American people would see a condition there that is intolerable. JENNINGS Ambassador Pickering. AMB PICKERING Senator Kerrey, I understand the health and the great problem you see. I'm not sure whether an American presence - and I'm not sure I know what you mean, a diplomatic presence, aid workers, relief workers, many countries have them there. There are clearly shortages. The issue of the seat, however - SEN KERREY Let me be very clear. AMB PICKERING - is not a question of the presence. JENNINGS I think he's going to give you an example of that, Ambassador. SEN KERREY Let me just be very clear. I mean any kind of a government presence so that the people of the United States don't rely on a senator who spends three days there coming back and pretending to be an expert. We've got no presence there. We've got the rawest intelligence data of all, so that we didn't even know that the Vietnamese had come back in October. We had to learn about it through an east bloc embassy. It seems to me that we need a presence there of some kind. I don't know how to get it. You're in this business of diplomatic relations of people, and it seems to me somehow we've got to get a presence there, otherwise we won't know what's going on. AMB PICKERING I would argue that the presence is important and worthwhile. But the presence at the price of recognizing and dealing with the Hun Sen government is not the sort of price we're prepared to pay at the present time, given the fact that that is, as Steve Solarz has very carefully explained, a very important part of the motivation to the Vietnamese in moving ahead with the kind of settlement. We have looked, however, at a very early stage of the settlement in getting the UN in. If the UN were go to in, that might open the door, having the government step back, in a sense, from engagement. And let the United Nations play the role that it can play of opening up the process of elections and doing all it can to ensure, in fact, that those elections are free and fair. JENNINGS Do you believe you'll ever get the government in Phnom Penh to stand back and say to the United Nations, "Here, you run my country for a while"? AMB PICKERING We never thought it would happen in Nicaragua, in terms of free and fair elections. JENNINGS But the government - AMB PICKERING We didn't think it was going to be easy in Namibia. JENNINGS - excuse me, Mr Ambassador, the government in Nicaragua stayed in place. AMB PICKERING I am talking about making arrangements, as we all are, in Cambodia which will ensure free and fair elections. JENNINGS But the government - AMB PICKERING That is - JENNINGS - but the government in Nicaragua stayed in place. AMB PICKERING - but free and fair elections were ensured. JENNINGS The government in Cambodia, as I understand it, as Congressman Solarz agreed, has accepted to internationally supervised elections. AMB PICKERING Peter, in every one of these questions, the devil is in the details, how and in what way precisely do you work it out. That's what we must be doing in order to get some kind of sense of what is actually going to be required. (crosstalk) JENNINGS Dith Pran, do you think - Dith Pran, what do you think your country will be like by the time we get the details worked out? MR PRAN Ah, Cambodia is very complicated. As you know that, because we have killers in the pie. In Nicaragua, it's different. And also, Cambodia, we have a foreign occupation in Cambodia. So like I say in the beginning, we the Cambodian people, are just trapped in the middle between the tiger and crocodile. Right now, you see, the Vietnamese are still inside Cambodia, and we're sure that the Vietnamese have big influence, you know, tell the government in Phnom Penh what to do. And then we have the Khmer Rouge trying to - not to use the word genocide, that we - all the world believes that the Khmer Rouge had indeed been killing their own people, the ethnic group, the relatives group, the minorities. And for me, I am pessimistic that - I don't know how, if the world did try to talk with the Cambodian people, what they want. Do they accept the Khmer Rouge leader back in to the future government, or they refuse to? And I'm afraid that will happen, another bloodbath again. This time it's a different bloodbath, will be a bloodbath in the city. When you see Pol Pot and (unintelligible) walk with the limousine or whatever in Phnom Penh, and who's going to protect them, who's willing to ensure them that they will be safe? My position, I feel that because I love my country, I want peace back, I feel that we should support the Australian plan, that we think this is a fair plan, that we must accept that, and also we should remove some of the few top Khmer Rouge officials away. And we must force the Viatnamese to leave Cambodia and let this into United Nations. But we need support from our government. Our government has to be - stand strong and say not to go along with China, we cannot do like China. China wants to use Khmer Rouge to punish the Vietnamese. We, 15 years we left Vietnam, we left southeast Asia. We want to save Indochinese life. So we must stop using and taking sides. JENNINGS Mr Pran, when this broadcast began, someone told me you were shy. I'm very glad you're not. I must also tell you, ladies and gentlemen, it's time to go home. Our stations around America have indulged us longer than they normally do. I am very grateful to all of you for taking part. I am sure you will leave here feeling that you didn't make all the points you would have liked to, but. A final personal note, if I may. Yesterday, while in Washington, I stopped briefly at the Vietnam memorial. It seemed a suitable thing to do on the eve of this broadcast. And I ended up standing very briefly beside a Lieutenant Commander Harrington from ROTC at Ohio State. He said it had taken him all these many years to come to the memorial, to look for the name of the best man at his wedding. And he stood there, in tears. It was hard not to be in tears beside him. And I remember what he said, and perhaps we could all remember what he said. He said: "I hope we've learned something from Vietnam. I hope we've learned, ultimately, that war doesn't really solve anything". It's a simple point of view, but a very telling one, I think. Good night.

Kuntsler goes on to express that men cannot be silenced and talks about several incidents such as Fred Hampton who was brutally murdered in the City of Chicago by police and then they were exonerated. He talks about there still being time to protest things like the man who is now on the public enemy list whose crime was tjat he made a speech in Cambridge, MD in 1967, and Black Panther Chairman, Bobby Seale and the electric chair. He goes on to say there is still time to prevent another Kent State, Jackson State, South Carolina State, the blatant murder of 6 black men who picked up a TV from a broken window in a store and that had suddenly become a capital crime in the Southern United States. He makes other comparisons but his main point is that there is still time to come together and speak to the things that have meaning to human beings.