I’ve watched the first three episodes of the Ken Burns/Lynn Novick series on the Vietnam War, which take us from the French colonial period beginning in the 19th century to the end of 1965 and a mushrooming U.S. military commitment. The narrative thread, it seems to me, is the notion of the war as a tragic mistake, most especially for the United States.
The series begins with a voice-over that suggests the war was begun in good faith by America, even as other American voices in the series suggest otherwise. I kept a notebook handy and jotted down the following notes and thoughts as the series progressed:
- There were divisions among the Vietnamese people, but they were more or less united by one idea: resist the foreign invaders/occupiers, whether that foreign presence was French, Japanese, the French again, American, or (both earlier and later) Chinese. And there’s no doubt Ho Chi Minh would have won a democratic election, as promised at Geneva. Which is exactly why that election never came.
- As one American admitted, the US totally misread the situation in Indochina after the French defeat in 1954. The Cold War and Falling Dominoes dominated the thoughts of Americans, obscuring the reality of a powerful and popular anti-colonial and nationalist revolt that tapped Vietnamese patriotism.
- When not fearing Falling Dominoes, US officials were far more concerned about their own prestige (or political fortunes) than they were with the Vietnamese people.
- US officials recognized South Vietnam was a fiction, a puppet government propped up by American money and power, and that they had “backed the wrong horse.” But they came to believe it was the only horse they had in the race against communism.
- US presidents, stuck with a losing horse of their own creation, began to lie. As president, Kennedy said he hadn’t sent combat troops; he had. As president, Johnson tried to obscure both the size and intent of the US military’s commitment. These lies were not done to deceive the enemy — they were done to deceive the American people.
- After backing the wrong horse (Diem and his family), American leaders conspired to eliminate him in a coup. When Diem was assassinated, matters only grew worse. Left with no horse in the race and a “turnstile” government in South Vietnam, the US began to bomb North Vietnam and committed combat units beginning in March of 1965.
- More duplicity by US officials: Battles such as Ap Bac and Binh Gia, which revealed the “miserable performance” of the South Vietnamese army (ARVN), were reinterpreted and sold as victories by senior US military leaders.
- Both JFK and LBJ had serious reservations about going to war in Vietnam. However, domestic political concerns, together with concerns about containing the spread of communism, always came up trumps. For example, the series quotes Kennedy as saying he believed America couldn’t win in Vietnam, but that he couldn’t win the 1964 presidential election if he withdrew US advisors from Vietnam. LBJ was similarly skeptical but took a tough line with the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, which saw his approval rating on Vietnam soar from 42% to 72%, ensuring his electoral victory over Goldwater in 1964.
One of the more compelling sound bites comes from then-Major Charles Beckwith, who is at pains to praise the fighting quality of Viet Cong/NLF forces, their total commitment to the struggle. If only he had (Vietnamese) troops like them to work with, says Beckwith.
To summarize: the series provides evidence of US dishonesty and duplicity and showcases the mistakes generated by hubris when aggravated by ignorance. Yet, the overall message is one of sadness about a “tragic mistake” committed by decent men who were overwhelmed by fears of international communism.
Final points: As we watch the series, we follow individual Americans, and hear American commentators, far more than we hear Vietnamese voices. Also, while the series shows US bombing from afar and mentions Agent Orange, the effects of this destruction haven’t yet been shown in detail. (A telling exception: a young Vietnamese women joins the communist resistance after US bombing destroys a center for senior citizens near her home.)
In short, the Burns/Novick series privileges the American experience, suggesting that US troops of that era fought courageously as a new “greatest generation,” even as senior US leaders spoke privately of an unwinnable war.
Is killing millions of people in a lost cause merely a tragic mistake? Or is it something far worse? More to come as the series continues to air on PBS.
William J. Astore is a retired lieutenant colonel (USAF). He taught history for fifteen years at military and civilian schools and blogs at Bracing Views. He can be reached at email@example.com. Reprinted from Bracing Views with the author’s permission.
3 thoughts on “The Vietnam War: A Tragic Mistake?”
Throughout the program, thus far, the viewer is reminded that the “enemy”(frequently used as a synonym for the Viet Cong), were “Communists”. The images of those Americans advocating peace and US troop withdrawals are nearly always of gyrating, half-naked young men and women, even interspersed into footage of Dr Benjamin Spock joining in the walk to the Pentagon.
The Burns/Novick Vietnam series has been a huge disappointment so far. But what did I expect, with sponsors such as David Koch and Walmart? Seems to me, the aim of this propaganda piece is to package and tie up the American War in Vietnam, and shelve it in the Outbox.
Ken Burns is a complete phony, from the top of his head to the tip of his toes. (H#ll, he’s 64 years old and not one grey hair on his head…yeah, right.)
Why can’t people see he’s as fake as his hair color.
Not a tragic mistake: a deliberate false-flag boondoggle requiring the
removal of the last truly independent President of the US. Dishonest. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/f3a244dbb8a0f7df222855ae259c81bbfd9d14dd8a71096668316639180ed6c4.jpg https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/5fb6a086f0aeabc84702e8eca7785b061c3c5a7c87543f33229d3062e4dbea6a.jpg
Comments are closed.