Oakland Tribune from Oakland, California • 22

WOK, CHARLES ATLAS fenr ISf tonal pap OWNED, CONTROLLED, EDITED Soviets View Chinese As Chief Threat 22 TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 1967 DRUMMOND A Challenge for Individuals The State Department of Employment's five-year job forecast for Alameda County, issued last week, reemphasizes the spectacular recent growth of the Eastbay economy. In the five-year pepQ used for the manpower survey, 1966 to 1971, an estimated 57,000 new non-agricultural jobs are expected to be added to the county's work force. This represents a 15 per cent net gain which exceeds the projected employment growth of the nation as a whole and will further strengthen Alameda County's position as the major employment center in the Bay Area. Currently, one out of every three workers in the five-county region is employed in Alameda County and this percentage is expected to increase in the next four years. For the county as a whole, these statistics indicate a bright economic future.

But the changing pattern of employment disclosed in the manpower survey underscores the soft spot that has long plagued the economy of the nation and the Eastbay: the unskilled worker. Most of the employment opportunities that will open up in Alameda County in the next four years will be in the white collar category professional, technical, managerial and sales. Less than 20 per cent of the projected employment growth will be iruauiskilled work, where the need for job opportunities is greatest. This contrast presents a difficult sociological problem for the Eastbay and for the nation because the pattern is one that exists throughout the country. There is only one realistic solution." The technological trend that provides the impetus for the nation's economic growth is not going to be reversed, nor should it be.

Instead of trying to provide more jobs for the unskilled, government and business must concentrate on helping the untrained acquire the education and skills necessary to fit into the nation's increasingly sophisticated economy. This challenge is not solely a responsibility of government or business. Government at all levels is supporting a wide variety of educational and training programs that offer the individual an unparalleled opportunity for self-advancement. It is up to the individual to take advantage of these opportunities. This responsibility of the individual to demonstrate a determination to improve himself is the real key toJ eliminating hard-core unemployment.

We do not think it has been sufficiently stressed. Government has acknowledged its duty to provide through educational and training programs the path to prosperity for the unskilled. Business has cooperated with these efforts with its taxes and its own vigorous programs to provide employment opportunities. It is now time for the individuals these programs are designed to help to demonstrate a similar sense of responsibility. The job prospects will continue to be bleak for those who refuse to make the effort to acquire a skill that is in demand.

By ROSCOE Editor's Note: The followint views are those of the author and are presented here to give readers a variety of viewpoints. The Tribune's opinions are ex- pressed only in editorials. WASHINGTON If the Soviets are as worried about Red China as they say they are worried lest they be, engulfed in war why don't they do something about it? Isn't the 'logical answer to Moscow's 'poisoned relations with Peking an improvement of relations with the United States? There is a counterbalance to the Soviet fear that China is intent on war. It is to make peace with the United States, including a willingness to help resolve the Vietnam conflict. Soviet anxiety about China is pervasive.

No one has described it more vividly or authoritatively than Harrison E. Salisbury of the New York Times, a veteran Moscow correspondent, who recently traveled widely Russia to develop a series of articles appraising the 50-year record since the Bol-, shevik Revolution. Speaking of the worries and the preoccupations of the Soviet officials and the Soviet people, he found that "above all, there was China." There it was, the No. 1 fear inside the Soviet Union today. It came out in nearly every interview he had the widespread feeling that China was deliberately provoking border incidents prior to attempting to take Russian territory, and the fear that Peking was deliberately trying to provoke war between the Soviet Union and the U.S.

The Soviets were certain that the danger was growing. "In Moscow," Mr. Salisbury reported, "this fear was somewhat generalized. In Siberia it was particularized because each Siberian had heard of a specific incident at one point or another along the frontier." And where does this lead the Soviet policy-makers? It leads them to an even greater LETTERS TO THE FORUM France: Frientf or Foe? pound, paign to further weaken the Raps Rafferty EDITOR: Dr. Max Raffer-ty's column Tribune, Nov.

19, leaves much room for counter-criticism of his patronizing and limited view of "Those Striking Teachers." Dr. a wrist-slapping and moralizing justi-liably places those naughty teachers where they belong: in their role of dedicated, restrained, self-denying martyrs who are akin to monks and nuns of the Middle Ages. The implications are clear. In other words, to be professional, teachers must be subservient. Subservient, even enslaved, to whatever conditions or directives they encounter and receive.

I would like simply to ask if the welfare of school children does or does not involve the welfare of their teachers? I would like to ask if respect is generated under undesirable 5 not intolerable classroom conditions? Are classroom regulations which the teacher must follow but are ignored by pupils, essentially ineffective? If state laws govern teacher behavior and student The friendship and alliance between the United States and France spans nearly 200 years, making her this nation's oldest ally. This makes' it all the more regrettable that French President Charles de Gaulle seems determined to strain current relations tween the two nations beyond repair. It would seem hardly necessary to remind De Gaulle of the actions of Great Britian and the United States in behalf of France during France's years of mortal peril in this century. If, indeed, De Gaulle has not forgotten, then it would appear that gratitude is no longer a quality of French gracious-ness. In recent years we have seen our French ally refuse to abide by the nuclear test ban treaty, criticize the United States for its defense of freedom in a and, even more so, the dollar.

The French government first contributed to the crisis by leaking rihmors about the impending devaluation. Then, after devaluation, it disclosed it had stopped making contributions to the international gold pool which had been created to stabilize gold prices. Finally, it was leaked that De Gaulle was preparing to resume cashing in French dollars for scarce U.S. gold. De Gaulle defends all this by insisting there is a "new situation" in the world, that as a result of its expanded economy France no longer needs anyone and is now asserting the independence it has achieved.

To the contrary, any realistic assessment of a "new situation" in the world is that France by. herself lacks the population and resources to ever qualify as a major power in the nuclear LBJ Made His Own Vietnam Troubles tear the fear that the Unit ed States will make a deal with China at the expense of Russia. We shouldn't be surprised at that. Many Americans feel the same way in reverse that the difference between Moscow and Peking are superficial and can easily be patched up at any time and the world confronted again with a monolithic Sino Soviet alliance for aggressive spread of The best judgment, I think, is that the differences between the two are deep and irreparable as far as anyone can see ahead, that the breach is not primarily a conflict of ideology but a conflict of national interest, that Mao Tse-tung is intent upon recreating a vast Chinese empire and taking the leadership of world communism away from the Soviets. too, has its fear.

Its fear is that the Soviet Union will reach a real detente with the United States at the expense of Peking. And my question is: why not? It need not be a tormal alliance and certainly not directed against the territorial integrity or independence of Red China. It would be directed only against Chinese expansion by force in the Western Pacific where such expansion would be against both Soviet and U.S. interests. Such an understanding between Washington and Moscow would have to rest upon two pillars: That neither would act to dominate Southeast Asia.

That the war in Vietnam be brought to an end with the independence of South Vietnam i.s only goal. If containment of Red China and peace in Asia are in the national interest of both the Soviet Union and the United States, wouldn't it be sensible to do something about it together and soon? At least it seems about time to begin to explore the edges of the possibilities. (c) 1M7 PublUherj-Hsll iyndlcal HAZLITT icies is that of "building bridges" to the Communist world. This includes such things as "cultural cooperation," inviting the Soviet Union to set up more consulates and send over more spies to man them and, worst o' all, encouraging trade with the Communists to be financed with credit at the American taxpayers' risk. All these bridges have proved to be one-way bridges.

For the Communists trade with the West is merely one more strategic instrument in their war against the West. Soviet Russia is today supplying most of the arms and munitions being used by North Vietnam to kill our men. EastrWest trade is helping them to do this. What earthly sense does It make to "build bridges" to the Communist world in the morning and to bomb it in the afternoon? It is this glaring contradiction that so deeply confuses and disturbs American opinion and produces demands for "some logical, straightforward explanation." We should halt all our naive one-sided "co-operation" and make it unmistakably clear to Soviet Russia that we will not resume it until Russia stops 1 i the North Vietnamese with arms to kill our soldiers and stops daily and systematically inciting hatred against us all over the world. Copyright 17, Loi Angalet Time HERE ARE ADDRESSES OF NATIONAL AND STATE LEGISLATORS Sen Thomo M.

Kuchet, ton. Georgt Murphy. CtnortMnwy Now Otttoe Building, Washington. DC. XS15.

Rep. -lattery Cooelen, 7th District, rep. rewriting Albany, Berkeley, Emeryville, Piedmont end port at Oakland! Rap. George p. Miliar, Ith, repreeentlng Alameda, San Leendro.

Catro Vallay ana parti ot Oakland and San Loranio; Map. Dan Edward, tth, repreaantlng Hay. ant, Fremont, Newark, union City, Livermore, Plaatanton, San Ramon and part of San Loranio In Alimada County, and tha norttwatfern half of Sinla Clar County; Rap. Jerome R. Weldie, lath, representing Contra Coata County.

Stata Senetora and AMemblymen Stat Capita, Sacramento, fSWI. Alameda County State Sanatort art tm piitrki, Lewli f. Sherman IHh, Nlcho-lat C. PetrH lath, Clark Bradley. The and llth Dlitrlctt cover the tame area, with Sherman and Pefrla mpre-aentlng all of Alameda County ecpt Ceitro Valley, Livermore, and Pleeaan-ton.

Thow communltlM and a I arse oee- anted by Bradley. Aaiernymen are Carta tee. ljw OH- Cow ttr Senator, Witr let, Oeorge Millar Jr. Aeaem. land, wnich rance colonized ana ex- ploited for almost a century, Strange Saga of Harold Stassen jigej mat, in reality, sne is no more independent of her allies today than she was in 1914 or 1940.

However, one must concede that France under De Gaulle is a sovereign nation free not only to ignore the common interests and common obligations of her allies but, in fact, free to choose her own allies. We do suggest, however, that this nation enjoys the sovereign right to exercise the same options. selfishly to keep a struggling British nation out of the Common Market, urge the seating of Communist China in the United Nations and summarily evict NATO troops from French soil. Now, with the world's money mar kets in turmoil because of the devaluation of the British pound, it has become apparent that the De Gaulle government is deliberately waging a cam- behavior, why is student disobedience tolerated year round, but striking teachers reprimanded? Dr. Rafferty seems less concerned with the conditions and factors motivating dedicated people to organize and protest so forcefully, than he is with staying legal.

I do not believe in lawlessness either, yet neither do I espouse ignorance of the basic issues involved. Undesirable conditions encompass not only teachers but also students, whose potential to learn is thwarted and damaged. These must be important reasons for a s' striking. Research tells us teacher turnover and dissatisfaction is primarily dissatisfaction with teaching conditions. Economics and salary are a secondary reason; however, teachers as true professionals are entitled to professional salaries.

Professional conditions attract professional individuals, and are created by them. Take another look, Dr. Rafferty. Your point of view is lacking for a fellow professional. CHARLES BELGIAN, Oakville.

By PETE HAMILL I think the political rehabilitation of Harold Stassen has already begun. The reaction to him has been very encourag- ing. He wins over every age group, but he is especially ef- fective with young people." The young people who see Harold Stassen now have probably never heard the gaudy saga of his life. They should. It is one of the more instructive American lives, because for one golden season Harold Stassen had it all.

Elected district attorney at 23, he became governor of Minnesota at 31, was reelected twice, made the keynote speech at the 1940 Republican national convention, and successfully managed Wendell Willkie's floor fight for the nomination. People started saying that some day Harold Stassen would be President. It never happened, though somewhere inside 60-year-old Harold Stassen today there is a 30-year-old Harold Stassen struggling to get out. At 30, Stassen's future looked limitless. At 60, he is a bad joke, the Sonny Tufts of American politics.

"It's a packaging job," said Springer, who also once did packaging jobs as publicity man for Johnson's Wax. "If people can get to see him, by Brickman MAS Trie You THAT WBfS WOW IT? FLORA LEWIS Student Protest EDITOR: Being a professional chemist myself, I would like to make a brief comment about the student protest against the Dow Chemical Company. The students certainly have a right to express their displeasure but they are attacking the wrong people. If they would spend their energies in individual and group meetings with potential Dow employes, there would be no need for mass protest and mob rule. Convince the chemistry and chemical engineering students that there is a moral issue at stake, not the Dow representatives and the University administration.

Since it is a student protest, it seems only fitting that their fellow students be the first target. Remove the reason for Dow's presence and the problem will disappear without the hair-tearing hysteria which seems to be a growing part of campus language today. JERRY LANDRUM, Livermore. face to face, and listen to what he's saying, they'll realize that a man with his brains and intelligence is a resource this country can't waste. I wouldn't trade placeswith the Nixon or people.

Harold Stassen is going to sur prise a lot of people." The man who most fully agrees, of course, is Harold Stassen. When he announced his candidacy, he acknowledged that George Romney and Richard Nixon were "frontrunners" but he still thought he would astonish everyone. That sounded like the old Stassen. At some point in his life, things started going wrong for him, and Stassen apparently cannot yet believe that the American voters have written him off. In 1948, he won all the early primaries and seemed on his way to the nomination.

He challenged Sen. Robert Taft in his home state of Ohio. Taft was a favorite son candidate, and Stassen alienated all the professional Republican political by opposing him. Stassen might have survived this breach of political manners, but Taft creamed him anyway. After a debate in Oregon with Tom Dewey, in which Stassen played to the peanut gallery by asking that the Communist Party be outlawed, Stassen managed to lose that primary too, and the nomination.

Since then it has been one abysmal failure after another; when he ran for governor of Pennsylvania, he lost to a pretzel manufacturer. So from now until next April, Harold Stassen will be trudging the back roads and the street corners, trying to get strangers to talk to him. And when you tried to call him at the Hotel Schroeder in Milwaukee, where he announced his candidacy the other day, the hotel operator said, "Harold who?" It will be a long primary season. (c) Ntwdtr 1H7 Europe and the U.S. Editor's Note: The following views are those of the author and are presented here to give read' ers a variety of viewpoints.

The Tribune's opinions are expressed only in editorials. WASHINGTON The country can now relax. Taxes will soon vanish, the war is certain to end swiftly, the slums shall become gardens of earthly delight. Harold E. Stassen has consented again to run for the presidency of the United States.

"We think miracles are In season," says Floyd Springer, who will manage Stas-sen's primary campaign in Wisconsin. "We think we can pull off the miracle of the century." Wait a minute. Harold Stassen? Harold Stassen? That's right. At 60, the wunderkind of the early 1940s is coming back. Again.

He does have certain liabilities, of course. For one thing, he hasn't won an election since 1942, and since then he has tried for the presidency seven times, and lost bids to become governor of Pennsylvania and mayor of Philadelphia. "We do have a packaging problem," says Springer, who worked for Stassen in the years when Stassen was President Eisenhower's special assistant on disarmament. "But By HENRY Editor's Note: The following views are those of the author and are presented here to give readers a variety of viewpoints. The Tribune's opinions art ex-pressed only in editorials.

President Johnson has been rapidly losing public support for his policies in Vietnam. Paradoxically, he has been losing it from both sides at once, from both the Hawks and the Doves. This is unjust and alarming. Yet in large part he has himself to blame. The decline of his support is evident.

The most recent Harris Survey indicates that public confidence in his handling of the Vietnamese war has dropped to 23 per cent from 46 per cent last June. A Gallup Poll conducted for the National Broadcasting Co. indicated that only 59 per cent of the American people favor continuing our military effort there. The President goes to church, and the minister demands from the pulpit "some logical, straightforward explanation" of our involvement in Vietnam. Mr.

Johnson has said repeatedly that if he were merely trying to do the "popular" thing it would be easy, but he is determined to do only what is "right." The truth is that he has been trying to be both right and popular simultaneously. He has been trying to please both the Doves and the Hawks. As a result he has deeply confused public opinion, and produced growing distrust from both sides. In 1964 he wooed the Doves by ridiculing Barry Goldwa-ter's demands for escalation. When he escalated nonetheless, he did so gradually, limiting the bombing to a few unproductive targets.

This gave the enemy time to install or increase antiaircraft defenses around strategic targets to make our belated bombing more costly in planes and men. When it was announced (as on Nov. 6) that U. S. bombers struck at North Vietnam's largest mlitary supply area and again (on Nov.

16) at a Haiphong shipyard, both "for the first time," both Doves and Hawks became more un-' easy and distrustful. The Doves wondered why it was done at all; the Hawks wondered why it was not done much earlier. Perhaps the most confusing of all the Administration's pol 'Goliath' than ordinary mortals. Servan-Schreiber urges a radical reorganization of Europe to propel it back into the race with the U.S. Others urge a radical withdrawal of America from the rest of the world.

But of course a giant doesn't shrink when you cut off a toe. Surveying its enemies and lukewarm friends, the U.S. is coming to feel isolated. It is crucial to realize that this is the isolation of power, not of weakness, so that the more power applied to the world to make it deal with us, the more frightened hostility we create. America isn't going to stop being a giant in this century, at least.

There is no use pretending it can hunch up, contemplate its turbulent navel, ignore the world and be ignored. What it can do is recognize that its very strength imposes special rules, far more restraint than others must bear. Copyright 1M7, Ntwtdiy, Inc. that there are no longer five, nor three, nor even two powers in the world, but only one. It is the U.S.

The Soviet Union is celebrating its fiftieth anniversary with grandiose displays of might, space adventures that can only be launched from a base of huge resources and technology far beyond the reach of most. Ironically, that has not changed the widespread sense of American predominance, so far ahead that no one can ever catch up. Now a Frenchman who is neither pro-Gaullist nor anti-American has come along to focus the attitude with hard analysis. He is Jean-Jacques Servan-Schreiber, editor of l'Express, and he has called his analysis of what he thinks needs doing in the world, "The American Challenge." The illusion must be dropped, he says, that even Europe with all its experience and wealth can cope with it, let alone less developed regions. He sees Goliath, the U.S.A., growing much faster than David, the remaining billions.

However well-intentioned, the shadow of such towering strength appears oppressive in this view. The American, administration and Congress, at varying moments, get i i a at what they consider a refusal by foreigners to understand their problems and give a little help. The foreigners note only that it behooves a giant to tread much more softly Editor' Note: The following viewi are those of the author and are presented here to give readers a variety of viewpoints. The Tribune's opinions are expressed only in editorials. PARIS There was no hostility in his voice.

Rather, there was a tone of sympathy overcome by morbid curiosity. "Tell me," he asked, "how does it feel to be an American and know that all the world dislikes and fears you?" The questioner was a young Yugoslav Communist that time, but it has become an unhappily familiar question abroad. A conservative French weekly recently featured a long interview with Norman Mailer on "Why So Many People Hate America." Nobody appeared to challenge the question, only to dispute the answer. Yet it isn't really true. Everything shows that few people hate America.

And most of them are Americans bitter in their passionate despair at seeing serious faults in a country with such ideals and such capacity. But it is true that America is making much of the world deeply uneasy, not just because of Vietnam but because the U.S. is so overwhelming. A profound sense of how mighty is America and how small is Vietnam underlies hostility to U.S. policy, also among determined anti-Communists who fear China and fullv supported the defense of South Korea.

Somehow, without anyone quite knowing where it came from, the notion has spread the small society mm i nii i ii.