| The Cold War in Asia: China, Korea, Vietnam & Cambodia (1949-1979) |
|
Sections:- Dean Acheson: United States Position on China (1949)
- Red China Vote
- Mao Zedong’s Speech Commerating the 20th Anniversary of the Chinese Communist Party (June 30, 1949)
- China Gets the Bomb (October 16, 1964)
- Pravda: Editorial concerning The Anti-Soviet Policy of Communist China (February 16, 1967)
- Richard Nixon’s Remarks at Andrews Air Force Base on Returning From the People's Republic of China
- Security Treaty Between the United States, Australia, and New Zealand (ANZUS); September 1, 1951
- Security Treaty Between Japan & the U.S. (Sept. 8, 1951)
- Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty (Manila Pact) (September 8, 1954)
- Report of The United Nations Commission on Korea, 1950
- Outbreak of the Korean War
- Andrei A. Gromyko: On American Intervention in Korea (1950)
- Korea See-Saw Battle
- Truman On Korea and Relieving MacArthur from Command (April 11, 1951)
- General Douglas MacArthur: Farewell Address to Congress (April 19, 1951)
- Vietnamese Declaration of Independence, 1945
- Ambush in Vietnam
- Showdown in Vietnam
- McNamara on Vietnam
- Peace March
- Children of the Killing Fields
|
| Historical Context
Dean Acheson (1893-1971) served as Secretary of State under Truman and played a central role in the creation of many important institutions including Lend Lease, the Marshall Plan, the United Nations, NATO, the IMF and the World Bank. Acheson was also instrumental in the prehistory of the Vietnam War, having persuaded Truman to dispatch aid to French forces in Indochina, but later counseled President Johnson to negotiate for peace with North Vietnam. During the Cuban Missile Crisis, President Kennedy called upon Acheson for advice, bringing him into Kennedy's executive committee.
During the early years of the Cold War, he built a working framework to the policy of the containment, first formulated by George Kennan. The failure of the United States to prevent the communist takeover of mainland China in 1949 precipitated several years of organized opposition to Acheson's tenure, a period to which Acheson refers in his outspoken memoirs as "The Attack of the Primitives." Although he maintained his role as a firm anti-communist, he was attacked by various anti-communists for not taking a more active role in attacking communism abroad and domestically, rather than a mere containment of communist governments. Both he and Secretary of Defense George Marshall came under attack from men such as Joseph McCarthy; Acheson became a byword to some Americans, who tried to equate containment with appeasement.
Attached Document
In the attached document, Acheson clarifies his position on China, the reasons for Mao’s victory, and why the Communist victory, despite U.S. aid, was beyond the control of the Truman administration.
Questions to Consider
1. Why does Acheson believe that the defeat of the Nationalist forces was not due to “any inadequacy of American aid?” What other factors, in his opinion, weakened the Nationalists ability to resist the Communists?
2. What qualities does Acheson attribute to the Communist forces?
3. According to Acheson, how much aid has the U.S. given China since the defeat of Japan? What types of aid die the U.S. send?
4. Why doesn’t Acheson believe that more aid would have prevented a Communist victory?
5. Why did Acheson rule out direct American military intervention in the conflict?
6. Although Acheson was disappointed by events in China, why is he still optimist about the future of that country?
|
| | | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
Attached Document
In this video (:55), an election in Communist China is documented. Also included is a Time Magazine with Chairman Mao on the cover.
Questions to Consider
1. Who is still ruler of China in “all but name?”
2. What was the outcome of the vote? What was staged after the election?
|
| | | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
Mao Zedong (1893-1976) led China's communist revolution and established the People’s Republic of China on October 1, 1949. After the Communist victory, Mao pursued the ideal of strong and prosperous China, endeavoring to build a modern, industrialized nation and relieve the poverty of peasants that constituted the majority of China's population. However, the disastrous results of Mao's most significant socio-political programs—including the Anti-Rightist Movement, the Great Leap Forward, and the Cultural Revolution—crippled China's development, leading to economic hardship, social turmoil and widespread starvation. Until his death, Mao remained the de facto ruler of China.
Attached Document
In this document, Mao commemorates the 20th anniversary of the Chinese Communist Party, praises Marxist-Leninism and the advances it has brought to China and condemns bourgeoisie and reactionary elements standing in the way of further Communist progress. A photograph of Mao Zedong is also included.
Questions to Consider
1. According to Mao, what was the importance of the Russian Revolution for China?
2. Why is China unable to have a “bourgeois republic?”
3. According to Mao, what have been the principal internal and external experiences of the Chinese people?
4. Why does Mao reject help from the British and U.S. governments?
5. How does Mao justify his dictatorship?
6. According to Mao, what elements of Chinese society make up “the people?” Which element forms the leadership of the people? Who opposes them?
7. How does Mao justify the massive state power invested in the Communists?
8. How does Mao propose to deal with “reactionary” elements within Chinese society?
9. Which state is, in Mao’s opinion, China’s role model?
|
| | | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
Chairman Mao had once derided atomic weapons and the United States as "paper tigers," but, in October 1964, the People’s Republic of China detonated its first atomic bomb and thereby joined the ranks of nuclear powers.
Attached Document
The attached document, a press statement released shortly after the successful test, explains China's policy and why the Chinese leaders decided to develop a bomb. An image of Mao along with an atomic mushroom cloud is also included.
Questions to Consider
1. According to the press release, which foreign power will be deterred by the Chinese atomic bomb?
2. How does China justify the building of a nuclear weapons program?
3. Why did China abandon its former policy of advocating the abolishment of nuclear weapons?
4. Why do the Chinese consider the 1963 Treaty between the USSR, the US and Britain as a fraud? According to the press release, against whom was the treaty actually directed?
|
| | | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
Though China joined the Soviet Bloc as an ally shortly after Mao’s 1949 victory, the two countries began quarlling and eventually split from one another. After the death of Stalin, Mao, believing himself the rightful leader of international Communism, believed Khrushchev to be too conciliatory to the West. Khrushchev further angered Mao by refusing to give China nuclear weapons. During the “Cultural Revolution,” Mao fanned the flames of anti-Soviet sentiment amongst China’s youth and, on one occasion, the Soviet embassy was besieged by militant supporters of the Chairman. During 1968, the Soviets massively increased their troop deployments along the Chinese border and Soviet and Chinese troops began openly clashing along the border. The '''Sino-Soviet split''' was a major diplomatic conflict which began in the late 1950s, reaching a peak in 1969 and continuing in various ways until the late 1980s. It led to a parallel split in the international Communist movement.
Attached Document
Published in the official Soviet Party newspaper, the attached document,presents the Soviet case against the Chinese Communists. Included here too is an image of the Soviet and Chinese flags and a Communist propaganda poster featuring Mao.
Questions to Consider
1. According to the article, why is Mao pursuing anti-Soviet policies? What purpose does this serve for him?
2. According to the article, what failed Chinese policy led Mao to adopt an anti-Soviet stance?
3. Why does Mao need to slander the Soviet Union? Why, in the opinion of the article, is this actual a sign of Chinese weakness?
4. How is Mao serving the interests of the United States? What effect is this having on international Communism?
|
| | | | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
Relations between the Western and Eastern power blocs changed dramatically in the early 70s. In 1960, the People's Republic of China ended the alliance with its biggest ally, the Soviet Union, in the Sino-Soviet Split. As tensions between the two communist nations reached its peak in 1969 and 1970, Nixon decided to use their conflict to shift the balance of power towards the West in the Cold War. In what later would be known as the "China Card", Nixon deliberately improved relations with China in order to gain a strategic advantage over the Soviet Union, but giving Moscow a chance to improve relations so as not to be squeezed by a US-China detente. In 1971, a move was made to improve relations when China invited an American table tennis team to China; hence the term "Ping Pong Diplomacy". In October 1971, The People's Republic of China entered the United Nations. Nixon sent Henry Kissinger on a secret mission to China in July 1971, and in 1972 Nixon stunned the world by himself going to China to negotiate directly with Mao.
At the conclusion of his trip, the United States and the PRC Governments issued the Shanghai Communiqué, a statement of their foreign policy views. In the Communiqué, both nations pledged to work toward the full normalization of diplomatic relations. The U.S. acknowledged the notion that all Chinese on both sides of the Taiwan Strait maintain that there is only one China and that Taiwan is part of China. Nixon and the U.S. government reaffirmed their interests in a peaceful settlement of the Taiwan question by agreeing with the People's Republic of China themselves. The statement enabled the U.S. and PRC to temporarily set aside the "crucial question obstructing the normalization of relations" concerning the political status of Taiwan and to open trade and other contacts.
Nixon’s diplomatic gambit had an immediate effect on Soviet behavior. Fearing the possibility of a Sino-American alliance, the Soviet Union yielded to American pressure for détente. The first Strategic Arms Limitation Talks were finally concluded the same year with the SALT I treaty. To win American friendship both China and the Soviet Union cut back on their support for North Vietnam.
Nixon then turned to topic of nuclear peace. Fearing the possibility of a Sino-American alliance, the Soviet Union yielded to American pressure for détente. The first Strategic Arms Limitation Talks were finally concluded in May 1972 with the SALT I treaty. To win American friendship both China and the Soviet Union cut back on their support for North Vietnam.
Attached Document
The attached document is the speech presented by Nixon upon his return from China. The first photograph depicts Nixon and Chou toasting. The second photograph shows Nixon speaking to the daughter of a Chinese leader. The third photograph shows Richard and Pat Nixon visitiong the Great Wall. The fourth photograph is of Nixon and Chairman Mao.
Questions to consider
1. Does Nixon see his trip as a success?
2. What did he attempt to achieve during his stay?
3. What type of relationship do you believe the United States and China have at this time, after reading the address? |
| | | | | | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
The Australia, New Zealand, United States Security Treaty (ANZUS or ANZUS Treaty) is the military alliance which binds Australia and the United States, and separately Australia and New Zealand to cooperate on defense matters in the Pacific Ocean area.
The treaty came about following the close cooperation of the United States, Australia and New Zealand during World War II, during which time Australia had come perilously close to invasion by Japan. Following the end of World War II, the United States was eager to normalize relations with Japan, particularly as the Korean War was still raging a short distance from Japan. With the involvement of China and possibly the Soviet Union in Korea, the Cold War was threatening to become a full-scale war. However, Australia and New Zealand in particular were extremely reluctant to finalize a peace treaty with Japan which would allow for Japanese rearmament. Both countries relented only when an Australian and New Zealand proposal for a three-way security treaty was accepted by the United States.
The resulting treaty was concluded at San Francisco on 1 September 1951, and entered into force on April 29, 1952. The treaty bound the signatories to recognize that an armed attack in the Pacific area on any of them would endanger the peace and safety of the others. It committed them to consult in the event of a threat and, in the event of attack, to meet the common danger in accordance with their respective constitutional processes. The three nations also pledged to maintain and develop individual and collective capabilities to resist attack.
Unlike NATO, ANZUS has no integrated defence structure or dedicated forces. However, in fulfillment of ANZUS obligations, Australia and the United States conduct a variety of joint activities. These include military exercises ranging from naval and landing exercises at the task-group level to battalion-level special forces training, assigning officers to each other's armed services, and standardizing equipment and operational doctrine.
Attached Document
This document outlines the essential points of the treaty.
Questions to Consider
1. The charter of which international body is evoked as the guiding principal behind the treaty?
2. What military obligations does the United States have in the Pacific?
3. What do the signatory nations pledge in the event of aggression in the Pacific?
|
| | | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
At the end of the Second World War, Japan, having surrendered unconditionally, was occupied by the Allied Powers. The United States played the leading role in the occupation. After six years of occupation, the San Francisco Peace Treaty, signed on September 8, 1951, marked the end of the Allied occupation, and when it went into effect on April 28, 1952, Japan was once again an independent state.
Attached Document
The attached document encapsulates the essential points of the treaty.
Questions to Consider
1. By signing the treaty, what “inherent right” will Japan no longer be able to exercise? What danger does this present the Japanese?
2. Although Japan will not maintain armed forces, what will the treaty oblige the United States to do as compensation? Yet what will Japan eventually do?
3. Although American military forces are intended to be used as a deterent against aggression, can they be used in the Japanese domestic arena?
|
| | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
The Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO), also known as the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty or the Manila Pact, was an international organization for defensive collaboration established on September 8, 1954. It was also created to oppose further Communist gains in Southeast Asia. The organization's headquarters was located in Bangkok, Thailand.
The organization used the militaries of its member nations, and had joint maneuvers every year. Despite this, it was unable to intervene in the early conflicts of Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam because an intervention required a decision of unanimity, which was never reached; France and the Philippines objected. Intervention in the Vietnam conflict was sought again later, but France and Pakistan withheld support.
Unable to intervene at all collectively in Indochina, the organization was found ineffective. Questions of disbandment arose as early as 1973, as some countries withdrew. Pakistan withdrew on November 7, 1973. and France withdrew on June 30, 1974. The organization formally ended in 1977.
Memberships for Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam were not possible because of issues of the three countries' dealing with the 1954 Geneva agreements. The official leader of the organization from 1957 was known as the secretary-general. Thai diplomat Pote Sarasin held this position until 1964.
SEATO was created as a result of the Truman Doctrine and the West's policy of containment at the time of the Cold War. It is considered the brainchild of US diplomat John Foster Dulles.
Attached Document
The attached document is a transcript of the Manila Pact. Also included is a map showing the member countries of SEATO. The final image is an American postage stamp commemorating SEATO.
Questions to Consider
1. What United Nations principals are evoked as a guiding purpose of the treaty?
2. Although the treaty intends to “resist armed attack,” it also states that members will “prevent and counter subversive activities.” What is meant by this statement? Against whom would such a clause be directed?
3. How will the signatory nations cooperate in the economic sphere?
4. What institutional arrangement is provided for in order to ensure full implementation of the treaty?
|
| | | | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
On August 10, 1945 with the Japanese surrender imminent, the United States and the Soviet Union agreed to divide Korea along the 38th parallel, and that Japanese forces north of that line would surrender to the Soviet Union, those south to the United States - the peninsula was effectively divided into zones of control in the north and south under the administration of the two major powers.
The US did not consider this to be a permanent partition.
South Korean President Syngman Rhee and North Korean General Secretary Kim Il-sung were both intent on reuniting the peninsula under their own system. Partly because of Soviet tanks and heavy arms, the North Koreans were the ones able to go on the offensive, while South Korea, with only limited American backing, had far fewer options. In 1949 both Russian and American forces had withdrawn. By 1950 the North Koreans enjoyed substantial advantages over the South in every category of equipment. After another visit by Kim to Moscow in March–April 1950, Stalin approved an invasion.
On June 25, 1950, North Korea struck across the 38th parallel behind a thunderous artillery barrage and 135,000 troops crossed the border. Advised and equipped by the Soviets, the North Korean surprise attack was a devastating success. The invasion of South Korea came as a surprise to the United States and the other western powers. Soon afterwards, the United Nations debated the issue. Having walked out just prior to the debate, the Soviets were unable to prevent the passage of a U.N. resolution which pledged assistance to the beleaguered South Koreans.
Attached Document
The attaced document is a U.N. document that outlines the causes of the war and efforts to stabilize the situation.
Questions to Consider
1. To whom does the U.N. attribute responsibility for aggression in the conflict? Why does it do this?
2. According to the U.N., what role does the division of Korea play in the conflict?
3. What prospects does the U.N. see for eventual Korean unification?
4. What is the status of democracy in South Korea? What else is needed for democracy to take root?
|
| | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
The Korean War was the first major armed clash between Free World and Communist forces, as the so-called Cold War turned hot. Korea, a small country numbering 30 million people in 1950, lies at the point where three great Asian powers meet- Japan, China, and the former Soviet Union. Japan ruled Korea from 1910 to 1945. Following the defeat of Japan in World War II, the United States and the Soviet Union jointly occupied the country, the United States south of the 38th Parallel and the Soviet Union north. Preoccupied with Soviet intentions in western Europe, the United States attached little strategic importance to Korea in the late 1940s. America did assist the South Koreans in national elections and in formation of the Republic of Korea (ROK). The Soviet Union, on the other hand, took an active role in governing North Korea and in formation of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK). The United States Army withdrew its combat forces from South Korea in 1949 but left a military advisory group to assist the ROK Army. In early 1950 the Soviets supplied weapons to and assigned several thousand Russian soldiers as trainers for the North Korean People’s Army (NKPA). Armed clashes between North and South Korea were common along the 38th Parallel, but in June 1950 American observers did not anticipate an invasion of the South. Determined to unite Korea by force, the North Koreans invaded South Korea on 25 June. An initially hesitant United States decided that it must take a stand against this armed aggression. American military intervention was ineffective at first, but by September 1950 the combined efforts of the U.S. and ROK Armies, complemented by air and naval superiority, held the North Koreans in check at the Pusan Perimeter.
Attached Document
In this video (3:28), the outbreak of the Korean War & important subsequent developments are explained. The following map shows the offensives during the Korean War. The third resource is a Chinese propaganda poster during the war. The fourth is a South Korean propaganda poster, while the fifth is from North Korea.
Questions to Consider
1. Where was the Korean peninsula divided?
2. Who lead the U.N. forces? How badly were U.N. forces outnumbered?
3. What atrocities did the North Koreans commit?
4. How many nations rallied to U.N. cause? What noteworthy act did Canada do?
5. What U.N. move dramatically altered the conflict? According to the video, what branch of the U.N. military “spelled the difference between victory & defeat?”
6. What nation entered the conflict & prevented an outright U.N. victory? |
| | | | | | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
Andrei Andreyevich Gromyko (1909 – 1989) was a Soviet politician and diplomat. He served as Minister for Foreign Affairs for the Soviet Union (1957-1985) and Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet (1985-1988). At outbreak of the Korean War, Gromyko condemned U.S. intervention in the conflict.
Attached Document
This document provides an interesting glimpse into the Soviet perception of the war. A photograph of Gromyko is also included.
Questions to Consider
1. To whom does Gromyko attribute blame for the conflict? What evidence does he cite?
2. According to Gromyko, how does the United States justify its intervention in the conflict? Why does he reject this?
|
| | | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
The Korean War reached a stalemate when negotiations at Kaesong stalled in the summer of 1951. U.N. troops and Communist militia fought for position along the battle lines just north of the 38th parallel. On August 18, U.N. forces attempted to take a ridge believed to be used by their opponents as an observation post. They took most of the hills that made up the ridge following a week of intense, often hand to hand, combat. As soon as the hills were taken, however, the North Korean forces recaptured the territory. The U.N. forces attempted again, the firefight raging for ten days with Communist troops constantly pushing them back. The weather turned and it began to rain almost constantly creating slippery, muddy hillsides. The conditions were not amicable for the U.N. forces who continued to fight while casualties accumulated. The U.N. forces were increased and on September 5, they were finally able to outflank the Communist troops and take "Bloody Ridge."
Attached Document
In this video (:53), the bloody battle of Old Baldy Ridge is documented. A photograph of soldiers fighting in the Battle of Bloody Ridge is included. Also, a photograph of a truck passing the 38th parallel in included.
Questions to Consider
1. In one week, how many times has Baldy Ridge changed hands?
2. How many U.N. soldiers have died in the battle for Baldy Ridge? What was simultaneously occurring during the battle?
|
| | | | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
After the outbreak of the Korean War, Truman appointed the aggressive and outspoken general Douglas MacArthur to lead the struggle, pushing the conflict nearly to the Chinese border after scoring a stunning victory at the Battle of Inchon. In October 1950, Communist China intervened on North Korea's behalf, raising the specter of a third world war. MacArthur urged Truman to attack Chinese bases across the Yalu River and use atomic bombs if necessary. Truman refused both suggestions. The Chinese pushed American forces far back into South Korea, but after much bloody conflict the opposing forces eventually found themselves back at the original starting point. MacArthur, who had privately given assurances that he would respect Truman's authority as Comander in Chief during a one-on-one meeting at Wake Island in 1950, publicly aired his views on the shortcomings of US strategic decision-making -- despite the President's extremely delicate negotiating position, and against Truman's direct orders that MacArthur clear all public statements with the White House.
Truman was gravely concerned that further escalation of the war would draw Russia and its atomic weapons into the conflict. He was also concerned about the precedent of allowing insubordination at a high level of the United States military. On April 11, 1951, Truman relieved MacArthur of his command. The Korean War remained a stalemate until a ceasefire took effect on July 27, 1953, under President Dwight D. Eisenhower.
The war, and the dismissal of MacArthur, helped to make Truman so unpopular that he eventually chose not to seek a third term. (In February 1952, Truman's approval mark stood at at 22% according to Gallup polls, the all-time lowest approval mark for an active American President.) Truman thus earned a strange -- and, so far, unique -- distinction in American history: he ascended to the presidency to inherit the responsibilities of conducting a war already in process -- and left office while an entirely different armed conflict with a foreign enemy was still underway.
Attached Document
In the attached document, Truman defends his Korean strategy and his decision to dismiss MacArthur.
Questions to Consider
1. According to Truman, what is the ultimate purpose of the war?
2. What is the best policy against aggression? What historical period does Truman point to in order to justify this position?
3. What is the significance of the Korean conflict? What evidence does Truman use to see the conflict in a wider perspective?
4. How is the conflict in Korea helping the larger U.S. strategic aim?
5. What courses of action do the Communists have?
6. What reasons does Truman give for not expanding the conflict with attacks against China?
7. Why was the dismissal of General MacArthur necessary?
|
| | | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
After his dismissal, MacArthur returned to Washington (his first time in the continental US in 11 years), where he made his last public appearance in a farewell address to the U.S. Congress, interrupted by thirty ovations. In this closing speech, he recalled: "Old soldiers never die, they just fade away." 'And like the old soldier of that ballad, I now close my military career and just fade away - an old soldier who tried to do his duty as God gave him the light to see that duty. Good-bye.'
On his return from Korea, after his relief by Truman, MacArthur encountered massive public adulation, which aroused expectations that he would run for the US presidency as a Republican in the 1952 election. However, a U.S. Senate Committee investigation of his removal, chaired by Richard Russell, contributed to a marked cooling of the public mood and MacArthur's presidential hopes died away.
Attached Document
In the attached document, MacArthur defends his position on the Korean conflict.
Questions to Consider
1. Why does MacArthur believe a global strategy is necessary to combat the spread of Communism? Why is Asia vital to this strategy?
2. According to MacArthur, what basic needs do the Asians seek?
3. How did World War II affect the strategic position of the United States in the Pacific? What does MacArthur recommend to maintain this position?
4. According to MacArthur, how has China changed during the last 50 years? What changes have the Communist leadership brought?
5. What measures, according to MacArthur, should have been taken in order to secure victory in Korea?
6. In his opinion, how has MacArthur’s Korean strategy been distorted?
7. Do you agree with MacArthur’s statement that “in war there is no substitute for victory?” How viable is this in the nuclear age?
|
| | | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
After the defeat of Japan in 1945, France, the old colonial power, tried to reclaim its colonies in Indochina - i.e. Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. But France faced opposition, which it had been able to beat down before the war, from a nationalist political party. This party, the Vietnamese Communist Party, had been founded in Paris in 1930 by Ho Chi Minh (1890¬ 1969 - the name is a nom-de-guerre), a man from a poor family who had nevertheless been able to acquire an education in Paris. Ho expanded his political base in 1941 when he founded a broader nationalist coalition, the Viet Minh (Vietnamese League for Independence) . The Viet Minh fought a guerilla war against both the Japanese and the Vichy French forces - making the Viet Minh an ally of the United States at that time.
Looking for recognition from the United States and other Western countries, Ho and his colleagues proclaimed the Democratic Republic of Vietnam on September 2, 1945. Instead of supporting the Republic, the West recognized French claims. The first Indo-China War was fought with the French from 1946 to 1954 and resulted in the division of Vietnam in South and North Vietnam. By the mid 1960s, France, weakened also by its colonial war in Algeria, was no longer a force in the region and the United States, already a supporter of South Vietnam, became the chief backer of the southern Republic of Vietnam. The situation was not stable, and eventually resulted in the Second Indo-China War, known in the US as the "Vietnam War".
Attached Document
The following document is an object lesson in the use of Enlightenment ideals, and 19th century nationalism, by colonized peoples. The first photograph shows Ho Chi Minh. The second photograph is of governmental leaders in Vietnam.
Questions to Consider
1. From which documents does the Vietnamese declaration of independence quote? What is the significance of this? What country violated the spirit of these documents?
2. According to the document, what crimes have the French committed against the Vietnamese people?
3. How did the Japanese violate Vietnam? What was the French response?
4. How did the Vietnamese people respond to the French actions during World War II?
5. What does the declaration seek from the Allies? What recent Allied agreements does the document point to as proof that this will happen?
|
| | | | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
Attached Document
In the attached video (1:16), a Vietcong ambush & American counterattacks that occurred early in the war are shown.
|
| | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
The Vietnam War or The Second Indochina War, 1954-1975, grew out of the long conflict between France and Vietnam. In July 1954, after one hundred years of colonial rule, France was forced to leave Vietnam. Communist forces under the direction of General Vo Nguyen Giap defeated the allied French troops at Dien Bien Phu, a remote mountain outpost in the northwest corner of Vietnam. This decisive battle convinced the French that they could no longer maintain their Indochinese colonies and Paris quickly sued for peace. The Geneva Peace Accords, signed by France and Viet Nam in the summer of 1954, reflected the strains of the international Cold War. According to the terms of the Geneva Accords, Vietnam would hold national elections in 1956 to reunify the country. The division at the seventeenth parallel would vanish with the elections. Secretary of State John Foster Dulles was not going to allow the Communists to take southern Vietnam without a fight. Instead, Dulles and President Dwight D. Eisenhower supported the creation of a counter-revolutionary alternative south of the seventeenth parallel. The United States supported this effort at nation-building through a series of multi-lateral agreements that created the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO).From 1956-1960, the Communist Party of Vietnam desired to reunify the country through political means alone. Accepting the Soviet Union's model of political struggle, the Communist Party tried unsuccessfully to cause Diem's collapse by exerting tremendous internal political pressure. After Diem's success against Communist cells in the South, however, southern Communists convinced the Party to adopt more violent tactics to guarantee Diem's downfall. At the Fifteenth Party Plenum in January 1959, the Communist Party finally approved the use of revolutionary violence to overthrow Ngo Dinh Diem's government. In May 1959, and again in September 1960, the Party confirmed its use of revolutionary violence and the combination of the political and armed struggle movements. The result was the creation of a broad-based united front to help mobilize southerners in opposition to the Saigon government.
The National Liberation Front had long and historic roots in Vietnam. Used earlier in the century by the Communists to mobilize anti-French forces, the united front brought together Communists and non-Communists in an umbrella organization that had limited, but important goals. Anyone could join this front as long as they opposed Ngo Dinh Diem.
In 1961, President Kennedy sent a team to Vietnam to report on conditions in South Vietnam and to assess future American aid requirements. As Kennedy weighed the merits of these recommendations, some of his other advisers urged the president to withdraw from Vietnam altogether, claiming that it was a "dead-end alley." Instead of a large-scale military buildup as the white paper had called for or an immediate withdrawal, Kennedy sought a limited partnership with Diem. The United States would increase the level of its military involvement in South Vietnam through more machinery and advisers, but would not intervene whole-scale with troops. Following the death of President Kennedy and concerned with the continuing political problems in Saigon, however, convinced the new president, Lyndon Johnson, that more aggressive action was needed. Perhaps Johnson was more prone to military intervention or maybe events in Vietnam had forced the president's hand to more direct action. In any event, after suspected Communist attacks on two U.S. ships in the Gulf of Tonkin, the Johnson administration argued for expansive war powers for the president. By 1968, things had gone from bad to worse for the Johnson administration. In late January, the DRV and the NLF launched coordinated attacks against the major southern cities. These attacks, known in the west as the Tet Offensive, were designed to "break the aggressive will" of the Johnson administration and force Washington to the bargaining table. The Communist Party believed that the American people were growing war-weary and that Hanoi could humiliate Johnson and force a peace upon him. Most of Hanoi's predications about the Tet Offensive proved elusive. Communist forces suffered tremendous casualties in the South and the massacre of thousands of non-Communists in Hue during the Tet Offensive created ill-will among many of Hanoi's supporters. Furthermore, several leading southern Generals thought the plans for the Tet Offensive were too risky and this created a strain in relations between northern and southern Communists. In any event, in late March 1968, a disgraced Lyndon Johnson announced that he would not seek the Democratic Party's re-nomination for president and hinted that he would go to the bargaining table with the Communists to end the war. The war would continue for another 5 years, finally ending the 21 years of United States involvement.
Attached Document
In the attached video (2:42), a Vietnamese raid on a U.S. air base & American retaliation is shown. The second resource shows a screen shot from the fighting in the video. The second photograph is an American soldier in Vietnam. The final photograph shows a helicopter landing during the war.
Questions to Consider
1. What questions arose from the Vietnamese attack?
2. According to Robert McNamara, where did the Americans counterattack? How successful were these attacks?
3. Who carried out the 2nd counterattack? How did the Soviets & Chinese respond?
|
| | | | | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
Attached Document
In the attached video (1:57), Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara discusses recent U.S. attacks against North Vietnamese strongholds. The Time Magazine cover featuring McNamara appears below, along with a photograph of McNamara and Lyndon Johnson.
Questions to Consider
1. According to McNamara, what is the significance of the recent attack?
2. In the past 4 ½ years, how many Vietcong have been killed? What has been their understandable response?
|
| | | | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
It wasn’t until Johnson began his massive bombing campaign against North Vietnam in 1965 that the Antiwar Movement actually found its roots and dug in. Words like “counter culture”, "establishment”, “nonviolence”, “pacification”, “draft-dodger”, “free love”, “Kent State”, and “Woodstock” were added to the American vocabulary. The country’s youth, the ones dying in the line fire, began demanding answers to America’s high profile presence in Vietnam. They wanted to know why peace talks were organized and continually failed. They wanted to know what they were fighting for. Extensive media coverage brought the violent and bloody guerrilla war home each night to every American living room. People realized that the glowing reviews of the war effort their government had been releasing were “sanitized” and far from the truth. Even congressional senators began questioning Vietnam policies. Through it all the bombings continued and more and more of America’s young GI’s came home in body bags.
Once the draft was introduced young people on college and university campuses all around the country began to organize protests against the war. Teach-ins and student organizations like the SDS (Students for a Democratic Society) held rallies and marches, the first of which happened in Washington in April of 1965. Over the next 2 years the anti-war movement snow balled. Activists, celebrities and musicians like Abbie Hoffmann, Timothy Leary, Allen Ginsberg, Jane Fonda, Jefferson Airplane, and countless others took up the Anti-war cause and waved Anti-war banners. Their speeches and their music reflected the anger and hopelessness that Americans felt over the Vietnam war. Even the GI’s stationed overseas began supporting the Anti-war movement in whatever capacity they could, from wearing peace symbols to refusing to obey orders.
By 1967 America was mired in its own urban problems. As the bombings and body count in Vietnam continued to escalate so did civil unrest. 100,000 Anti-war protesters gathered in New York and thousands more in San Francisco. There were urban riots in Detroit. Johnson’s support was falling drastically on all fronts. Anti-war rallies, speeches, demonstrations and concerts continued being organized all over the country. There was a backlash against all that was military. Soldiers returning home from the war were no longer regarded as heroes but as “baby killers”. Young men sought to evade the draft by being conscientious objectors or leaving for Canada. Richard Nixon’s number one campaign promise to Americans was that he’d end the war with “Vietnamization”, or systematic troop withdrawals. Yet the American presence in Vietnam remained high and casualties mounted, as did the cost of running the war effort. Taxpayers were paying 25 billion dollars per year to finance a conflict no one believed in anymore. The Woodstock concert brought 500,000 together from across North America in a non-violent protest against the war. Nixon’s plan to attack communist supply locations in Cambodia failed and set off another round of protests. The Kent State student protest in May of 1970 turned deadly when National Guardsman fired into crowds, killing 4 students and injuring dozens more. Students all across the country became enraged and over the next few days campuses all over the US came to a virtual standstill.
Attached Document
In the attached video (2:47),A large anti-war demonstration in New York is shown. The first photograph shows a woman putting a flower in the barrel of a gun. The second shows veterans at an anti-war demonstration. The third shows a crowd at a rally. The fourth is a button from the March on Washington.
Questions to Consider
1. What did the demonstrators burn? Approximately how many did so?
2. Who protested against the demonstration?
3. Who addressed the U.N.? What did he advise the U.N. to do?
4. According to President Johnson, who was watching the ant-war demonstrators?
5. Where else in the world was an anti-war demonstration staged?
|
| | | | | | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
The Communist Party of Kampuchea (CPK), known as the Khmer Rouge, took over the government of Cambodia in April 1975, and renamed the country Democratic Kampuchea. The Khmer Rouge ruled Cambodia until 1979, when Vietnamese military forces drove it out of power. During its five year reign, the Khmer Rouge launched one of the worst genocides of the 20th century. In terms of percentage of the population killed, the Cambodian genocide actually exceeded the Nazi Holocaust. The Cambodian reign of terror led to the deaths of approximately 1.7 million people (21% of the country's population). The Khmer Rouge regime headed by Pol Pot combined extremist ideology with ethnic animosity and a chilling lack of concern for human life to produce an unspeakable degree of brutality, suffering, and murder.
Attached Document
In this video (3:32), the Khmer Rouge's murder of children is documented in great detail. The second document is a photograph of Pol Pot. The second picture is a painting of a woman trying to save her child from the Cambodian soldiers. The third picture is a painting of the killing fields. The final photograph shows the bones of the murdered, stored by Pol Pot's regime.
|
| | | | | | | Citations: | |
|
| Back To Module List Back to Sections |
