Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T04:15:17.870Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Origins of the Vietnam War 1945-1948

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2009

Mark N. Katz
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Although several years have passed since the end of America's involvement in Vietnam, this war remains a highly controversial subject about which great reservoirs of heated emotion are easily let loose. No consensus has been reached concerning the lessons American foreign policy should have learned from this experience, and perhaps more important, how such situations should be approached in the future. Indeed, the dialogue on Vietnam that has taken place among political leaders, scholars, and the public at large has scarcely touched upon this issue at all, but has instead focused upon the question of which segment of American society's actions were justified at the time and which were not. Most recently, the study by Peter Braestrup, entitled Big Story: How the American Press and Television Reported and Interpreted the Crisis of Tet 1968 in Vietnam and Washington, has drawn the conclusion that the American military actually won the Tet offensive, but the media unjustifiably portrayed it as a defeat. Others, such as Robert Gallucci in his book Neither Peace Nor Honor: The Politics of American Military Policy in Viet-Nam, have described how the Pentagon continually claimed that the war was being won in Vietnam when actually it was being lost. In short, the dialogue on Vietnam that has taken place since the war has been primarily a restatement by various people of the same views they held during the war.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Review of Politics , Volume 42 , Issue 2 , April 1980 , pp. 131 - 151
Copyright
Copyright © University of Notre Dame 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Devillers, Philippe, Histoire du Viet-Nam de 1940 à 1952 (Paris, 1952), p. 81.Google Scholar

2 Ibid., pp. 107–113.

3 Ibid., pp. 123–25.

4 Ibid., pp. 137–43.

5 Lacouture, Jean, Cinq hommes et la France (Paris, 1961), p. 37–39.Google Scholar

6 Devillers, , Histoire du Viet-Nam, pp. 144–50.Google Scholar

7 Ibid., p. 169.

8 Ibid., pp. 191–93.

9 Ibid., pp. 203–204.

10 Ibid., pp. 213–18.

11 Ibid., pp. 219–25.

12 Ibid., pp. 254–255.

13 Ibid., pp. 287–88.

14 Ibid., pp. 98–100.

15 Firth, Raymond, “The Peasantry of South East Asia,” International Affairs (London) 26 (10 1950), 503–514.Google Scholar

16 Devillers, , Histoire du Viet-Nam, pp. 202–204.Google Scholar

17 Sainteny, Jean, Histoire d'une paix manquée: Indochine 1945–1947 (Paris, 1953), p. 57.Google Scholar

18 Ibid., pp. 182–83.

19 Devillers, , Histoire du Viet-Nam, pp. 225–26, 250.Google Scholar

20 Ibid., pp. 256–66.

21 Sainteny, , Indochine 1945–1947, pp. 203–205.Google Scholar

22 Devillers, , Histoire du Viet-Nam, pp. 269–70.Google Scholar

23 Ibid., p. 301.

24 Ibid., p. 302.

25 Ibid., pp. 304–305.

26 Sainteny, , Indochine 1945–1947, pp. 208–209; 248–52.Google Scholar

27 Brimmell, J. H., Communism in South East Asia: A Political Analysis (London, 1959), p. 184.Google Scholar

28 Frankel, J., “Soviet Policy in South East Asia,” in Beloff, Max, Soviet Policy in the Far East 1944–1951 (London, 1953), pp. 224–25.Google Scholar

29 Auriol, Vincent, Journal du Septennat 1947–1954; Tome 1–1947 (Paris, 1970), pp. 212–217.Google Scholar

30 Pauker, Guy J., The Soviet Union and Southeast Asia: RAND P — 5080 (Santa Monica, 1973), p. 18.Google Scholar

31 Aron, Raymond, L'âge des empires et l'avenir de la France (Paris, 1946), pp. 349–50.Google Scholar

32 Quoted in Moneta, Jacob, La politique du Parti communisie français dans la question coloniale 1920–1963 (Paris, 1971), p. 158.Google Scholar

33 Ibid.

34 Ibid., passim.

35 Devillers, , Histoire du Viet-Nam, p. 289.Google Scholar

36 Ibid., p. 329.

37 Ibid., pp. 335–37.

38 Ibid., pp. 349–57.

39 Marchand, Général Jean, Le drame indochinois (Paris, 1953), p. 10.Google Scholar

40 Devillers, , Histoire du Viet-Nam, p. 387.Google Scholar

41 Ibid., pp. 389–90.

42 Auriol, , Tome I — 1947, pp. 399–401.Google Scholar

43 Ibid., p. 498.

44 “La France reconnaît solennellement l'indépendance du Viêt-Nam, auquel il appartient de réaliser librement son unité. De son côté le Viêt-Nam proelame son adhésion a l'Union Française en qualité d'Etat associé à la France” (Devillers, , Hutoire du Viet-Nam, p. 431).Google Scholar

45 Auriol, Vincent, Journal du Septennat 1947–1954: Tome II — 1948 (Paris, 1974), p. 655.Google Scholar

46 Ibid., pp. 476, 485–87, and 497–89.

47 Ibid., p. 256.

48 Drachman, Edward R., United States Policy Toward Vietnam, 1940–1945 (Rutherford, New Jersey, 1970), pp. 147–58.Google Scholar

49 Auriol, , Tome II — 1948, p. 466Google Scholar

50 Ibid., p. 470.

51 Devillers, , Histoire du Viet-Nam, p. 472.Google Scholar

52 Quoted in Blum, Robert M., The United States and Vietnam: 1944–1947Google Scholar, a staff study for the U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, 92nd Cong., 2nd Sess. (Washington, D.C., 1972), p. 21.

53 Ibid.

54 Nguyen, Hoang, U. S. Aggressive Activities Against Viet-Nam (Peking, 1950), p. 13.Google Scholar

55 Ibid.