The Vietnam War - Dissertation Example

? Contents 2 1Introduction 3 1Background history 3 2Aims and objectives 5 2Literature review 5 2.1Media reaction to the Vietnam War 5 2.2Vietnam and subsequent changes in American domestic and foreign policies 10 3Methodology 13 4Analysis 15 Conclusion 17 Bibliography 18 President Eisenhower's News Conference, April 7, 1954. Public Papers of the 20 Presidents, 1954, p. 382. Retrieved from, 20 http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/pentagon/ps11.htm 20 Ruggie, J. 1996. Winning the peace: America and world order in the new era. 20 Chicago: Columbia University Press.  20 Schlesinger, J., Fall 1997. Fragmentation and hubris: A shaky basis for American 20 leadership. National Interest, 49, 3 – 9. 21 Abstract The Vietnam War is the singularly most important occurrence in the Cold War era, which was direct military fallout owing to the rising antagonism between the two superpowers, USA and USSR. This was keeping in line with the US anti-communist foreign policies observed during the Cuban Missile Crisis and Berlin Wall episode, and was a part of the various measures undertaken by US at that time to contain communism. However, unlike the Berlin wall and Cuban crises, Vietnam War reflects the ignominious defeat of US, and the price it had to pay in terms of psychological and actual monetary costs, still haunt the American socio-political milieu. The war was the longest in recent history, and stretched from 1955 to 1975, though, US came to be involved in this direct combat not until the early 1960s, and the consequences of this battle registered significantly in the minds of the American general public only during the last few years of the war. This article will analyze the Vietnam War and the far-reaching consequences that this war had in terms of subsequent US domestic and foreign policies. The Vietnam War 1 Introduction 1.1 Background history The Vietnam War was a part of the Cold War, the latter being primarily an ideological war between USSR and US, and was an instance where US took part in direct combat, to fight against the communist forces. This military conflict which started on 1st November 1955 and continued for the next two decades, ending with the fall of Saigon on 30th April 1975, occurred in Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. This war took place after the First Indochina War, and was fought between the communist USSR and its allies that had a stronghold in North Vietnam; and South Vietnam supported by the anti-communist forces, led by U.S. (Spector, 1993). Vietnam at this time lay divided along the lines of a Communist-ruled North, and the US allied South; after Ho Chi Minh put an end to the French colonial rule in 1954, under the 1954 Green Peace Accords. Drawn just after the Korean War, this Geneva agreement was a temporary settlement accorded to bring peace, mainly on the part of the communist forces. Owing to international pressure put on USSR and the People's Republic of China, its allies in Vietnam agreed to temporarily divide the nation on the seventeenth parallel. Moscow and Peking at that time was not particularly willing to face another confrontation with the anti-communist forces, so soon after the Korean debacle. After the division, the south elected Ngo Dinh Diem, a pro US political leader, as their President; leading to direct confrontation between the communist supporters and the anti-communist state authority. With the communist forces trying to unite the country, and the north President’s forces bent on detracting the communist supporters, the tension between the two factions was omnipresent, and it inevitably broke out into, first, an indirect and undercover combat; and later after US intervention, into a full-scale war. The Vietnam People’s Army that engaged in direct combat and relied primarily on territorial warfare, represented North Vietnam; while a communist controlled South Vietnamese faction known as Viet Cong that operated right from the enemy’s territory, helped it to a great extent. The South Vietnamese forces and the anti communist allies relied mainly on their air force and ammunition power, to conduct the battle that also involved ground forces, and heavy artillery.  In the Vietnam War, the U.S. government reviewed its part in the war that was in line with its foreign policy which directed it to abort attempts by the communist forces to take over South Vietnam; and it was also synchronous with their wider strategy of ‘communism containment.’ France that once occupied Vietnam (under colonial rule), was also involved in this anti-communist war, owing to which North Vietnam viewed it as a ‘colonial’ war, and initially fought primarily against France, and US that was backing France. Later, it also declared war against South Vietnam, which was supporting US, and hence viewed by the north as a puppet in the hands of its former colonial enemies. The first U.S. military advisors arrived during the 1950s, while there were increased involvements from the early 60s, with gradual increase in the number of US troops each year starting from 1960, while combat units came in around 1965 (25th Aviation Battalion, Church Committee Report On Diem Coup-1963, par. 223). US military operations that reached its highest summit in the year 1968 (during the Tet Offensive) extended across borders, and the neighboring countries of Cambodia and Laos, were also heavily bombed. Soon after this, domestic circumstances forced U.S. to withdraw its army (ground units) from Vietnam under the policy known as ‘Vietnamisation.’ In January 1973, all the concerned parties signed the Paris Peace Accord; however, the war ended two years later, in 1975. 1.2 Aims and objectives This article aims to study the Vietnam War and its implications on US domestic and foreign policies. The Vietnam episode is unique in the sense that for the first time in history US media had complete freedom to cover the entire war. However, the media representation of this war created severe repercussions within the general US public back home, leading to the US government to bow before public demand and recall its army back, an unprecedented event, both in American and world history. 2 Literature review 2.1 Media reaction to the Vietnam War The Vietnam War was a landmark in many different ways. During the time there were many technological innovations leading to high quality photography, while the television was also invented at around the same time; and the two combined “took the conflict into people’s living rooms and provided what was broadly understood as being the next best thing to being there” (Brandon, 2007, 91). For the first time the Americans were made aware about the true nature of an ongoing war, with vivid details and graphic representations. There was no media censorship, since the US government viewed the Vietnam episode as a ‘conflict’ and not a full- fledged war, and in this regards Strobel confirms that “the more limited the conflict is in its objectives, the less likely the government can impose strict social controls, including curbs on the news media” (1997, 29). Initially, media reported positive reviews that showed the ongoing war and the US army in a positive light. At this time, media was publishing news articles and pictures that kept the government happy and the general people were unaware of the actual ground zero realities. Later seeing the brutal nature of this war and taking cognizance of their journalistic ethics and social responsibilities, US media completely turned around, and started relaying news, printed articles, published photographs, and aired clippings on the television that jolted the US people from their deep slumber. Massive protest rallies were organized, while fierce outrage expressed against the government, and that finally forced the concerned authorities to halt its military operations in Vietnam. In the Vietnam War, the press had full freedom, and they could publish photographs on almost any subject, thus, allowing the press photographers to print various kinds of war photography, that were previously unimagined by the American public. Media managed to open a direct access into the war zone, which resulted in a changed perspective of the Americans, and created a new perception of the term ‘war’ that was harsher. Such extensive media coverage produced grave anti-establishment feelings amongst the general people, resulting in “massive and near universal protest movements, peaceful and militant, which pervaded American life” (Hudson and Stanier, 1997, 104). “Thomas Reston of the New York Times wrote: ‘Maybe the historians will agree that the reporters and the cameras were decisive in the end. They brought the war to the people…and forced the withdrawal of American power from Vietnam’ Then again, maybe not” (Taylor, 1997, 108). These continuous publications of photographs in all the leading newspapers, and the daily airing of pictures through the television, portraying the deaths of US soldiers and the Vietnamese, created a huge public outrage back home in US, forcing the government to call back its soldiers; and this phenomenon is now referred to as the “Vietnam Syndrome’” (ibid, 109). These reactions and severe public outrage made the US government comprehend the seriousness of the impact that new age technology, in the form of television and print media (through graphic details and vivid photography) can create, and jeopardize an ongoing military activity and affect the state’s foreign policies. It also made the government and the army authorities wary of all future actions pertaining to media access right into the battle field. Given below are some of the more famous photographs that created a stir back home in US, leading to protests, strikes, and the ultimate recall of the US army. Fig 1: “South Vietnamese National Police Chief Brig Gen. Nguyen Ngoc Loan executes a Viet Cong officer with a single pistol shot in the head in Saigon, Vietnam on Feb. 1, 1968” (Source: AP Photo/ Nick- Ut, Horst Faas, 2006). To the American ‘delicate’ minds that were not used to war brutalities General Nguyen Ngoc Loan came to represent the devil itself. Later, the photographer Eddie Adams apologized to the General for printing this photo and in a way destroying his life. in his apology letter he stated “I won a Pulitzer Prize in 1969 for a photograph of one man shooting another … The general killed the Viet Cong; I killed the general with my camera. Still photographs are the most powerful weapon in the world. People believe them, but photographs do lie, even without manipulation. They are only half-truths. What the photograph didn't say was, "What would you do if you were the general at that time and place on that hot day, and you caught the so-called bad guy after he blew away one, two or three American soldiers?" General Loan was what you would call a real warrior, admired by his troops. I'm not saying what he did was right, but you have to put yourself in his position” (Vietnam Executions, ‘General to Pizza Cook’, 2010). fig 2: “A South Vietnamese ranger uses the end of a dagger to administer punishment to a South Vietnamese farmer for allegedly supplying government troops with wrong information on Communist guerrillas during the Vietnam War, January 1964” (Source: AP Photo/Horst Faas, 2006) Fig 3: “The Napalm Girl,” a famous photograph that sparked widespread outrage in the western world, showed the horrific side of this war. In this picture, “South Vietnamese forces follow after terrified children, including 9-year-old Kim Phuc, center, as they run down Route 1 near Trang Bang after an aerial napalm attack on suspected Viet Cong hiding places on June 8, 1972. A South Vietnamese plane accidentally dropped its flaming napalm on South Vietnamese troops and civilians” (Source: Source: AP Photo/ Nick- Ut, Horst Faas 2006). After publications of many similar photographs, and daily reporting on the war brutalities via the television and the print media (journals, newspapers), gave rise to large-scale public outrage; and this entire episode became a sort of a revelation to the US government. Subsequently, it also led to the US army authorities imposing stringent regulations and a complete ban on all media coverage of any future war. A close watch was also kept on the media, during all post Vietnam wars that included the Gulf War, Iraq war, and the present ongoing Afghanistan war. “One of the lessons the Pentagon took from Vietnam was that the power of television meant control of the military’s message was central to the success of their operations” (Campbell, 2003, 59). The, Vietnam War brought about many changes in the US domestic policies and military strategies pertaining to media reporting. Under present circumstances, we find that the US military has banned media from covering any of its operations, except for some embedded journalists, who have limited access to the war zones, and even they are also bound by many stringent policy rules and army regulations. 2.2 Vietnam and subsequent changes in American domestic and foreign policies After America’s exit from Vietnam in 1973, and the subsequent defeat of South Vietnam in 1975, did not however lead to a resurgence of “McCarthyite Red-baiting” as was expected, instead there occurred a sort of ‘collective amnesia’ where no one was willing to talk about the Vietnam episode (Sitikoff, The Post War impact of Vietnam). It was again during the early 1980s, there occurred “a renewed interest in the war” (ibid) in the form of movies, television telecasts, music where Vietnam became a popular theme; while the journalists and the war veterans published a large number of books from their personal experiences concerning the legacies of the war. The most popular theme echoed on George R. Kennan' portrayal of this war as "the most disastrous of all America's undertakings over the whole two hundred years of its history"(cited in, ibid). The Vietnam episode brought about many internal woes to the US government. The ignominy of this defeat broke down the myth of US army’s invincibility, while the economic problems that were plaguing US at that time, were put down on the “estimated $167 billion spent on the war” (ibid). President Lyndon B. Johnson's decision to start the war without levying any significant tax to bring in money, started an inflation that soon went up to 2 digit figures, and led to increasing debts by the federal government that scarred the US economy, and significantly brought down the general standards of living, which continued into the 1990s (ibid). Such severe economic repercussions brought down the public faith on the government, and there were doubts expressed regarding the degree of honesty and the actual competence of those at the helms of the country. The people now viewed the authorities with a certain amount of distrust, while the US military remained a discredited institution for many years after the Vietnam episode. At this time, the American political atmosphere also changed, and increasingly the leaders, especially the Democrats, started questioning the relevance in trying to remove the communist forces from all countries in the world. In 1973, with a Democratic majority, the Congress implemented the 1973 War Powers Resolution, where the Presidential powers were clipped, and U.S. troops could not be sent into a war for more than 3 months, without consent from the Congress. “Exercising a greater assertiveness in matters of foreign policy, Congress increasingly emphasized the limits of American power, and the ceiling on the cost Americans would pay in pursuit of specific foreign policy objectives” (ibid). At this time there also came into vogue a neo-isolationist tendency that President Richard M. Nixon labeled as "the Vietnam syndrome," and this feeling existed during the various public debates that took place over President Reagan's intervening foreign policies in case of Nicaragua. The ‘Vietnam syndrome’ again came to the forefront when President George Bush decided to send US troops to fight against Saddam Hussein’s Iraqi forces and drive them out of Kuwait. Despite the US victory in the1991 Gulf War and later the President’s declaration “By God, we've kicked the Vietnam syndrome once and for all!" the same Vietnam syndrome again reared its head during public debates over President Clinton's decision to send U.S. peacekeeping forces in the African countries of Bosnia and Somalia. It is thus clearly evident that the disastrous Vietnam episode that had occurred more than 40 years back still continues to loom within the American minds. Keeping this Vietnam syndrome in mind, designs for a new framework pertaining to US foreign policies was outlined, and here it was unanimously decided by the US Congress that military force would be used only in four scenarios. These were: a) as a last resort when there are no other available options to avert a certain dangerous situation; b) in the wake of a threat to the US national interest; c) only after taking note of public consensus which promises to lend a strong support; d) and, only when the chances of a fast and inexpensive victory are relatively high. Another domestic scenario entailed after the Vietnam War, where US society as a whole decided to shun the veterans of this war (not entirely denigrated). In actual count, there were more than 2 million US soldiers that had gone to Vietnam, with around 1.6 million that took part in direct combat. A further “300,000 were physically wounded, the many more who bore psychological scars, the 2,387 listed as "missing in action," and more than 58,000 who died” (ibid). No aid was available to these war veterans and their families, who were in desperate need of assistance at that time. It was only after 1982, when there was a dedication made for the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington, D.C., that US slowly came to face its own fear, and started acknowledging the sacrifices made by the soldiers, and the suffering they endured during the Vietnam War. After this, there was a general consensus that the entire Vietnam episode was an unfortunate one and those who had taken part in it were actually ‘good soldiers’ that had the misfortune to take part in a ‘bad war,’ though no public policies were created by the political order to help the war veterans, financially or psychologically. The Vietnam War still continues to haunt the psyche of the Americans, and it is evident in the perceived reactions of the people, when there are reports of the various political leaders that in the 1960s-70s had used their connections to avoid going to the war. In 1988 “Dan Quayle, had to defend his reputation against revelations that he had used family political connections to be admitted into the Indiana National Guard in 1969 to avoid ...duty in Vietnam” (ibid). Four years later again fresh controversies arose when leaked news alleged that Bill Clinton, the then Democratic candidate for President, had avoided the war draft in 1969 using his family’s strong political connections, after which he had been a part of several antiwar demonstrations, while as a student in England. Today the Americans universally view the Vietnam War as a ‘morally ambiguous’ battle that led to the downfall of the US super power, which had developed a strong messianic faith in its self-created definition of virtue and righteousness. 3 Methodology The nature of research work carried out in this paper is known as secondary research, which can be defined as “analyzing [the] already collected data within another study” (Sarantakos, 2005, 297). Secondary researches generally involve a detailed study of all the available data, which is perceived as necessary, owing to the fact that often ‘a wealth of data’ that has been collected for various other non-research objectives, can also be used quite effectively to answer one’s questions in a research paper. Secondary research work generally creates a broader perspective for the concerned researcher to study and collect a large number of required data from various resources. The research process methodology as followed for this paper is based on the outline given by Graziano & Raulin, in their paper. Personal experience other’s research Initial idea procedures design study analysis Communication Interpretation Stimulating Others Research Fig: 3- Research process methodology by Graziano & Raulin, 2009, 40. The research paper is qualitative in nature and, this type of research work “is best suitable when little is known about a product, category, or respondent group or when the researcher wishes to expand the current state of knowledge…” (Mariampolski, 2001, 23-24). It is also important to use an inductive and qualitative analytical method, which would make it easier for the researcher to come to a “conclusion from one of more particular facts or pieces of evidence [where] the conclusion explains the facts, and the facts explain the conclusion” (Blumberg, Cooper, Schindler, 2005, 23). Summarily, this research process will consist of first locating all the relevant data and then studying and analyzing all the available data on this topic; then critical assumptions will be made from the gathered data; while, further supporting material will be collected to provide supporting evidence for all the opinions expressed and conclusions derived. 4 Analysis Vietnam War can be analyzed using international theories in order to get an overall view of the entire episode that spelled disaster for US. Since its inception, USA’s foreign policy objectives had always focused on safeguarding its national security and economic prosperity (Schlesinger, 1997). During the initial years US had no problems in maintaining its stance, as it remained relatively separate from the rest of the world, owing to the natural barriers. It protected itself from foreign threats while also bringing in economic prosperity, through its foreign policy that worked on the traditionalist or the unilateralist approach (Ruggie, 1996). Traditionalist or unilateralist is synonymous to ‘isolationism,’ where a nation decides to stay away from getting involved in other nation’s affairs, while taking responsibility for solving its own domestic problems (ibid). However, during the start of the 20th century as the world grew closer, owing to the emerging concept of the globalization and liberalization, US could not remain isolated any more (Schlesinger, 1997). In order to ensure national security and to maintain the economic prosperity, the country now adopted a new foreign policy that worked on the lines of internationalist-multilateralism (ibid). The internationalist-multilateralism theory especially came into vogue after Pearl Harbor incident, and with active support from President Franklin Roosevelt, it soon manifested itself in all the US foreign policies. This approach also formed to be the very guidelines, under which the United Nations were formed; and all global alliances in the nature of economic and political relationships that US forged with other nations, were viewed through this theory (Schlesinger, 1997). After the WWII, there were two superpower nations, USSR, and US (a bipolar order), and soon the relationship between the two countries became tense, owing to ideological differences, a sense of constant competition, and a deep-rooted suspicion (Leffler, 1984). This period of growing hostility between the two superpowers is known as the Cold War, where often the situation came very close to the two powers going into direct combat (Brzezinski, 1994). During the Cuban Missile Crisis when Kennedy and Khrushchev could not settle to an agreement, there were possibilities of the initiation of third world war (ibid). The Vietnam War was part of this ensuing Cold War, where US aimed to stop the spread of communism. The US had started believing in their invincibility after defeating the Axis group in WWII, and thought that defeating the Asians would not also pose to be a serious problem. At this time, the US foreign policy was based on the international relations theory of ‘Neorealism’ (Waltz, 1997) which states that in absence of one supreme power or a single sovereign ruler (that it strove to be), there is anarchy at the international level (Waltz, 1988). It was during this Vietnam War that we become aware of the ‘domino theory’, as propagated by US, which subsequently turned into a basic element, as was seen in all the US foreign policies during that time. The domino theory conceptualized that, if a country came under communism, then all its neighboring countries would follow suit, in what is known as the dominoes effect. Successive US governments used this theory during the entire Cold War era, to justify worldwide American intervention. As regards the Vietnam War, the U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower in a press conference in 1954 had explained the dominoes theory and said, “Finally, you have broader considerations that might follow what you would call the "falling domino" principle. You have a row of dominoes set up, you knock over the first one, and what will happen to the last one is the certainty that it will go over very quickly. So you could have a beginning of a disintegration that would have the most profound influences” (President Eisenhower's News Conference, April 7, 1954). It was ultimately the theory of ‘Neorealism,’ along with the a firm belief in the dominoes effect theory that led US to take part in the disastrous Vietnam War episode, the consequences of which it still suffers, even after a period of 40 years. Conclusion The primary concern that led US into the Vietnam War, as shown in the above discourse, had very little to do with interests for the benefit of the Vietnamese people (north or south). Rather, it was more interested in warding off the spread of communism, in the form of dominoes effect within the whole of Asia. It was the act of a country that was primarily concerned in saving its own reputation of being invincible, in face of the growing threat of USSR; and it viewed Vietnam as simply a part and an extension of the Soviet problem (Khong, 2004). Since US based its foreign policies on neorealist suppositions, where it believed that in a bipolar world, if one actor was successful, it meant the end of the other superpower; so it strove to emerge successful at all costs. In order to always keep an upper hand over the USSR, United States involved itself in the Vietnam War, which ultimately led to is disastrous defeat, with severe repercussions back home where it faced adverse conditions within its own domestic socio-political and economic circles. Bibliography 25th Aviation Battalion. Church Committee Report on Diem Coup-1963, par. 223. Retrieved from, http://25thaviation.org/facts/id430.htm AP Photo/ Nick- Ut, Horst Faas, 2006. Retrieved from, http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?96111-Vietnam-pics-by-Horst-Faas. Blumberg, B., Cooper, R., & Schindler, P. 2005. Business research methods (1st eds.). Berkshire: McGraw Hill, 20, 23. Brandon, L. 2007. Art and War. New York: I.B. Tauris. Brzezinski, Z. 1994. The premature partnership. Foreign Affairs, 73(2), 67 – 82. Campbell, D. 2003. Cultural governance and pictorial resistance: reflections on the imaging of war. Review of international studies, 29 (Supplement S1), 57-73. Graziano, A., & Raulin, M., 2009. Research methods: A process of inquiry (7th Ed.). Boston, MS: Allyn & Bacon. 26. Hudson, M., & Stanier, J. 1997. War and the media: a random searchlight. Thrupp: Sutton, 104. Khong, Y. F. (2004). “Seduction by analogy in Vietnam: The Malaya and Korea analogies.” In, G. J. Ikenberry (ed.), American foreign policy: Theoretical essays. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 523 – 533. Leffler, M. 1984. The American conception of national security and the beginnings of the cold war. The American Historical Review, 89(2), 346 – 381. Mariampolski, H. 2001. Qualitative Market Research: A Comprehensive Guide. London: Sage, 2001.23-24. President Eisenhower's News Conference, April 7, 1954. Public Papers of the Presidents, 1954, p. 382. Retrieved from, http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/pentagon/ps11.htm Ruggie, J. 1996. Winning the peace: America and world order in the new era. Chicago: Columbia University Press.  Schlesinger, J., Fall 1997. Fragmentation and hubris: A shaky basis for American leadership. National Interest, 49, 3 – 9. Sarantakos, S. 2005. Social Research, Edition 3, Basingstoke: Palgrave. Sitikoff, H. The Post War impact of Vietnam. Retrieved from, http://www.english.illinois.edu/maps/vietnam/postwar.htm Spector, R., 1993. After Tet: The Bloodiest Year in Vietnam. New York: Vintage Books. Strobel, W. 1997. Late-Breaking Foreign Policy: The News Media’s Influence on Peace Operations. United States Institute of Peace Press, Washington D.C. Taylor, P. 1997. Global Communications, International Affairs, and the Media Since 1945. London: Routledge. Vietnam Executions, 2010. General to Pizza Cook. Retrieved at, http://www.famouspictures.org/mag/index.php?title=Vietnam_Execution Waltz, K., 1988. The origins of war in neorealist theory. Journal of Interdisciplinary Study, 18(4), 615-628. Waltz, K., 1997. Evaluating theories. The American Political Science Review, 91(4), 913–917. Read More