1
Why war, why U.S. lost, Anti- Vietnam movement and lessons
Pete Bohmer, professor of economics—listen to alternative viewpoint
Still little understanding today by most people, confusion—why U.S. fought the Vietnam war--ask class? friends, family; mistake; well intentioned; press and politicians stopped victory, stabbed in the back, restrained..
A. Domino theory—1) Communists would win in Vietnam, not so clear which—Chinese, Soviets, North Vietnamese. Communists would expand and it would weaken resolve of leaders in other countries to resist in Indochina, Thailand, Burma, Indonesia, etc
Credibility to fight, lose credibility in SEATO, etc. if U.S. lost;—also appeasement if U.S. withdrew—World War II analogy, WW III from inaction—U.S. Ambassador Lodge, pp. 159
Asia would go Communist—main focus on expanding and aggressive Communist Conspiracy
B. A grain of truth in domino theory but primarily U.S. feared economic and political independence, particularly those societies which were socialist oriented or would limit and control trade and investment with first world. --My view--U.S. did not permit countries to break from U.S. economic and political domination; particular fear of Vietnam being model of independent development and this idea spreading to other countries; making it more difficult for U.S. multinationals to make profits although Vietnam not that important. Threat was threat of a good example not external subversion.—particularly in a period of third world nationalism and revolution.
Shaped U.S. foreign and military policy
The mistake by U.S. policymakers was not that they didn't know what they were doing but that they underestimated the Vietnamese fighting U.S.--racism and arrogance, application of models of cost-benefit analysis. "Light at the end of the tunnel" of McNamara. Morality of intervention not questioned by elites, nor was it even a question, the right of self-determination of Vietnamese.Anti-communism was short hand for this, shaped policy,
So was protecting the “free world”
(Mcnaughton-—U.S. defeat would be catastrophic –to whom—see page 135; 70% to avoid humiliating defeat to us as guarantor, 20% to keep from Chinese—straight domino; 10% to help like Iraq . Consistent with both domino theories)
In other words, U.S. had to fight to show that countries could not break out of “free world” and that U.S. would support govts. who were committed to this anti-communist and pro U.S. capitalist model.
Maximum U.S.goal—pro-western capitalist S. Vietnam, eventual collapse of North
Minimum goal—U.S.to not lose war, U.S. troops remain, devastated countries—not a model,
neither part of Vietnam is an alternative either separated or united
Why did U.S. leave/lose the war?
1. Organized resistance of North and South Vietnam—long run goal, something to fight for—independence and social transformation—deserved critical solidarity
2. Anti-war movement—deserves credit, challenging its own government—took time, collapsed between 1973 and 1975—,not strong enough after 1975 to win recognition of Vietnam, or reparations. Other type of U.S. war continued—must oppose economic wars as well as military
3. Movement within the military—spurred by conditions, Black movement, anti-war movement
4. Protest, instability, the resistance in military, growing balance of payments problems led to Vietnamization which was a losing strategy—ARVN would not fight sufficiently not could they stabilize country,
Growing balance of payments problems even with massive bombing. Profits began to decline
As other countries were catching up, also growth in real wages at home.
Growing elite opposition—a. Businessmen against the war, generals, For economic reasons, stability-McGeorge Bundy. b. Congress finally asserting constitutional powers and restricting war powers of U.S. in Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam—many loopholes because of protest, quote Jesse Jackson.
Also weakened govt.—losing legitimacy even with serious repression
5. Growing popular opposition to the war--influenced by 1, 2, 3, 4.
Let me focus on antiwar movement, mixing in personal activism
1.Vietnam anti-war
At first majority support for war, U.S. involvement grew—bombing on an unprecedented scale, chemical weapons—napalm, agent orange, others, over ½ million troops by 1968
Slow growth of anti-war movement, one of the social key movements of the 1960’s and early 1970’s
A little on my involvement, 1965 march—negotiate or withdrawal, quite large 20,000 didn’t go because I didn’t know people who were going
Growth of teach-ins—all night education about war, key part of any movement
Increasingly protests on campus—war research, ROTC, recruiters for DOW,CIA, often linked to
Campus to broader issue.
e.g. MIT, 1967 blocking students from seeing Dow recruiters.
1. Value of key issue to campus—also national movement, program, networks—
Campus-off-campus, Vietnam summer, 1967—education and action
Going door to door,
Question of militance—1967—Pentagon, , breaking law, burning draft cards
Take a stand—very powerful, critique of media –different fromm Floyd’s. Need for alternate media.—huge
1968—many people changed, anti-war movement, war not winnable, lies of government
Growing after 1968—raise social cost of the war, explain social costs—people increasingly against entire system, speech by McGeorge Bundy, disruption, turmoil
Idea is many levels of protests—vigils, to large legal protests, top civil disobedience, e.g, blocking recruiters, destroying draft boards-Catholic left
Must consider how it builds movement, social costs.
make country ungovernable—question war became less popular but movement while growing also not popular, major cultural divides. Anti-war movement intersected with other trends-counterculture, others although not identical.
1969—Justice dept, against political repression, massive. Nixon had considered using nuclear weapons—couldn’t claimed he hadn’t watched protest—People in power never admit protests, disruptions can affect [policy—less than what is demanded.
Growing antiwar movement by GI’s and Vets. Major protest in 1971,Washington, D.C. , Winter Solddier--also organized tribunals. Major resistance by GI’s, particularly influenced by Black Power and liberation movement, Muhammad Ali
SDS, one of the main groups fell apart after 1969--Anti-war movement on campus did not have a national organization after 1969—huge protests in May, 1970 after four students killed at Kent State for invasion of Cambodia. Growth of activity but hard to sustain without organization Started at elites schools but spread. Most massive strike in U.S. history—huge divide in country
Goals to end war but increasingly also to make a revolution in the U.S.—did not deal sufficiently with consciousness, where people where at. . Attempt to link issues—on campuses often with anti-racism struggles. E.g. strikes at various schools—Columbia 1968
Massive movement against war with varying ideologies, strategies, tactics.
I moved to San Diego in 1970—worked a lot with GI’s, counseling, music, rallies—Jane Fonda—rallies.
GI’s neither baby killers nor heroes—victims of draft, being poor—false issue raised beginning in 1980’s and again today—issue is war-End War—support troops by ending war, health care for all, VA
Nixon beginning in 1969—Vietnamization—bombing, reduce U.S. casualties, puppet govt. must be concerned with all casualties not just U.S. key, our responsibility here,
Similar strategy for Iraq.
1973 peace treaty signed—movement declined although bombing continued, 1975 withdrawal of all U.S. troops—movement collapsed, economic war continued.
Anti Vietnam War Movement has much to be proud of—I cannot think of any war where its own population protested so much against its own government. Vietnam Syndrome has led to making it somewhat more difficult for U.S. to militarily intervene, skeptical of govt claims. Bush senior claimed it was buried. To me, it means questioning government reasons for going to war,. Lies to gainsupport for both wars
WMD, nuclear, terrorists,
Attempt to discredit movement, spit on GI’s, hated U.S., only because of draft, spoiled middle class kids. People in power always try to discredit oppositional social movements,
Many people from anti-war movement have continued to be active in environmental, women’s movements, labor, etc, many have let private lives take over.
Weakness—sprinting, not a long run perspective, need to develop analysis and organization,
Insufficient analysis—from anti-theory to dogmatism or romantic third worldism.
arrogance—You are either part of the problem or part of the solution. Cultural arrogance
Failure to build institutions, organizations that were ongoing. Respect everyday people.
(Gender, race and class
1)some posturing, male led often
2)racism—not white, SNCC first group against war, tension on whether to link issues.
3)class—varied.-cultural arrogance)
------
Lessons for current organizing against Iraq War
1. Reach out—we are the majority-persistence
2. Link it to costs at home—1 to 2 trillion dollars—7 billion officially on war
Cutbacks—rising price of oil
3. Learn about the war, the middle east—challenge racist interpretations of Arabs, Muslims.
4. Respect Iraqi self-determination, explain and work for immediate withdrawal—explain that U.S. is making it worse.
5. Challenge violations of civil liberties at home—Patriot Act—Spying Niemoller poem
6. Get involved—write a letter, organize a discussion, go to a protest
7. Last two weeks in Olympia, 30 people got arrested, walking in front of trucks with military supplies, crossing a fence where supplies were being loaded. –30 years from now—seen as not complicit with this immoral and illegal war, MLK analogy—Take a stand like Lt. Ehren Watada did—said he would not go to Iraq. Courageous—wouldn’t accept non combat duty.
Key sources—Vietnam Wars, 1945-1990, by Marilyn Young
Hearts and Minds--movie