The War: Future Indicative

Administration officials, long convinced that there is no realistic hope of peace negotiations until after the 1968 elections—if then—were admitting last week that they may have been too pessimistic. Their hopes, admittedly, were pinned on a nuance, but nuances are the language of diplomacy. The nuance in this case was conscious and coordinated: it was a simple change of grammatical mood in a statement from Hanoi. No longer does the Red regime in Hanoi say talks "could" start if the U.S. stops bombing North Viet Nam; now it says talks "will" start.

The question that nagged Washington was whether the shift to future indicative did, in fact, signal a bona fide peace bid. Outside of North Viet Nam, no one could say for sure. Nonetheless, other simultaneous developments added to the sense, if not the substance, of the hope that there might be some movement in the diplomatic deadlock.

Rumors sprouted in several countries that the Communists were ready to talk. Then the possibility that the war might spill over into Cambodia seemed suddenly more remote with the decision by Prince Norodom Sihanouk to discuss documented U.S. charges that his country is being used as a sanctuary by Communist troops. President Johnson chose Old Asia Hand Chester Bowles, 66, U.S. Ambassador to India, for the mission. He will try to work out an accommodation with Sihanouk, an old acquaintance, that would guarantee Cambodia's borders. Though Sihanouk last week accepted eleven airplanes, including three MIG-17 jets, and several dozen heavy guns from Communist China, he was talking buoyantly about the possibility of resuming diplomatic relations with the U.S., broken since 1965.

Mongolian Message. Washington's reaction to the words from Hanoi and Pnompenh was serious and empirical. Secretary of State Dean Rusk, asked if Hanoi's change in tense represented a bid to talk, replied: "I don't know yet. But I wouldn't want to characterize this statement today as either a peace feeler or as purely a propaganda move. Let's find out what this statement means as well as what it says."

The Johnson Administration at first was not even certain that there was any statement to study. The initial report came from the Agence France-Presse correspondent in Hanoi. He quoted North Viet Nam Foreign Minister Nguyen Duy Trinh as saying to a visiting delegation of Mongolian Communists: "If the American Government really wants talks, it must first unconditionally cease bombing and all other acts of war against the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam."

Next Step. Five days later, as U.S. officials probed the back corridors of diplomacy for confirmation, a North Vietnamese diplomat in Paris confirmed that Hanoi's position had indeed changed. Summoning Paris-based Westinghouse Broadcasting Co. Correspondent Bernard Redmont to the North Vietnamese mission, the diplomat, according to the reporter, said that if the bombings stop, peace talks will begin; he made no mention of Hanoi's repeated demand that the bombing pause must be permanent. "The next step," he told Redmont, "is up to President Johnson."