A war watched abroad
Vietnam was not only an American issue. Allies and non-allies alike watched the war, and by 1967 it had become a focus of protest in many countries. The reasons varied: pacifism, anti-imperialism, sympathy for the Vietnamese, anger at a close ally’s government or simple fear of escalation. The protests abroad were generally smaller than the largest American events, but they showed that the United States was losing the argument about the war among many of its own friends.
London and Grosvenor Square
In Britain, opposition to the war came from the Labour left, the peace movement and students, and was not trivial even though the Labour government under Harold Wilson gave the United States diplomatic support without sending troops. The Vietnam Solidarity Campaign, formed in 1966 and associated with Tariq Ali and others, organised marches to the United States Embassy in Grosvenor Square. The best-remembered Grosvenor Square demonstrations came in March and October 1968, when clashes with police were far larger, so the 1967 events should be seen as the run-up rather than the climax. Even so, the embassy square had already become the traditional destination for antiwar marches in London.
West Berlin and Germany
West Berlin was a special case, because American troops were a symbol of the city’s protection. This gave student protest there an uneasy edge. Students questioned how far the Federal Republic should support the American war, and some compared US actions with earlier German aggression. The most important event of the year in Berlin, the demonstration against the Shah of Iran on 2 June, was not primarily about Vietnam, but it shaped the student left that later led protests against the war. The mass Vietnam Congress in Berlin came in February 1968, again showing the pattern of 1967 as a build-up year.
Tokyo and Haneda
In Japan, memories of the Second World War and the continuing presence of US bases fed a strong peace movement. On 8 October 1967, student groups clashed with riot police near Haneda Airport to try to block Prime Minister Eisaku Sato’s departure for a tour that included South Vietnam. A student died in the fighting, and many were injured. A second Haneda clash followed in November. The Haneda protests were noticeable for their militancy, with students using helmets and wooden poles, and they influenced radicals elsewhere.
Australia
Australia had sent troops to Vietnam and had introduced a conscription system based on a birthday lottery in 1964-65. Protests there were therefore often about conscription as well as the war. Women’s groups such as Save Our Sons, founded in 1965, held vigils and supported young men resisting the call-up. The largest Australian demonstrations came later, with the Moratorium marches of 1970 and 1971, but the pattern of 1967 was a growing movement in Sydney and Melbourne, particularly among students and church people. The government of Harold Holt, who had famously said “all the way with LBJ” in 1966, remained committed to the alliance.
Scandinavia and elsewhere
In Sweden, Denmark and Norway, local Vietnam committees collected funds, held marches and pressed their governments. Sweden’s government, under Olof Palme as a cabinet minister, was publicly critical of the American war, and its capital became a setting for important gatherings. Similar groups appeared in the Netherlands, France, Italy and elsewhere. Their activities were often small and local, but they added to a general sense of international disapproval.
The Russell Tribunal
One of the more unusual events of 1967 was the International War Crimes Tribunal, usually called the Russell Tribunal after the philosopher Bertrand Russell, who initiated it. It was not an official court and had no power to enforce a verdict. Its members were intellectuals and activists from several countries, with Jean-Paul Sartre as executive president. Participants included Simone de Beauvoir, Isaac Deutscher and Stokely Carmichael.
The first session took place in Stockholm in May 1967, and a second in Roskilde, Denmark, in late November and early December. The tribunal examined evidence about American conduct, including bombing of civilian areas and the use of weapons such as napalm, and its members concluded that the United States was guilty of aggression and of other violations of international law. Critics described it as one-sided and politically motivated, since only one side of the war was on trial. Supporters argued that it brought attention to information that governments preferred to ignore. Whatever its legal standing, it was an important moment in the public debate.
What the international movement meant
The overseas protests did not alter American policy directly. Their significance was cultural and diplomatic. They helped to make anti-Americanism a theme of the left in many countries, and they tied the war to wider arguments about colonialism and the Cold War. They also connected young people across borders, a connection that would be clearer in 1968.