TIG S2/#6: A Painful Scar from the Cold War: How the Vietnam War Affected the US & Its Foreign Policy Conduct
Being one of the most controversial US military engagements, the Vietnam War has earned itself various perspectives. Many have deemed it as an unwanted stage of US history or as another tragedy that is now manifested into the long walls of the Vietnam War Memorial. Now, as the US already outlasted the Cold War and found itself in a new set of foreign entanglements, the ghosts of the Vietnam War appear to be still present to that point in history. The article aims to put forward the many ways the Vietnam War has affected the US back then and to this day.
The Vietnam war is known as a stain on the history of the United States. Not only was it a huge mistake in the US foreign policy, but it is also a mistake that would haunt the US in the many years to come. Apart from being another conflict in the litany of conflicts the US had participated in, there is more to it than what has met the eye. As Kent Burns mentioned, the Vietnam war is a key event, an important stage in US history to understand the US we all know now, from the way it conducts its foreign policy to how it approaches a problem (Manullang, 2021).
In hindsight, it is easy to judge how the entire conquest of Vietnam was a pointless mistake. Back then, however,many would not think that the entire thing would turn into a fiasco for a global power like the US. There are two points on the US part to highlight when it comes to assessing the mess in Vietnam. First off, the US had no clear idea or answer to the different environment it found in Vietnam and this applies to both military and general aspects of the conflict. Military wise the US, despite its vast and sophisticated armament, was not fit to deal with unconventional (guerilla) warfare it was faced with (Turse, 2014). The US struggled to put up a fight that fit its desire, that was one that had a fixed frontline where it could face the enemies heads-on. Instead, the US was faced with enemies that were always on the run and spread throughout South Vietnam. Not only that, the US also had to distinguish them, both North Vietnamese Army and the infamous Vietcong, from the civilians. The mounting pressure and unsuitable conditions eventually led to terrible executions of many military operations they conducted. Furthermore,not only would it result in casualties on their side, the civilians ended up taking the brunt for most of the time. It is also important to note the French prior failure, even with the enormous help by the US, to take care of Indochina (what the two Vietnams used to be part of) (Windrow, 2003). In general, the US had no prior experience or understanding of what Vietnam had to offer then.
Another important point would be the reason that drove the US to send its soldiers thousands of miles to Vietnam. In securitizing the issue, the government had used national security to frame the importance of the war. The domino theory and ongoing red scare during the Cold War were in part another supporting factors as well (Resky, 2015). Sending out millions of soldiers to an alien land with no clear objective or what was at stake was not a good idea. Looking back to reassess the situation, it is no surprise that many have considered it an absurd excuse to get into a pointless bloodbath,especially as it had already been proven following the fall of Saigon that a so-called communist Vietnam had no interest or capacity as a direct threat to the US.
As time went on, many in the US, from those in the government to the public, were getting a clearer picture of what was going on in Vietnam and what the government had been up to. The people were not satisfied with how the government had been handling the conflict, especially in how they delivered it to the public as there was a huge discrepancy between what was being said by them and what was present in Vietnam. In short, the public no longer put a high degree of trust in their government. An interesting development in it was that there were all sorts of movements against the war, from the youth with their counterculture movement to protests done by the veterans of the war themselves. All across the US, people took to the streets to voice their desire to end the war in Vietnam and to bring back the soldiers home. The many waves of demonstrations would at times be filled with violent clashes that resulted in casualties but all in all it contributed to the move’s gaining popularity, even outside the US (Cawthorne, 2010). The huge movement against the war would play an important role in the US eventual departure from Vietnam.
The US finally put its military, at least as an active tool in its foreign policy, on hibernation following its departure from Vietnam. The shock that the American public bore witness to in Saigon as the North Vietnamese finally reclaimed their southern counterpart also exacerbated the military’s image in the public’s eye. In the international stage, the image of US military supremacy was also stained as many considered its venture in Vietnam as a failure, or in other words a defeat. The hibernation period is known as the Vietnam Syndrome. Not only that, another change in the US national security outlook also supported such a shift in the military. The Nixon doctrine played a big part in this where many of US allies were to rely much more on their own military forces as the US would only supply them with the armament, not with manpower. These two conditions above would make the US military less active abroad as it was not involved in any major conflicts for some years to come (Dougherty & Stewart, 2016).
Unfortunately, as the old saying goes, history has its own way of repeating itself. Despite the horror and suffering the US had inflicted upon itself, the so-called winner of the Cold War would eventually find itself engaged in yet another foreign conflict. US involvement in the Middle East, from its early resurrection in Iraq to Afghanistan, would prove that nothing has changed since its involvement in Vietnam. Its recent departure from Afghanistan is another proof of US incapacity in dealing with unconventional warfare, the same problem it encountered in Vietnam, and in a bigger picture, for itself to choose which fight it should not take part in. This was also made painfully clear following its departure from Afghanistan that invoked vivid images of its counterpart back in Saigon. Moving on, with the past records of US stubbornness and its ongoing competition, either with Russia or China, only time can tell whether or not the US would make the same move as it did in Vietnam again.
About the Author
Abel Josafat Manullang is a Research and Development staff of ISAFIS. Currently, he is in his second year at Universitas Padjadjaran program of international relations. With affinities in history, security and other international issues, he loves to project his thoughts and analysis into his writings.
References
Cawthorne, N. (2010). Vietnam a War Lost and Won. Arcturus Publishing Limited.
Dougherty, K., & Stewart, J. (2016). Kronologi Perang Vietnam: Konflik yang Mengguncang Sejarah Perang Amerika. PT Elex Media Komputindo.
Manullang, A. (2021). Limited War: US Diplomacy Instrument during the Vietnam War — IR Corner. Ir corner. Retrieved 8 August 2022, from https://www.ircorner.com/limited-war-us-diplomacy-instrument-during-the-vietnam-war/.
Resky, M. (2015). Kegagalan Politik Luar Negeri Amerika Serikat di Vietnam, 1965–1975. Deepublish.
Turse, N. (2014). Kill anything that moves. Metropolitan Books/Henry Holt and Co.
Windrow, M. (2003). The French Indochina War 1946–54. Osprey Publishing Limited.
