Introduction
The occupation of Vietnam by France helped create conditions for the start of the Cold War rivalry between the two superpowers of the world. The democratic and communist forces devised their plans to protect their interests in the region. The involvement of the United States in Vietnam began in the 1950s and reached its height in the 1960s. Countering the increasing influence of the US, the Soviet Union also became involved in protecting its interests in the region. Moscow was mostly concerned about its credibility, and as a superpower, it considered it necessary to maintain national and international legitimacy. The war in Vietnam became part of the Cold War between the democratic and communist forces represented by America and Russia.
Discussion
The Vietnamese were consistently demanding independence from French colonization. They prepared their forces to achieve separation from France. In 1945, after the bloody war, when France formally surrendered before the Allies, one of the famous leaders, Ho Chi Minh, announced the independence of Vietnam (Appy, 2016).[1] With the realignment of the Allies, it was an unbearable situation for France to continue the war against its opponents. The state was also unable to combat the internal anti-French resistance war and hence preferred to surrender before the Allies.
The conflict in Vietnam was not merely national or between two allies; it was an international dispute in which a number of actors were involved. China also played its role, as it also had certain interests. [2]. The chaotic atmosphere of Vietnam around the Second World War attracted the attention of China, the US, France and Russia (Asselin, 2016). Every state was fighting for its interests. In the same way, France was consistently losing control as the guerrilla forces of the Viet Minh took control over major parts of the territory. The United States, observing the situation, became alarmed, and the chief of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the American forces proposed a nuclear strike in Vietnam [3] (Boyle, 2015). The massive Viet artillery barrage attacked the French forces, which they could not withstand, and the tide of the battle moved against France.
Around sixteen hundred soldiers were killed by the guerrilla forces of the Viet Minh. The same number of soldiers were missing, and five thousand were injured in the war. The war at Dien Bien Phu was the last major involvement of France in the affairs of Southeast Asia (Fear, 2017). The financial and military humiliation was unbearable for the French. [4]. The complete surrender of France was reflected in the Geneva Convention in 1954. However, during the war, France sought the help of the US several times. The appeal made by South Vietnam and Nixon’s policy of containment of the ideology invited the US to play its role.
Driven by the human tendency to suppress and contain others, the US faced severe losses in the Vietnam War. It was the goal of the US to prevent communism and ideas that belonged to socialist Russia. The attempt to break communist influence by sending military forces to Vietnam was considered by the advisers a big mistake (Hartman, 2015). After the independence of Vietnam, the US, despite being defeated, continuously assisted the rebels against the communist governments [5]. The surrender of North Korea towards the South further aggravated the situation and compelled US forces to bear further losses. The basic fear that overwhelmed the minds of Americans was the increasing spread of communist ideas and thoughts around the globe.
Before the official announcement of the war in Vietnam, there was a significant effect on US nationals. Americans were systematically educated about all the dangers that might influence US ideologies. However, after detailed discussion and negotiation between Vietnam and the United States, the Paris Peace Accord was signed (Jones, 2014). The agreement was not initially fulfilled by South Vietnam, which led President Nixon to order massive bombing while assuring that the United States would protect the northern region of Vietnam. After the agreement with the senior advisers of the US, the northern area surrendered its forces but consistently received aid from Russia and China [6].
For the military and defensive capability of North Vietnam, the Soviets provided large-scale training along with increased arms. The communist bloc also helped it promote political and economic strength (Nguyen, 2016). Similarly, after the signing of the Geneva Agreement, Vietnam required assurances regarding its political independence [7]. The Vietnamese, after observing the situation, again initiated talks with Western states for further correspondence on the agreement and other negotiations. They decided to end the war with the US by employing diplomatic means in 1972. They successfully negotiated with the Americans and made sure that the outcomes and the struggle for revolution would not be abandoned.
Hostility remained in the relationship between the US and Vietnam because the latter did not want to abandon armed struggle (Nye 2015). The conflict ultimately ended when the South was completely liberated. On the other hand, the administration in the United States was also not wise and mature. [8]. The calculations regarding strategy resulted in war, while negotiations through diplomatic measures required highly professional leadership. The president of the US was not able to realize the situation on the ground for winning the war. The Nixon administration placed the losses of the war on American citizens and armed forces.
Nixon was one of the most controversial and problematic presidents in the history of the US. [9]. A number of supporters lauded his foreign policy initiatives. These included building relationships with China and launching strategic initiatives against the Soviet Union. They also hailed him for ending the war with Vietnam and American participation in it. Many supporters also applauded the ideological and pragmatic approach of the president. The use of the China card helped him interact with Russia for smoother and more valuable relations. All the services and contributions of the president faded with the emergence of one of the worst political scandals in American history (Page, 2016). His policies might have been a great lesson for the next generation of leaders, but they faded before they were fully recorded in history.
The policies and decisions of the president were good but not always relevant to the nature and manner in which he could bargain for much more. [10]. Certain dealings reveal that he simply gave up on the agreement concerning strategic arms limitations. Moreover, anti-war sentiment was persisting at that time in the US. It was the national voice to focus on home and not indulge in the war in Vietnam. Opposition to the Vietnam War existed in 1964 and progressively became a national movement (Paterson, 2014). Using slogans about getting out of Vietnam, the demonstrators demanded that the United States get out of the war.
The movement against the war shaped a polarized and vigorous debate in the country. Many people, including anti-establishment hippies, along with mothers and students, participated in the opposition to the war. Unions of African Americans, Chicanos, women’s movements and other sectors of organized labour also contributed to restraining the administration from indulging in the war [11]. The Tet Offensive and the rising of the Tet Mau Than in 1968 provided an opportunity for American forces to take part in the war (Reynolds, 2018). South Vietnam and the US regrouped and inflicted heavy losses on the North. The forces also used NAPALM, which is a mixture of a gelling agent and gasoline. It was one of the dangerous substances that was used in the Vietnam War. In addition to these dangerous war tools, the US military also used Agent Orange. A number of people were affected by the use of Agent Orange.
The chemical was such a destructive substance that it contained certain material that destroyed the genes of the human body. The Red Cross of Vietnam calculated that around one million people were disabled due to attacks by US forces involving Agent Orange. The role of the media was highly important in the Vietnam War. Intensive graphic coverage and the relationship of those issues with public opinion made a great contribution. The US media increased its value by progressing in research-based reporting of the news along with a professional style of interviews. [12]. They learned certain new tactics to cover the real story of the Vietnam War (Robertson, 2017). The policy decisions of the Nixon administration were forced to follow public opinion.
The United States, after massive losses in the Vietnam War, began to withdraw its forces. However, the withdrawal did not force America to get out of Vietnam completely. It left the fragile state with a proper plan. In fighting the communists, the United States assigned the task and power to the South Vietnamese. Despite the signing of the Paris Peace Accord, the fighting continued. Similarly, in the US, there was a significant movement in action as part of the counterculture and the evolution of anti-Vietnam-war sentiment. [13]. The war thus changed the situation and created new gaps and relations between the South and the North (Rydstrom, 2015). Anger came from the South Vietnamese over injustices and unequal treatment by the occupying and influential forces. There were a number of reasons that strained the relationship between the southern and northern regions. The anger lasted for many decades, and people retained the injustices in their minds. The Soviet Union was the winner, and France, along with its allies, was defeated by the Vietnamese.
Conclusions
In conclusion, the occupation of Vietnam by France contributed to the Cold War between Russia and America. The unusual and failed occupation of Vietnam by France invited the two superpowers of the time to confront each other. In the same way, China and other powerful states had interests in Vietnam. The multipower conflict among various countries on the land of Vietnam destroyed numerous precious Vietnamese lives.
End Notes
Appy, Christian G. American Reckoning: The Vietnam War and Our National Identity. Penguin Books, 2016.
Asselin, Pieere. “The 1954 Geneva agreement on Vietnam and the 1973 Paris agreement: diplomacy and the triumph of the Vietnamese revolution.” VNU Journal of Science: Social Sciences and Humanities 22, no. 5E (2016).
Boyle, Brenda M., ed. The Vietnam War: Topics in Contemporary North American Literature. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2015.
Fear, Sean. “Saigon Goes Global: South Vietnam’s Quest for International Legitimacy in the Age of Détente.” Diplomatic History (2017).
Hartman, Andrew. A war for the soul of America: A history of the culture wars. University of Chicago Press, 2015.
Jones, Matthew. “The End of the First Indochina War: A Global History by James Waite.” Journal of Cold War Studies16, no. 1 (2014): 231-233.
Nguyen, Duong T. The United States, and Vietnam Relationship: Benefits and Challenges for Vietnam. US Army Command and General Staff College Fort Leavenworth United States, 2016.
Nye Jr, Joseph S. “The decline of America’s soft power.” In Paradoxes of Power, pp. 39-44. Routledge, 2015.
Page, Caroline. US official propaganda during the Vietnam War, 1965-1973: the limits of persuasion. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2016.
Paterson, Thomas, J. Garry Clifford, Robert Brigham, Michael Donoghue, and Kenneth Hagan. American Foreign Relations: Volume 2: Since 1895. Vol. 2. Cengage Learning, 2014.
Reynolds, Phil W. “Long Wars: Demonstrating the Corrosive Effects of Irregular Wars on the Dominant States.” Social Sciences 7, no. 1 (2018): 43-54.
Robertson, Mitchell AJ. “Richard Nixon and the Conservative Revolt against the Legal Services Program.” Australasian Journal of American Studies 36, no. 1 (2017).
Rydstrom, Helle. “Politics of colonial violence: Gendered atrocities in French-occupied Vietnam.” European Journal of Women’s Studies 22, no. 2 (2015): 191-207.
- Appy, Christian G. American Reckoning: The Vietnam War and Our National Identity. Penguin Books, 2016. ↑
- Asselin, Pierre. “The 1954 Geneva agreement on Vietnam and the 1973 Paris agreement: diplomacy and the triumph of the Vietnamese revolution.” VNU Journal of Science: Social Sciences and Humanities 22, no. 5E (2016). ↑
- Boyle, Brenda M., ed. The Vietnam War: Topics in Contemporary North American Literature. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2015. ↑
- Fear, Sean. “Saigon Goes Global: South Vietnam’s Quest for International Legitimacy in the Age of Détente.” Diplomatic History (2017). ↑
- Hartman, Andrew. A war for the soul of America: A history of the culture wars. University of Chicago Press, 2015. ↑
- Jones, Matthew. “The End of the First Indochina War: A Global History by James Waite.” Journal of Cold War Studies16, no. 1 (2014): 231-233. ↑
- Nguyen, Duong T. The United States and Vietnam Relationship: Benefits and Challenges for Vietnam. US Army Command and General Staff College Fort Leavenworth United States, 2016. ↑
- Robertson, Mitchell AJ. “Richard Nixon and the Conservative Revolt against the Legal Services Program.” Australasian Journal of American Studies 36, no. 1 (2017). ↑
- Page, Caroline. US official propaganda during the Vietnam War, 1965-1973: the limits of persuasion. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2016. ↑
- Paterson, Thomas, J. Garry Clifford, Robert Brigham, Michael Donoghue, and Kenneth Hagan. American Foreign Relations: Volume 2: Since 1895. Vol. 2. Cengage Learning, 2014. ↑
- Reynolds, Phil W. “Long Wars: Demonstrating the Corrosive Effects of Irregular Wars on the Dominant States.” Social Sciences 7, no. 1 (2018): 43-54. ↑
- Robertson, Mitchell AJ. “Richard Nixon and the Conservative Revolt against the Legal Services Program.” Australasian Journal of American Studies 36, no. 1 (2017). ↑
- Rydstrom, Helle. “Politics of colonial violence: Gendered atrocities in French-occupied Vietnam.” European Journal of Women’s Studies 22, no. 2 (2015): 191-207. ↑
Academic Master Education Team is a group of academic editors and subject specialists responsible for producing structured, research-backed essays across multiple disciplines. Each article is developed following Academic Master’s Editorial Policy and supported by credible academic references. The team ensures clarity, citation accuracy, and adherence to ethical academic writing standards
Content reviewed under Academic Master Editorial Policy.
