WHENEVER battle scenes at Vietnamese detention centres are splashed across our morning newspapers, the temptation is to cry 'foul'. Given the excesses of past attempts to restore order in the camps, it is hardly surprising that in many quarters, not least in the international media, the knee-jerk reaction is to blame the police and the Correctional Services Department.
There comes a time, however, when it is no longer possible to see the inmates of the detention centres as victims of aggression. If they are victims at all, it is of the cynical propaganda aimed at them by politicians in the United States, and by those of their countrymen with something to gain by holding out unrealistic hopes of resettlement in the West. Whatever sympathy one may still feel for their hatred and fear of the Vietnamese Government, it is impossible to condone premeditated violence and the use of lethal weapons. The bottom line is that nations worldwide, including the United States, has accepted the remaining detainees must be sent back to Vietnam by next April at the latest. They may go voluntarily or be deported under the Orderly Return Programme; but there will be no exceptions. Violent resistance is not only counter-productive, it puts their safety and the safety of their children at risk.
Nevertheless, there may be lessons to be drawn by the security services from Saturday's messy operation to clear Section One of Whitehead. One, which they might have learned from the fiasco on April 7, last year, is that tear-gas is only of limited use in such operations. It is good for dispersing crowds in situations where they have somewhere to run to, but of little help in the cramped surrounds of a detention centre, where the main victims are likely to be children. It has demonstrated itself to have been even less used in rounding up reluctant inmates. Another lesson, which police spokesmen have already alluded to, is that solidarity among camp inmates crosses lines between sections. Fences will have to be strengthened, guards will have to be posted.
But other conclusions may be less obvious. Although smaller operations at more frequent intervals may appear a better solution, in the current mood of the camps that is unlikely to be helpful. A similar operation to remove 1,500 people was conducted recently with relatively little trouble. It is generally felt the sudden change of mood is purely the result of the bill to allocate money for the resettlement of Vietnamese now going through Congress.
Against that political backdrop, the chances of conducting peaceful transfers between camps are limited. But careful planning and renewed efforts to counsel inmates against pinning their hopes too high must take absolute priority.