Diplomatic Presidential and Cultural Lessons of the Vietnam War

Like many disagreements, the Vietnam War created the various peace proposals but none prevailed. One problem was that the U.S. and North Vietnam had different goals for the peace talk. Failing to have any progress, President Nixon seeked other methods for peace. Nixon ordered Henry Kissinger ,National Security Adviser, to start separate talks with the North Vietnamese — without involving South Vietnam or the America’s army. On August 1969, Henry Kissinger began talking with Le Duc Tho. Three years, these private conversation failed to produce any big result. In late October 1972 both of them finish drafting a treaty, and was reveal by Kissinger at a press conference. Nguyen Van Thieu’s was against the treaty. His decline almost caused the North to withdraw; only another vast U.S aerial attacks with bombs on North Vietnam, instructed by Nixon, kept them at the negotiating table. Thieu finally accepted the treaty from Washington, who promise to back him up if the North shattered the terms of the contract.

In 1960s, the US was faced with another crisis of communist expansion in the war between North and South Vietnam. The Kennedy Administration decided to further pursue their containment strategy out of fear being seen by the international community as weak towards communism. During the Johnson Administration, an attack against American vessels that happened in the Gulf of Tonkin led to President Johnson being granted the ability to conduct broad military operations without congressional approval. The American public began to largely oppose American intervention in Vietnam because the optimistic statements made by the government ran contradictory to the reports of the violent fighting by American news outlets. During the Nixon administration, the US switched to a policy, later known as Vietnamization, where the main goal was to strengthen the South Vietnamese forces and provide them with better armaments so they can better defend themselves. Vietnamization proved to be ineffective as the South Vietnamese forces were unable to hold their own against the North without US air support as proven during Operation Lam Son 719 and the Easter Offensive. The signing of the Paris Peace Accords officially ended US involvement in the Vietnam War. The US followed containment policies during beginning of the war due to the underlying fear of the spread of communism and since the policies were inherited from previous

The Vietnam War lasted longer, bloodier, and more hostile than any U.S. President or American citizen imagined. Lyndon Johnson faced many other enemies during the war such as the duration, the immense number of deaths, and for the first time in most American’s history, failure. Through deep evaluation of Lyndon B. Johnson’s foreign policies as President during the Vietnam war, failure was a recurring outcome, as he faced military and political difficulties over having complete authority over political decisions made leading to the misuse of his respective power, receiving split support through torn Americans at home, and his accord to deport so many troops into combat in Vietnam.

Ending the war in Viet Nam, Richard Nixon believed himself the consul to succeed in presidency. In less than a year, Nixon effortlessly worked hard to bear troops on Northern Viet Nam and settle negations. Moreover, Nixon rallied troops, secretly settling B-52 bombings in North Vietnamese base camps in Cambodia. He began bringing diplomatic pressure onto the Soviet Union in order to persuade Northern Viet Nam to settle for negotiations. Nixon then used Vietnamization to strengthen forces for U.S troops in South Viet Nam. Furthermore, Nixon set up conferences in Paris, France for negations between North Viet Nam, South Viet Nam, and the United States. However, these public peace talks became “Propaganda Theater” to both sides. This lead to secret meetings in order for successful agreements to occur. In the end, it took until 1975 for the war between the United States and Viet Nam to be considered “over.”

In Nixon’s effort to end the war, his first policy was to send a message to Hanoi that he meant business. His policy consisted of escalated strategic bombings near the border of Cambodia in hopes to get the North Vietnamese to fear that the United States was capable of doing anything to achieve victory. Even Johnson was skeptical of expanding the war into Cambodia but Nixon’s first policy in full effect. Unfortunately, America was blinded by the corruptness of Nixon’s “peaceful presidency” since

“The Vietnam War was arguably the most traumatic experience for the United States in the twentieth century.” (Donald M. Goldstein). Many times in America, our leaders have made impulsive decisions that, though persuaded by the correct intentions, resulted in even greater turmoil. The quoted source reflects the feelings of some citizens that view the United States as falling short when trying to lend a hand in the fulfillment of South Vietnam’s desire to become a democracy. In the case of the Vietnam War, the results of the decision to aid South Vietnam in its efforts to exclude itself from communism were not as triumphant as the United States had expected. The United States willingly sent its troops into a foreign country to help fight for its freedom; however, only some Americans were able to view this as loyalty to one of its allies. Many different opinions on the United States’ involvement in the war is questioned, and sometimes even condemned, by our society today.

On May 13 the US started its negotiations to end the war but North Vietnam wouldn't officially negotiate with the US unless they stopped bombing the rest of North Vietnam. When President Johnson told the military to stop the bombing, it did nothing but create problems with their South Vietnamese allies. The US did not think they would win the war, with their military. The United States thought it would end by peaceful negotiations with north Vietnam and would still give a chance for South Vietnam to

President Lyndon Johnson stresses in ‘Why We Are in Vietnam’, “Around the globe, from Berlin to Thailand, are people whose well-being rests, in part, on the belief that they can count on us if they are attacked. To leave Vietnam to its fate would shake the confidence of all these people in the value of America’s commitment, the value of America’s word.” The Vietnam war was historically lengthy in contextual buildup, the war produced capping results nevertheless many casualties. The United States began entering and attacking North Vietnam In 1965, as well Communist-controlled areas in the South. The war lasted 19 years and 180 days. North Vietnam was receiving aid and assistance from the Soviet Union, as well as other Communist countries, and in opposition, by 1966,190,000 U.S. troops were in South Vietnam.

Thirty-eight years have passed and the Vietnam War is still a controversial topic. While some Americans believe that Indochina was of no strategic value to the United States, others argue that civilian leaders have undermined the war effort. My paper will help analyze the different viewpoints for U.S. involvement in Vietnam and the overall assessment of each. Almost all the sources utilized came to the consensus that the chief purpose for U.S. intervention was to stop Communism from spreading. Nevertheless, while some believed that the developed country had reason to fear the “Iron Curtain,” which fell upon Asia in 1954 with the armistice in Korea and the Geneva Accords, others did not see this as an act of upholding freedom and democracy.

Lorenzo M. Crowell discusses the lessons that Americans have learned from the Vietnam conflict in his article "The Lessons and Ghosts of Vietnam." Crowell analyzes the lessons learned from Vietnam and applies them to the military strategies of today. Crowell does overlook some problems involving the power of Saddam Hussein after Desert Storm and the comparison of two dissimilar wars. Crowell is effective in his arguments with the use of first-hand viewpoints, current newsprint, and political figureheads. Although the article "The Lessons and Ghosts of Vietnam" had some weak points, overall the article is effective and informative.

As the Vietnam War remained an existential crisis for the anti-communist agenda of the United States, President Johnson had to make crucial decisions regarding whether to continue intervening in the war or to withdraw the troops already deployed. Several debates among government advisors occurred in July of 1965 regarding differing strategies for plans of action. Although some advisors were against deploying more troops, such as George Ball who believed in a “compromise solution,” to “cut our losses while we still have the freedom of maneuver to do so,” many advocated for the deployment of more troops (Vietnam 283). Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara argued that without continued intervention, communist expansion was inevitable, stating “the alternative to fighting in Vietnam was a Chinese-dominated Southeast Asia, which would mean a ‘Red Asia” (McMahon 101). He also believed pulling out the troops would ruin the international prestige of the United States. The Johnson administration decided to increase the amount of troops and number of bombings in North Vietnam, hopefully leading to their surrender. Unfortunately for the three years following, countless resources and men were poured into Vietnam with no improvement or end to be seen.

The Vietnam conflict was a ruthless and long war that had serious consequences for everyone involved and would prove to be a shameful and infamous snapshot of American foreign policy at work. This paper will highlight the geo-political relationship of the United States and South Vietnam, focusing on events taking place after the Geneva accords of 1954, in the attempts to insure a non-communist Vietnam.

The United States intervention in Vietnam is seen by the world as America’s greatest loss and longest war. Before the start of the war in Vietnam, the thought of the United States losing this war was unheard of because America was technologically superior, no country in south East Asia could contend with them. Lyndon B. Johnson announced that he would not be the president to allow South East Asia to go Communist . Why the United States lost the war has been a huge debate since the end of the war, because there were so many factors affecting why they lost; the war was a loss politically, after losing support from not only the American public but also the South Vietnamese and losing a political mandate for the war by 1973, when the last

In the early 1970’s, the Vietnamese War became a stalemate between the United States government, and Vietnamese forces; neither side seemed to be making advances, and there was little will to fight. At the same time, both Washington and Hanoi faced internal issues that made the drafting of a peace agreement inevitable. Facing this reality, both sides agreed on drafting a peace agreement. Washington and Hanoi both had particular goals in the signing of the Paris Agreement. According to Asselin, the United States had three purposes in seeking a peace agreement, “…securing the release of American prisoners, withdrawing from Vietnam without formally capitulating, and preserving

The diplomatic negotiations were often stalled after the introduction of American troops in 1965. This is because the North Vietnamese felt that they should not have to concede on anything. Instead, the US should immediately withdraw its forces from the country unconditionally. This created divisions about how the US could end the war. What was happening is reports were surfacing, that the rules of engagement dramatically restricted the ability of US forces to peruse and attack the enemy. At the same time, many operations were fought involving tremendous amounts of materials, resources and personnel. However, after everything was over, is when the US would withdraw and the North Vietnamese reoccupied the area. (Westheider, 2011) (Moss, 2010)