In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

7Entangling Alliances and Mounting Costs, 1970–71 The parade of reversals af›icting the AFL-CIO in the late 1960s continued into the 1970s. Critics gleefully exposed the questionable arrangements made by the supposedly independent U.S. trade unionists to the glare of daylight, and growing numbers of trade unionists, especially at the rank and ‹le level, de‹ed Meany and joined the peace movement. In Saigon, the CVT also faced mounting challenges, including an expanded campaign of terrorism by the VC and charges of corruption within its own ranks. Reeling from the setbacks of 1968 and 1969, free trade unionists struggled to adapt to new circumstances both at home and abroad. Desperate to preserve free trade unionism in Vietnam, the acrobatics required of both the AFL-CIO and the CVT grew more complicated. For survival, the CVT made limited common cause with President Thieu. Meanwhile, the AFL-CIO, de‹antly clinging to its Vietnam agenda, forged an awkward, symbiotic relationship with President Richard Nixon, a bond made entirely possible by the divisive, painful war in Vietnam. “The Price We Paid for Mr. Meany’s Support on Vietnam” As President Richard Nixon took the oath of of‹ce in January 1969, uppermost in the minds of free trade unionists was anxiety over the future of foreign aid spending. By the end of the 1960s, the AFL-CIO was, through its international programs such as AAFLI, a leading recipient of expenditures. In its endeavors to promote free and independent trade unions worldwide, the federation had become ever more dependent on foreign aid subsidies. Even its allies in South Vietnamese labor seemed confused as to the exact boundaries separating the U.S. government and the AFL-CIO. 153 As with virtually everything else, the unpopular war in Vietnam complicated the foreign aid picture for organized labor. Aid had always been controversial in a country where many voters leaned toward isolationism and tended to view foreign aid as a wasteful diversion from pressing problems at home. As passions deepened over the war in Southeast Asia, attitudes hardened , and the debate surrounding aid grew ever more contentious.1 By the late 1960s, the Far Left had developed a biting critique of foreign aid. Radicals argued that aid appropriations were hardly sel›ess acts of humanitarianism but rather were part and parcel of an imperialistic drive to expand American in›uence and “open-door” market values.2 Meanwhile President Nixon—borrowing a critical approach from the Right—proposed to economize and streamline foreign aid by redirecting it through multilateral channels such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, thereby avoiding politically loaded, waste-laden, nation to nation aid.3 In his drive to expand and preserve his international programs, Meany increasingly faced harsh criticism from both ends of the political spectrum.4 Over the years, the AFL-CIO fashioned its defense of foreign aid around ideals of charity and anticommunism. Pointing to the large proportion of AID dollars spent domestically, labor also argued that aid provided valuable jobs at home, contributing to full employment. Yet as the Vietnam War grew more controversial labor found it more and more dif‹cult to make the case for aid. William S. Gaud, the AID administrator, described the bitter yearly congressional battle over foreign aid appropriations as an annual “cliff hanger.”5 On one occasion Senator Wayne Morse of Oregon threatened Gaud that, short of serious negotiations in Vietnam, he planned to vote against all aid appropriations.6 By mid-1968, both liberals and conservatives were clamoring for reductions in foreign aid, imperiling AAFLI and the AFL-CIO’s other overseas projects. To appease critics, President Johnson promised to tighten procedures and address balance of payments issues by ordering more aid dollars be spent domestically.7 Nonetheless Congress slashed AID’s appropriation for 1968 to the lowest amount in the agency’s history.8 It was thus with trepidation that the AFL-CIO faced the presidency of Richard Nixon. A Republican who had been ‹ercely opposed by the AFLCIO , Nixon promised to be no friend to free trade unionism. The new president , within several months of taking of‹ce, launched plans to reform foreign aid by creating the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, a semipublic organization designed to shift aid administration into private hands.9 The Nixon administration, AFL-CIO vice president Joseph Bierne warned Meany, risked “losing sight of the social development aspect” of foreign aid, adding that “there can be very little possibility for American labor...

Share