§ Q9. Mr. Dribergasked the Prime Minister if, following his inquiries, he has now received a full report of the statement made recently by the United States Ambassador in Saigon, concerning the unlimited intensification of the war in Vietnam; and if he will make a statement.
§ Q12. Mr. Hefferasked the Prime Minister, following his inquiries into the matter, what report he has received regarding the statement of General Maxwell Taylor, the United States Ambassador in Saigon; and if he will make a statement.
§ The Prime MinisterMy right hon. Friend at my request took this up with United States Ministers. He was assured that General Taylor's remarks did not mean that there had been any change in United States policy.
§ Mr. DribergWhile thanking my right hon. Friend for making those inquiries and passing on to us the result of them—whatever it means—may I ask him whether he or the Foreign Secretary will be able, in Thursday's debate, to deal with the whole question of the risks of escalation in Vietnam, and bearing in mind what happened in Korea and what President Truman had to say to General MacArthur, to what extent President Johnson is still in detailed control of military operations?
§ The Prime MinisterWe shall, of course, in the debate on Thursday, give the House as full a statement as possible. I think that my right hon. Friend intends to speak quite fully about it. We are all very concerned about the possible dangers here of escalation. While I have seen some three or four different accounts from different sources of what General Taylor 1395 is supposed to have said, it is extremely hard to form a clear view of what he said or what he meant to say. What I rely on is the clear statement given by the United States authorities in Washington that nothing he said or meant to say in any way derogated from what the President said about his own intentions.
§ Mr. ZilliacusWould my right hon. Friend confirm that this means that General Taylor's remark that there might be unlimited escalation of the war has been repudiated by the President and not that this is the policy of the United States Government?
§ The Prime MinisterThere is some argument as to what was actually said at this apparently rather strange Press briefing conference by General Taylor. Certainly—this was stated outside the White House by my right hon. Friend last week—my right hon. Friend made it plain that he had sought specific assurances on this question and had got them.
§ Mr. Stratton MillsDid the Foreign Secretary consult the Prime Minister before making his very tactless remarks to the National Press Club?
§ The Prime MinisterI think that the hon. Gentleman is one of the very few in the House who do not welcome the statement made by my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary. As to consultation, we were both in complete agreement as to what should be done and what should be said last week.
§ Mr. RankinIn view of the fact that nobody, including General Taylor, seems to know exactly what he said, or what he meant, can we all conclude that he was just "blethering"?
§ The Prime MinisterMy study of the various reports suggests that even that would be a rash assumption to make on the wording that I saw. Certainly, as I say, we must have our relations with the United States Government on this question and their position on this is quite clear. It is, of course, a fact that General Taylor is in Washington at present and discussions are going on. If there should be any change—which I have no reason to expect—in the statement by United States Ministers to my right hon. Friend, we 1396 would be told about it and we should certainly express any views that we might have on it.