 It's time for the Lawn Jean Chronoscope, a television journal of the important issues of the hour brought to you every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. A presentation of the Lawn Jean Wittner Watch Company, maker of Lawn Jean, the world's most honored watch, and Wittner, distinguished companion to the world-honored Lawn Jean. Good evening. This is Frank Knight. May I introduce our co-editors for this edition of the Lawn Jean Chronoscope? Larry Lasser from the CBS television news staff, and Kenneth Crawford, National Affairs Editor of Newsweek Magazine. Our distinguished guest for this evening is the honorable Guy Amgillette, senator from Iowa. Probably not since the days of the Spanish Civil War, has so much thinking centered about those two words, intervention or non-intervention. Now, President Eisenhower has said that Indochina is the cork in the bottle that keeps almost all of Asia from communist control. Our guest tonight, Senator Gillette, is one of the ranking Democrat members of the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee. And so, for a start, Senator, if I may, I'd like to ask you what you think we should do in Indochina? Well, of course, the Larry, the answer to what we should do now is an entirely different from the question as to what we should have done in the past. But we do have to face the situation as it is there today, and as you have just said, it's a very serious one. The necessary thing in my opinion is to have a definite program, a definite policy that will end the confusion. So far as our people are concerned, they'll have some idea of what we're trying to do as well as our allies. They can be assured of some definite plan as it is at the present. It is very indefinite. Well, Senator Gillette, you said not long ago that you favored turning over the problem of Indochina to the United Nations. Do you still feel that might accomplish anything? I feel it's essential. We, the United Nations, in my opinion, it marks the high point in international cooperation for world security, and I think international cooperation is essential for world security for more involvement. We are not using it at the present time in the Indochina situation, wherein it differs very materially from the situation that pertained in Korea at the time we became involved there when we went in under the aegis of the United Nations, working for United Nations principles with 16 associates that were contributing military forces and some 60 other nations that were contributing at least morals for it. Whereas we're in Korea, we've made no attempt to bring this to the United Nations. We've been proceeding unilaterally in the aid that we have given France and Vietnam, of course, as a subsidiary of France. Senator, some six weeks ago, I think you made a speech in which you said time was running out here. Isn't it now a question of perhaps time having run out? I'm afraid that there's too much truth in that, but it is true, as you suggested, that on the floor of the Senate. I said at that time, time was running out, and I felt that there were three things that we could do even then. We had time before Geneva. One was to give assurance to the people of the associated states of Indochina that we would support their aspirations for full independence, to bring the matter before the United Nations and bring the United Nations in under the the obligations that we all had incurred, and then to try to build up an area, a regional defense pact under the United Nations. That was not done. Don't you feel, Senator, that we're now beyond the place where direct intervention is a question here? Yes, and yet at the same time, we're in a desperate situation. We have been carrying, are carrying right this minute, 70% of the burden of that war in cost. I don't know how, and our people are asking. Ken, our people are asking, how did we become involved? How did we become subjugated? Why did that suddenly become our responsibility? France has been fighting in Indochina for seven and a half years. Those people have been trying to secure their independence. How did we happen to find it our war at the present time? And what are we going to do about it? We have spent this last year over a billion dollars in support. And the peculiar thing about it is that it hasn't gone to Vietnam, it's gone to France. And France has used it in any way that she sees fit. Well, Senator, there seems to be some doubt, actually, if we could get a majority vote in the United Nations with so many frightened Asiatic nations there. Now, what do you think of the possibility of getting a regional United Action or United Front in Indonesia, Indochina? I think we can accomplish that, Mr. Lesora. I'm sure we can. We have proceeded in negotiation developing regional PACs under the United Nations. But it does like to point out only a few months ago, we wouldn't allow France and Britain to go into our ANZUS PAC with New Zealand and Australia in the Pacific. And now we seem to want them in very badly. We are urging them to come in and there will be some hesitancy in bringing them in. The present plan, as I understand it, is not only to bring France and Great Britain in, but the associated states of Indochina and Philippines and the possibility of Japan. But, of course, along with New Zealand and Australia. And the possibility of Burma, the whole idea being that we can bring in the states that have a community of interest in that area. Time, as Ken suggested, is pretty well run out. Well, as you and Ken suggested, that it is a pretty desperate situation. But is there any optimism to be drawn from the Geneva conference so we note that the Russians seem to be more amenable to an armistice there, which might be controlled by neutral states, they've said. Do you feel that there is any reason for optimism over the results of this conference in Geneva? So far as I've seen any reports from Geneva, I see no occasion for optimism at all. Apparently, the communist group and the communist satellites are in the saddle there. And so far, they've up to the present time, they've given every evidence they expect to remain in the saddle and are going to dictate the terms. We have a very able man there, in General Beatle Smith, very keen and very able. But no man can accomplish anything unless you have a definite purpose and plan in which he's to work. Senator, as a practical matter, next in the Far East, what is it? A security pact of some kind and a new line, a new defense line somewhere, I take. That's about the only thing you can do. I think it's absolute folly, Ken, to talk about a blockade, to blockade the coast, an economic blockade, or to turn loose Jankochecks forces on the mainland. The first place they cannot accomplish anything. We have our airplanes or our airplane carriers at the present time in the Tonkin Gulf. But if we brought all the naval force of America into a blockade there, it could well bring in the Chinese Empire into full-scale war. And if it so, it would inevitably bring the Russian Empire into. And that would be Third World War. That would be Third World War. Senator, we seem to be thinking of in terms of too much, too late. But while we're thinking of what we haven't done in Indochina, what about places we can do something? There seems to be a very bad situation now in the Middle East, where most of the world's great oil reserves are underground. Would you form any kind of a coalition to secure that area? Well, of course, as you know, we have made rather marked progress in that direction. We started with the NATO pact. Then later, we extended it to include Greece and Turkey. Now we are working and with measurable success to bring Pakistan and possibility of Iraq. And that will extend it still further. But even so, there doesn't seem to be any disposition on our part to secure a firm peace in the Middle East vis-a-vis the between the Israelis and the Arabs. That situation seems to be deteriorating rapidly. It is. And I had the rather dubious privilege of visiting nine of those countries last fall in that area, in the Near Eastern area. And the situation there is rather desperate. There's no improvement in relations between the Arab States and Israel. In fact, every one of the Arab States told me, the leaders told me at that time, that they were defeated by Israel militarily, but that they were going to bring her to her knees economically through the blockading her and destroying her industrially. Senator, well, I have some time left. I'd like to turn the subject to another one. And that's the view of the hearings now taking place in Washington. I'd like to ask you a question. Some people are saying that the caliber of our representatives in Congress now has deteriorated. Now you've been in Congress for more than 20 years. Do you feel that we no longer have men of the caliber of Norris, Bora, the Elder La Follette? Oh, no, I wouldn't say that. The Congress is a cross section of men throughout the country, the length and breadth of the country. The districts and the states certainly select men in whom they have confidence. We have poor congressmen. We have very able congressmen. We've had them in the past and we have them at the present time. Of course, it's probably a fortunate thing. The distance lens enchantment. And we forget the weaknesses as time goes by. But I would say that this Congress compares very favorably with the preceding Congresses. You feel that there are giants in this Congress as well as there were in the past. Yes. We have giants in this Congress and we have members in this Congress that perhaps we could dispense with without any pain. Thank you very much, Senator Letcher. Proud to have you here tonight. The opinions expressed on the Longeen Chronoscope were those of the speakers. The editorial board for this edition of the Longeen Chronoscope was Larry Lassur and Kenneth Crawford. Our distinguished guest was the honorable Guy M. Gillette, Senator from Iowa. The satisfaction which comes from owning a Longeen watch is above and beyond price. The old words, accuracy and reliability take on a new and true meaning when applied to a Longeen watch. A Longeen watch brings priceless peace of mind. For one knows where one stands with time all the time. Now this is the result of experience. For almost a century, Longeen has made watches which, by observatory standards, have consistently been equal or superior in accuracy to the best achievements of each decade. Further proof is found in this fact. Among the finest watches of the world, only Longeen watches have been honored with 10 world's fair grand prizes and 28 gold medal awards. Yet though Longeen is one of the finest of all watches, there are many beautiful models for both ladies and gentlemen, which can be purchased for as little as 70-150. You may buy a watch in the weeks ahead for a graduate, for a wedding, or an anniversary present, or as the perfect Father's Day gift. Then remember these facts about Longeen. And if someone forgets you, why not remember yourself? The satisfaction that comes from owning a Longeen is truly above and beyond price. Longeen, the world's most honored watch, the world's most honored gift. Premier product of the Longeen Witner Watch Company. Since 1866, maker of watches of the highest character. We invite you to join us every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday evening at this same time for the Longeen Chronoscope, the television journal of the important issues of the hour, broadcast on behalf of Longeen, the world's most honored watch, and Witner, distinguished companion to the world-honored Longeen. This is Frank Knight reminding you that Longeen and Witner watches are sold and serviced from coast to coast by more than 4,000 leading jewelers who proudly display this emblem. Agency for Longeen Witner watches.