THE VERY virtues that made Diem such an effective anti-Communist leader—steadfastness and stubbornness—now seem to be working inevitably toward his downfall. From the first Buddhist outbreaks, he has missed one opportunity after another to conciliate the opposition, or failing that, to blunt its thrust. By the time he was grudgingly ready to conciliate—by offering an international investigation of the May 8 shootings—the Buddhist leadership had upped the ante with further demands, and American public opinion was captured and held by what the London Economist calls “the cynical public-relations activities of sharp young monks.” 

In Western terms Diem’s rigidity is inexplicable. Had he immediately broadcast his regret over the Hue shootings, along with a promise that there would be no repetition, the ground would have been cut from under the opposition. Even later in the game, if he had gathered about him a group of prestigious Buddhists loyal to his government, and made them his spokesmen in the crisis, the world would not have been so quick to see an essentially political struggle as a religious one. For whether the Buddhist protest was religious in its origins or was politically motivated from the first, the major news media in this country are now agreed that the battle is political.

Even today, after the particularly brutal repressions that preceded the arrival of Ambassador Lodge, it is instructive to consider whether the Buddhist revolt is, or ever was, an essentially religious protest. It is true that as long ago as last March the French Catholic magazine Informations Catholiques Internationales warned against any attempt to establish Catholicism in Vietnam. And there is, reporters agree, a disproportionately high number of Catholics in the Diem government, plus charges of favoritism toward Catholic groups. None of this is to be defended. Nevertheless, as the reports from Vietnam accumulated, charges of persecution of Buddhists became more and more elusive. Before Diem—or his brother—touched off the attack on the pagodas, it was not clear whether the charges were justified or just what the Buddhist leadership wanted. Marguerite Higgins’ articles in the Herald Tribune, arguing that the Buddhist cause was hollow and opportunistic from the first, illustrate how uncertain our knowledge of Vietnam really is.

If this has not really been a religious protest, but rather a cynical attempt to use Buddhism to bring down the Diem regime, then the American public has been viewing the turmoil from a curious angle. American indignation seems largely based on a sensitivity toward religious rights, and to a lesser extent on our belief in Church-State separation, both of which appear to have doubtful application in present-day Vietnam.

The Diem raid on the pagodas, however, has radically altered the situation. The brutality of the action, the violation of religious grounds, plus the breach of faith with the American government, have probably tipped the scales decisively against the regime. World public opinion, and perhaps Vietnamese opinion, is now solidly against Diem, and once again the United States, despite its own best efforts, has found itself backing a repressive regime in the name of anti-Communism. Here it seems that the attack on the pagodas was either an act of desperation or a drastic miscalculation of American reaction. It is difficult not to feel some sympathy for Diem, who fought both French colonialists and Communists with equal strength and conviction. But once again it is becoming clear that anti-Communism is not enough. It is possible that Diem could still conciliate both the American government and the Buddhist opposition. But it is highly unlikely. Partly through Diem’s efforts, the Buddhist movement has gained the kind of momentum that will grow until Diem fails. The question now is not so much “If not Diem, who?” but rather, “Instead of Diem, who?” The matter is complicated by the failure of the Buddhist movement to produce a leader of Diem’s stature. But that is another problem. The issue of the moment is how to ease Diem out.