Compare and Contrast the Vietnam War and Operation Iraqi Freedom - Essay Example

Compare and Contrast the Vietnam War and Operation Iraqi Freedom al Affiliation: Compare and Contrast the Vietnam War and Operation Iraqi Freedom. Counterinsurgency is the action taken to stop insurgency and it may take form of military, economic or civic action based on the support of the large population who feel that the government will protect them. This battle of counterinsurgency has to take form of both political and military dimension. The United States of America has over the years in the post world war two emerged as the worlds military power and its Economic strength has supported the growth of the military because as a state its must protect its interest both internally and in its foreign policies. The Vietnam War and Operation Iraqi Freedom are two examples of the military invasion led by the USA. The Vietnam war which according to Vietnam is the American war was and ideological dispute that the US was trying to prevent the spread of communist ideology to the South Vietnam. The cold war was felt in Vietnam as the Soviet Union and the US flexed their ideological interest militarily (Harry, 1985). The North had already defeated the French colonizers in 1954 and wanted to form a united Vietnam with a communist based government similar to the former Soviet Union and China but the South wanted to for a democratic state allied to the USA and the west. Counterinsurgent strategy on both wars was to topple the government and hand power to the natives who cooperated with the US foreign policy. Vietnam insurgents could not accept any other thing rather than independence. The US army was not well prepared for the new insurgency by the Vietnam. In Iraq the Sunnis wanted power over the other tribes so they had to compromise (Bruce, 2008) with the US forces in order to get power. The operation Iraqi freedom main aim was to outset the president Saddam Hussein who was said to have possession of weapons of mass distraction. The Iraqi state, having being declared a rogue state which supports terrorists groups  financially and providing weapons, especially after the September eleven bombings. The main reason of the operation Iraqi freedom was to outset the government and replace it with a west allied which would help the US protect its national interest weather it was because of the large oil deposits in Iraq or the national security issues like terrorism. The two wars differs first with the fact that the US was fighting a historically known well build resistance in Vietnam which before has resisted the French and was united by a common ideal of independence (Bruce, 2008). The Iraqi government on the other hand was a young state with a multi ethnicity background and religious division. The disunity of the people of Iraq made it easy for the USA to invade and replace the government with a new government. So the national identity of the Vietnamese made it hard for the USA outset them like the Iraqi government. In Vietnam, the US went to war with a well disciple, skilled, experienced enemy who had a stable structure of operation and has external backup ally who provided for military assistance. During world war two, Japan occupied Vietnam that was already under the French but with the help of china and USSR. This is clear that the people of Vietnam were used to long period of external rebellion. In Iraq the US had already used its power in the united nation to make other states to politically isolate Iraqi. The US diplomatic strength fueled the UN Security Council Resolution 1441(Bruce, 2008) which ordered Iraqi weapons to be inspected. Speculation of possession of weapons of mass distraction and intelligent information that Saddam wanted to acquire uranium from Mali, created a political isolation hence it was easy for the US to enter Iraqi (Bruce, 2008). The main aim of the US in Vietnam War was to defend South Vietnam not to overthrow the North Vietnamese government and its military power was highly kept in check by the perceived threat of Chinese intervention but in Iraq, there lacked any actual military power that could contest the military might of the US. In the post cold war era, the collapse of the USSR gave US ample space to invade Iraqi with no fear of external support. Counterinsurgency of Vietnam is attributed to new military tactics being developed by the then president Kennedy. He wanted to change the tactics by reorganizing the military so that the methods employed to be based on the units using counterinsurgency mostly around the Special Forces. This did not happen because Kennedy was assassinated before the strategy kicked off and failure of this was seen when US found it had two enemies, which is the insurgents who weakened the South Vietnam government and North Vietnam government. This meant that the US had to go to war will two enemies in the same time. Failure in Vietnam gave lessons to America in Iraq operation because the US was able to change the military of Iraq and reorganized the locals and other foreign forces to form one conventional army that took control over the state by having power and ability to fight insurgency. This worked and the new government in Iraq was highly composed of Sunni who supported the USA. The two insurgencies had different goals. The Vietnam wanted to unite the people of south and north and form an independent government based on communist rule of Ho Chi Minh. In Iraq, the reason for insurgencies was mainly to restore former government since the national identity of Iraqis was not as strong as their identity as Sunnis who have being in power since 1921. A similarity is that both the wars were spread out geologically across both countries in two cases. The small villages posed a problem to conquer because each unit village will try fight individually after the defeat of the national army.Iraq had many reasons for their insurgents as the motives that drove them where for political gain, military power and paramilitary insurgency in Fallujah and Baghdad , tribal affairs domestically and religious factors  hence is was easy because there was no one centralized insurgents (Harry, 1985). After political failure of Iraqi state ethnic disputes between the Kurds, Sunnis, and Shiites but individual defeat sparked need to unite and remove the American army. Counterinsurgent strategy on both wars was to topple the government and hand power to the natives who cooperated with the US foreign policy. Vietnam insurgents could not accept any other thing rather than independence. The US army was not well prepared for the new insurgency by the Vietnam. In Iraq the Sunnis wanted power over the other tribes to they had to compromise. Technology which was not well developed as it is now during the Vietnam War was a reason for failure. In Iraq the internet and satellite technology and medicinal advances was developed and its use assisted to reduce the American causality. In Iraq only 1800 of the Americans died while in the Vietnam War over 58000 Americans perished which is ten times that of Iraq..        Vietnam was the regional target to fight communism. Many in the government thought  that if Vietnam goes down, so would Cambodia, Thailand, India. The Truman doctrine of containment along with the domino theory justified American decision to go into war in Vietnam. The doctrine will justify action hence the Gulf of Tonkin was justified by the claim that the threat posed by the expansion of Communism. The threat never fully materialized, and Vietnam proved to be benign, communism stayed within the borders. It is difficult to determine the effect American involvement in southeast Asia had on deterring both Soviet and Chinese expansion, regardless, the war demonstrated the will of the United States to take on a lengthy conflict sent a clear message to friend and foe. America will fight when its interests and ideology are threatened. Public support is essential for any war. The US government has over time in any war tried to make people support the war although many of the citizen feels that the cost and effects of the war would be heavier that the national interest. Once the public learnt that the  Vietnam War was based on lost military strategies, they were reluctant to accent another war becauseof the logistics cost burdens to the taxpayers. The public will always use an example of previous causalities and will definitely put pressure for either withdraw of troops or change in the strategy on the war. A lot of protests arise against war in Iraq by the civil societies and war veterans but most of the public disapprove the war through public opinion polls and the congress which the public is represented. When to withdraw is a major question that any strategist must come up with a solution (Terry Anderson, 1995). It’s not a problem of whether or not to come out of the war but the main issues is when and how to withdraw from the battlefield after accomplishing national interest. The fear of looking week before the international stage and only peace talks and treaties may seem good but another challenge is the post withdrawal effects live civil war. Actually, the failures and success in both the operation freedom Iraq and Vietnam War are good lessons that solders, policy makers and world leaders can take in the global fight against terrorism. First, like the Vietnam War, the global fight on terrorism is a fight against an ideology. One may win the war against terrorism physically, but the main problem is that terrorism is an instrument for the week and they are united by a common belief and this time it’s the spread of jihadist doctrine. Technology has emerged as the new battle field with terrorist using internet hackings and this has caught a lot of governments pants down because the increased cyber wars is attributed to the fast growth of new recruiting into the terrorist movements. Propaganda and terror videos seem to be a great weapon of terrorist. This though out of control of the governments, spread of jihadist teaches should at first be stopped if not reduced. Youtube, twitter which are USA websites are used by the extremists to spread the idea.War on global terrorism is very difficult because the battle field is not clear and well defined. Terrorist hide in small secretive cells and they attack in least expected moments. They are spread all over the world and they are difficult to limit movements because of the porous borders. Unity will be a helping factor if the global war on terror is to succeed. The military strategies should try and first identify the enemy. It would be a worst case scenario if you fight what you don’t know. The mistake the USA did while going to war without knowing it had two enemies to fight yet it had prepared for one. The main problem is that suspects live within the society and has many sympathizers. So the main task in the global war on terror is to know the enemy but it won’t be an easy task because the terrorist have an advantage in that they only have to be right once and their attack will be perfect but the opponent has to be right all the time to ensure that they prevent loss of life, disaster and public panic.         References Terry Anderson, (1995). The movement and the Sixties: Protest in America from Greensboro to Wounded Knee. Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 178-179 Harry G. Summers, (1985), “Vietnam War Almanac.” Facts and files publication, New York, p.133 Bruce R. Pirnie, EDWARD O’Connell,(2008). Counterinsurgency in Iraq (2003-2006).Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, pp 21-53 Read More