Yesterday, of course, being the 40th anniversary of our glorious victory in Vietnam, where, after failing to figure out what exactly we were fighting for and who we were dying for, the very last American left Saigon via helicopter from the American Embassy roof.
What, you say? We *didn’t* win in Vietnam? Don’t say that to the fine soldiers at the VVA, they’ll claim up and down that while *they* were fighting, the war was over and won! But of course it wasn’t, because the only way to win the war was to invade North Vietnam, and China promised to send “volunteers” if the US did that. So that left a huge army at the borders with South Vietnam, a huge army which invaded and won the war. Contrary to popular belief and the front page of the Washington Post on that day in 1975, Saigon did not fall to the “Vietcong”. Saigon fell to regular units of the NVA, North Vietnamese Army. The Viet Cong had largely been destroyed by the 1968 Tet Offensive and did not present any existential danger to the government of South Vietnam after that time.
On this day 40 years ago, if you wanted a M-16 rifle, there was plenty of them lying around the streets of Saigon, never fired and only dropped once, with abandoned ARVN uniforms littering the gutters. While there were a few South Vietnamese army units that fought hard, the majority of the ARVN melted away. Pretty much like the Iraqi Army when ISIS started shooting in their direction.
A few aging ARVN generals still hang around this area. I avoid them. They’re as annoying as the “Lost Cause” types in the American South. The reality is that South Vietnam fell because the South Vietnamese weren’t willing to fight for it. There was plenty of guns and ammunition in South Vietnam, the fact that Hanoi used captured ARVN guns and ammunition for most of their offensive after capturing the first two cities with armories should make that clear. What there was a lack of, was bodies willing to fight for a government that had become corrupt, autocratic, and divorced from the people it purported to rule. Pretty much the same reason the Confederacy fell, now that I think of it.
The North Vietnamese sent the generals and top politicians that they captured to “re-education” camps. The Union sent the generals and top politicians that they captured back to their homes in the former Confederacy. There was no equivalent in South Vietnam to the KKK and White Leagues that took the Southern USA back for the former Confederacy (as long as they pretended to be part of the USA and pretended to not have slavery) after the final surrender happened. Anybody who could have led such organizations was busy dying in the “re-education” camps. It was a harsh way of doing things, but probably saved many lives over the long run compared to the lenient way that the US government treated the rebellious Southern states. But then, I suppose that there were different goals at stake here. The average Northern politician or general didn’t give a shit about how Southerners ran their states or how harshly they treated their Negros, as long as they pretended they were part of the United States and pretended they didn’t have slavery. For the North, the war had always been about preserving the unity of the nation and only incidentally about ridding the nation of an institution (slavery) that had become a global embarrassment, not about the fate of black people. Meanwhile, for North Vietnam, they not only wanted to re-unite the nation, they had an ideology they wanted to impose on the South — and so any leader in the South had to be removed and sent to prison camps. Which they did.
Different goals, different end results. Vietnam got the unity they wanted. Their South is just Vietnam. Nobody flies the flag of the former South Vietnamese government in their South, not only because it would result in them being shot, but because the majority of Vietnamese in the South were born after the war ended and would be completely baffled as to why they would want to do such a thing. Meanwhile, the USA never did get the unity it desired — the South has always sat restless down on the USA’s southern flanks, with the flag of the defeated rebellion still flown regularly over state buildings and private businesses and homes, never really part of the nation until the 1960’s and the communications revolution started bringing it closer to the rest of the US.
Which tells you something about victory versus “victory”. The North Vietnamese knew that simply defeating the ARVN wasn’t enough to get the unity they desired. They acted ruthlessly to insure that there was only one Vietnam, run from Hanoi, with no trace of the old South Vietnamese government left in place, and anybody who dared disagree was sent to the prison camps or simply killed. The United States has never really done that kind of thing. Which makes us better than the Vietnamese, I suppose, on some moral scale. Some moral scale that doesn’t include the fate of the thousands of blacks who died after the Civil War at the hands of the KKK and White Leagues, or the millions of people killed by US guns and bombs around the world over the past hundred years, or …
– Badtux the History Penguin
Read Full Post »