Indochina: Fifty Years On
By John McAuliff
When I first encountered the human and material devastation
of post-war Viet Nam, Cambodia and Laos in April-May 1975, I could not imagine
the transformation that half a century would bring—including in relationships
between our countries.
I just led an extended visit to Indochina by eighteen
Americans, most with a history of antiwar activism but without prior direct
experience in the region. Our number did
include four recognized scholars as well as a distinguished veteran, the second
ranked graduate of his class at the US Air Force Academy, who was confined for ten
months after refusing to fly combat support missions when the US invaded
Cambodia in 1970.
Like hundreds of thousands of US tourists who visit every
year, our group was overwhelmed by widespread economic and social development
far beyond the level of the US war years.
Every city we visited contained completed and under construction high
rises of residential apartments and of offices of private businesses and
government agencies. Traditional markets
are being supplemented or replaced by modern malls based on Japanese and
Chinese investment. Large export
processing zones produce name brand goods destined for US consumers. New bridges have replaced ferries and Ho Chi
Minh City, a.k.a. Saigon, has opened its first subway train.
Students flock to the US, especially from Viet Nam, for
undergraduate and professional degrees.
Most return home where they are joined by ambitious government-welcomed first
generation descendants of refugees. Grab
is the Uber like ap that provides smart phone credit card access not only to
taxis but also to motor bikes and three wheeled tuk tuks.
Shared positive history took our delegation to Tan Trao, 125
miles northwest of Ha Noi, where members of the US Office of Strategic Services
lived and trained with Ho Chi Minh and General Giap to fight Japanese forces in
1945. It is a well attended public
memorial. A current shared threat took
us to the East Sea Museum in Da Nang where Viet Nam’s decades long conflict
with China over maritime claims blend with US concern to maintain freedom of
navigation and the territorial rights of all countries bordering the South
China Sea.
Meetings with the public University of Hue and the private Dong
A University in Da Nang and the Diplomatic Academy in Ha Noi, as well as personally
arranged meetings with academic colleagues, illustrated how much potential still
exists for research collaboration.
One of Viet Nam’s most popular attractions for American and
other foreigners and countless local students and older visitors is the War Remnants Museum in Ho Chi Minh
City. Our delegation went beyond that
venue to grapple with the pain still felt at My Lai, the tiger cage prisons at
Con Dao Island, mine and UXO clearance in Quang Tri, and birth defects created
by Agent Orange in Da Nang.
Our visits to Cambodia and Laos were shorter with fewer
participants but equally meaningful. The
magnificence of Angkor Wat gives way to the still raw pain of the torture
center at Tuol Sleng, the execution ground of Chung Ek and the work of the
Documentation Center sponsored by the Queen Mother to account for every
person’s experience under the Khmer Rouge.
The decades long challenge of clearing land mines in Cambodia and UXO
(unexploded ordnance) in Laos echo war legacies in Viet Nam, including Agent Orange,
that exact human cost far after combat ended.
US acceptance of responsibility for the legacies of its wars
in Indochina has been slow and insufficient but had been growing. Already obligated US funding for remediation
and clearance programs appears to be undergoing slow if murky fulfillment. However the future is less certain because of
the DOGE afflicted destruction of USAID and the US Institute of Peace.
Our delegation played a locally well reported role in Viet
Nam’s celebration on the 50th anniversary of the end of the
war. Their formulation is different than
ours, and reflects what the conflict was about from their perspective, “The
Liberation of the South and the Reunification of the Country”. Our difference of motivation is acknowledged,
but there is broad recognition that opposition to the war in the US saved
countless lives in Viet Nam and in Laos.
Cambodia is a more complicated equation due to the indigenous killing
fields of the Khmer Rouge after US withdrawal.
In Ho Chi Minh City we joined the President’s anniversary
eve dinner for the international diplomatic and business community. After the parade, we held a private meeting
with a leader of the governing party. (His
remarks can be read here https://vnpeacecomm.blogspot.com/2025/05/fatherland-front-meeting-in-ho-chi-minh.html.)
Along with representatives of resident US veterans and business communities, I also
spoke at an earlier commemorative program hosted by the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs in Ha Noi.
The whole delegation was invited to the seated gathering of thousands
opposite the VIP speaker and viewing stand for the celebratory anniversary parade
in the center of Ho Chi Minh City. The general public watched in crowds
surrounding the subsequent line of march, on giant TV screens erected around
the city or at home. Enthusiasm for the
multiday celebration appeared broad and genuine. Participating units were reported
here: https://vietnamnews.vn/politics-laws/1716843/grand-military-parade-procession-takes-place-in-hcm-city-to-celebrate-50th-anniversary-of-national-reunification.html
Based on memory of previous 5 year anniversary
marches, the military presence was larger, but not exclusive. For the first time Cambodian, Lao and Chinese
contingents participated.
There are reports that Viet Nam also invited the US to
participate for the first time, a remarkable symbol of reconciliation and a
careful balance to Chinese inclusion.
However that was killed by the White House blocking any US official
participation, until the last minute at the Consular level—much to the
detriment of the US. The same policy seems
to have led to cancellation of our delegation’s meeting with the US Ambassador
and the substituted Deputy Chief of Mission.
My personal conclusion fifty years later is that Viet Nam is
well on the way to its goal of being a middle income developed country. It will play an increasingly strong
leadership role in South East Asia and internationally. The difficult process of reunifying the
country culturally, politically and militarily after four decades of war with
France, the US, Cambodia and China (and distrust of their allies within the
country) are over. As after the US Revolution
and Civil War, there are still some rough edges of treatment of the losing
side. Viet Nam’s version of democracy
is not the same as our, nor is that pursued by its neighbors. The country has new leaders and is in the
midst of deep reform of local, regional and national governance. Time will tell whether that makes the system
more responsive to popular will or more efficient bureaucratically.
Having traveled to the region at least thirty times over the
last half century, I was not surprised by what I saw or heard although the amount
of Vietnamese engagement in the 50 year anniversary was notable. I was impacted more by learning of a link
between the history of Viet Nam and Cambodia.
Hearing Charlie Clements’ account of 1970 was not only moving as a
reminder of the price paid for conscientious resistance by an active duty Air
Force officer, but also confirmed direct and unique US responsibility for the
tragedy that befell Cambodia.
As a C130 pilot with unusual security clearance, Charlie transported
an intelligence team to Phnom Penh that apparently lay the groundwork for the overthrow
of President Norodom Sihanouk. Charlie’s
chance encounter with a key CIA operative in Saigon a few days later predicted
the coup by Lon Nol and his invitation of US military intervention including
B52 raids way in excess of the Secret Bombing.* Without a US inspired coup and military engagement, there would have
been no viable Khmer Rouge, take over of power, depopulation of cities, mass
torture and executions, cross border attacks on Viet Nam and a third Indochina
War that included China’s destructive invasion in support of Pol Pot.
As an American, I am more immediately concerned by current
threats to our governance and foreign policy.
If implemented, the irrational and unfounded tariff policies of the
Trump Administration will do great damage to the economic well being of the
people of Viet Nam, Cambodia and to a lesser extent Laos. His tariffs have nothing to do with
reciprocity. Viet Nam and Cambodia are
being grievously punished for an imbalance of trade that came about because the
US encouraged them to be an alternative supply stream to China.
US non-participation in 50th anniversary events was
juvenile and may reflect revisionist right wing perspectives on the war by this
Administration. It was contrary to US
interests and hopefully will be corrected by the time of the 30th
anniversary of normalization of relations in July.
5/16/25
* Charlie's personal account can be read here https://vnpeacecomm.blogspot.com/2025/05/charlie-clements-on-cambodia.html
***************
Webinar by delegation participants (5/15/25):
https://youtu.be/-oUamqY6D0Q
********************
Remarks by John McAuliff on behalf of the VPCC Delegation at the Fatherland Front meeting April 30, 2025
The anniversary we
celebrate has special meaning for Americans and Vietnamese. Our initial
relationship could not have been more positive in 1945 as the US Office of
Strategic Services provided military support to Viet Minh forces in Tan Trao
led by Ho Chi Minh and Võ Nguyên Giáp.
The pressures of
emerging cold war politics led the US government to a tragic course of first
supporting and then replacing the French colonial role in Indochina. How
many million lives were lost and opportunities for economic development were
squandered because of American historical and cultural ignorance and arrogance?
During the next thirty
years the people of Viet Nam and the US paid an increasingly horrific and
disproportionate cost.
The first stages of US
intervention were barely noticed in public opinion and government. The
path accelerated with sabotage of the Geneva Agreement, most notably refusal to
implement reunification elections in 1954. As military advisers and supplies
of weapons grew into direct combat, a military draft and growing casualties,
US citizens took notice. Symbolic vigils by traditional pacifists
expanded into teach-ins on university campuses, a draft counseling and
resistance movement, increasingly massive peace demonstrations, a nationwide
Moratorium, tax resistance, symbolic sabotage of draft boards and large scale
civil disobedience.
Civilian activists were
energized by antiwar veterans and gave significant support to opposition within
the military. African Americans not only provided the inspirational model
of the civil rights movement but moral leadership uniting domestic and
international concerns.
After the Paris
Agreement brought release of POWs and the end of US combat and bombing of the
north, the antiwar movement diminished in size but focused effectively on
pressuring the US Congress to restrict further US intervention and material
support for the Saigon government, undermining its morale and military
capability. A powerful motivator for activists was exposure of the brutal
tiger cages at Con Dao that we just visited and repression of the Paris
mandated role of the Third Force.
When the war ended fifty
years ago, a majority of Americans celebrated the end to the bloodshed and
favored humanitarian assistance. Official opinion was more
negative. The rawness of feelings and distrust led to missed
opportunities for normal relations on both sides in the late 1970s. US
public opinion soured because of postwar problems in Viet Nam and illusions
about China.
However, sympathetic
sectors of peace oriented religious organizations and remnants of the secular
antiwar movement advocated for normal relations beginning with Viet Nam’s
membership in the United Nations. A rice shipment was provided by the
Friendshipment coalition and individual organizations established their own
humanitarian programs in collaboration with the Viet Nam Union of Friendship
organizations.
Thanks to Foreign
Minister Nguyen Co Thach and General John Vessey a crucial diplomatic pathway
was opened through officially endorsed private humanitarian assistance.
During the decade before normalization of relations, a growing number of US
NGOs, veterans groups, educational exchange institutions and businesses built a
network of relations with Vietnamese mass organizations and government
ministries. They also pressured and worked with members the US Congress
and several Administrations to end the embargo and establish diplomatic
relations.
Many US ambassadors have
acknowledged that US government credibility with the Vietnamese people was
built on the moral foundation of activists who opposed the war and
non-governmental organizations and veterans groups that addressed the
humanitarian problems of its legacies, including Agent Orange, land mines and
unexploded ordnance.
In the thirty years
since normal relations, we have seen the flowering of bilateral trade due to
economic reforms created by Doi Moi, dramatically expanded educational exchange
and creation of a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership. Both countries are
determined that neighboring waters should be a zone of peace, mutual respect
and free transit.
We had begun to believe
that the catalytic role of people to people engagement had been supplanted by
deep and enduring national ties. Then we witnessed the Trump
Administration’s butchery of USAID and the US Institute of Peace, including war
legacy projects in Viet Nam, a block on US embassy participation in 50th
anniversary events and threats of punishing irrational tariffs. I
hope and believe this is a short term aberration. In any case it has
illustrated that the role of friendship and mutual support has not ended.
********************
Prospects of Viet Nam’s Diplomacy in the Role of Mediation
and Reconciliation
Remarks by John McAuliff at a conference organized by the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ha Noi, April 23, 2025
“50 Years of National Reunification: The Peacebuilding Role
of Diplomacy from Past to Present”
Let me
thank our hosts of MOFA and DAV for inviting me and giving me a task that
seems inherently presumptuous, an American offering ideas about mediation and
reconciliation to Vietnam, the country that has taught me everything I know
about creative diplomacy for almost fifty years.
It
began with Do Xuan Oanh of Hoi Viet My who welcomed a delegation of US peace
activists to Ha Noi on April 30, 1975. We arrived at the same moment that
US Ambassador Graham Martin was abandoning Saigon. It continued with
Foreign Minister Nguyen Co Thach who taught me that you could not move a
country geographically but you could change its political and thus its
strategic environment.
It
went on with a series of US ambassadors, beginning with Pete Peterson, who
recognized that American credibility with the Vietnamese people was built on
the moral foundation of activists who opposed the war, non-governmental
organizations and veterans groups that addressed the humanitarian problems of
its legacies, including Agent Orange, land mines and unexploded ordnance;
not to mention pioneers from US universities and the American business
community.
So
here is my two cents worth about where Viet Nam might go in the future to build
on the hard won potential of its past.
1) Utilize
Viet Nam’s unique role where it is trusted by both sides of a conflict to offer
the good offices of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Defense
and other agencies to assist in the development of mutual understanding and
confidence building. That can be combined with adding in the
broad range of people to people relationships and experience created by the
Viet Nam Union of Friendship Organizations. I leave to your imagination the
applicable countries.
2)
Offer Viet Nam’s example of undertaking risky internal radical
self-transformation to solve grave economic and development problems and
liberate creative productive energy of the entire population, consistent with
socialist values. At the same time show the benefit of opening the door
without discrimination to all sources of investment and trade. Note
that doi moi preceded and may have encouraged the end of the US embargo of Viet
Nam by more than seven years. Countries with which Viet Nam has special
emotional and political closeness can be helped to recognize the hard, uneven
but necessary steps to achieve fundamental market reforms.
3) Consistent
with Viet Nam’s principle of non-intervention, it needs to grow its
international leadership role beyond participation in UN peace keeping missions
to lead incremental humanitarian solutions in conflict zones. For example
Viet Nam could bring countries that abstained in the UN vote against Russian
aggression in Ukraine to take responsibility under the UN for the security of
all nuclear plants, replacing both sides’ combatants. That would eliminate a
grave danger to the people of Ukraine, Russia and the rest of Europe.
Viet Nam could also have helped to create a neutral safety zone that allowed
the local population to obtain internal refuge closer to home and family.
Trusted by both sides, these special UN peace keepers could have saved civilian
lives and been able to assure exclusion from this territory of transit of
foreign weapons supplies or use for Ukrainian military emplacements.
You
can say this is an attractive fantasy but who could imagine fifty years ago
what we see around us today, here and throughout the country, of booming
construction, economic growth and public engagement—or have believed that once
bitter enemies could be comprehensive strategic partners determined that
neighboring waters should be a zone of peace, mutual respect and free transit.
A half
a century ago the Vietnamese people with significant popular support throughout
the world, including in the US, overcame what was assumed to be not only an
undefeated but undefeatable power that had dominated the world since
1945. Today we see that the disease of imperial assumptions and ambition
does not have one home country or ideology. Multipolarity ironically
leads to more than one power doing terrible things. I challenge Viet Nam
to provide the international leadership that guarantees not only its own
well-being but advances hope for the survival and prosperity of our brothers
and sisters in too many places to mention.
Let me close as someone who was raised as a Catholic but no
longer follows that faith to express the feeling of deep loss from the passing
of Pope Francis and hope that his Church will choose a worthy successor.
*********************
Vietnam can be a trusted mediator on global stage, says
American peace activist
Voice of Vietnam Wednesday,
23/04/2025
https://english.vov.vn/en/politics/diplomacy/vietnam-can-be-a-trusted-mediator-on-global-stage-says-american-peace-activist-post1194311.vov
American
activists say US should take responsibility for role in Cambodia’s tragic
history By Som
Sotheary / Khmer Times May 8,
2025
https://www.khmertimeskh.com/501680694/american-activists-say-us-should-take-responsibility-for-role-in-cambodias-tragic-history/
Delegation meeting at the Diplomatic Academy
https://dav.edu.vn/hoc-vien-ngoai-giao-tiep-doan-quy-hoa-giai-va-phat-trien-hoa-ky-tang-cuong-hop-tac-vi-hoa-binh-va-phat-trien/
************************
Ho Chi Minh City Celebrates the Fall of Saigon By Damien
Cave, The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/30/world/asia/saigon-parade-vietnam-war.html?unlocked_article_code=1.G08.OUTr.1_ANDXXYj7UZ&smid=url-share
Out of War’s Shadow:
Vietnam on the Move t
By Damien Cave and Tung Ngo, The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/30/world/asia/vietnam-country-progress-growth.html?unlocked_article_code=1.G08.8zZo.B7Y7L4xCBvck&smid=url-share
