By Joshua Kurlantzick
Sunday, October 25, 2009
In a ceremony last week honoring a unit of Vietnam veterans for their heroism in a long-forgotten battle, President Obama offered a glimpse of how heavily the lessons of Vietnam weigh on him as he considers the way forward in Afghanistan.
"If that day in the jungle, if that war long ago, teaches us anything," Obama said in the White House Rose Garden, "then surely it is this: If we send our men and women in uniform into harm's way, then it must be only when it is absolutely necessary. And when we do, we must back them up with the strategy and the resources and the support they need to get the job done."
**(MY THOUGHTS ON THIS: I totally agree. I may not know a great deal about the Vietnam War, but I intend to do the research and 'do my homework, so to speak, about this, and if the president REALLY believeshis words, then WHY is he 'dragging his feet' and procrastinating on sending in more troops--troops that we NEED over there in Afghanistan--so that we can end this thing with a victory?)**
Vietnam is the nuclear option of historical analogies. Yet, rather than fear that Afghanistan will become another Vietnam, we should embrace the prospect. If the U.S. relationship with Afghanistan eventually resembles the one we now have with Vietnam, we should be overjoyed. Little more than a generation after a bloody, frustrating war, Vietnam and the United States have become close partners in Southeast Asia, exchanging official visits, building an important trading and strategic relationship and fostering goodwill between governments, businesses and people on both sides.
The lessons of the Vietnam War are clear and sobering, but history does not end in 1975, when the last American diplomats fled Saigon. Once large-scale fighting ends in Afghanistan, Washington should strive for the kind of reconciliation it has achieved with Vietnam. America did not win the war there, but over time it has won the peace. As unlikely as it seems today, the same outcome is possible in Afghanistan.
**(MY THOUGHTS ON THIS: Ok, but here's the thing. In my opinion, the people of Vietnam were a lot more civil toward us [America] than I think that Afghanistan or Iraq will be. Let's face it, the Taliban is over there using Afghanistan as a training camp for their militant terrorist groups, and those people HATE America and all that we [Americans] stand for. My question is this: Even if this war turns out the way the Vietnam War did, can we REALLY trust that Afghanistan and Iraq will show us the same respect that Vietnam did so long ago? Do we REALLY want to take the RISK of trusting our enemies?)**
Thirty-plus years ago, few would have predicted that Vietnam and the United States would someday come together. The long war of attrition left government ties strained, to put it mildly, and forever scarred both populations. In the United States, the war damaged the reputation of the military, severely dented America's own image of its power and undermined U.S. standing in the world. And for the loved ones of the 58,000 American servicemen and women killed, the war was a tragedy from which they may never recover.
**(MY THOUGHTS ON THIS: Exactly. This is something else that I am afraid will happen. I mean, wasn't not too long ago that our Presidential Administration was already calling our military 'evil' and 'murderers'? Our military are the only ones, RIGHT NOW, who care enough to fight for our freedoms that we are granted under our Constitution and Bill of Rights, and I have much--MUCH--respect and love for them [military], and it would simply break my heart if our military was shunned and disregarded, once again for the sacrifices that they make for all of us--even for those who are ungrateful.)**
Much like the airstrikes in Afghanistan, U.S. tactics in Vietnam -- such as the spraying of Agent Orange and bombings that caused widespread civilian deaths -- alienated the civilian population there. And even after the war officially ended, Washington continued to punish Hanoi, refusing to recognize the Vietnamese-installed government in Cambodia that had ousted the genocidal Khmer Rouge and slapping a trade embargo on Vietnam.
**(MY THOUGHTS ON THIS: Ok, and considering the type of Administration we have at the White House now, I believe that it is safe to say that the same thing will happen with them, only it won't be OUR government that will continue to punish them, it will be THEIR government--or the terrorists--who will continue to punish us by executing more and more terror attacks on U.S. soil. I mean, realistically, is this what we really want? Is this the risk we really want to take?)**
Today, however, 76 percent of Vietnamese say U.S. influence in Asia is positive, according to a 2008 study by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs -- a greater percentage than in Japan, China, South Korea or Indonesia. When President Bill Clinton visited Vietnam in 2000, citizens greeted him like a rock star, mobbing him whenever he stepped out in public. Two-way trade now surpasses $15 billion annually, compared with virtually nothing in 1995, the year the two countries normalized diplomatic ties. American companies have descended upon Vietnam, and last year foreign direct investment in the country tripled compared with 2007.
U.S. Navy ships now call at Vietnamese ports, and the two governments have institutionalized high-level exchanges, including a 2003 Pentagon visit by Vietnam's defense minister -- the highest-level Vietnamese military trip to Washington since the war. Following up on Clinton's visit, President George W. Bush traveled to Vietnam in 2006; the previous year, Bush welcomed Vietnamese Prime Minister Phan Van Khai on a visit to America.
Why the dramatic reversal? Time helped, certainly: Just as Americans will forget Mohammad Omar, eventually the images of tortured American POWs and massive bombing of the Vietnamese countryside began to fade on both sides. But more important, American war veterans publicly made peace with their old adversaries. In the Senate, vets John Kerry and John McCain pushed for the normalization of ties between the nations in the 1990s. And on the ground in Vietnam, groups of veterans met with civilians from the areas where they had served. These meetings had a profound impact on Vietnamese public opinion.
**(MY THOUGHTS ON THIS: While both sides after the Vietnam War were able to 'forgive and forget' what had happened, my thought about this when it concerns this current war(s) is that we [America] may be able to 'forgive and forget', but do we really believe that the Taliban and Al-Qaeda will do the same? My guess is no, they won't. In theory I believe that what will actually happen is that they [terrorists organizations] will make us think that they have 'forgave and forgot' but the minute we [America] allows our guard to be let down, all hell will break loose and the next terror attack will be at least 10 times worse than the attacks executed on September 11, 2001)**
Hanoi reciprocated American goodwill and allowed a U.S. investigative commission to scour the country for any remaining prisoners of war, a major concern of the U.S. veterans community. The commission reported in 1993 that it had found little evidence that any POWs remained. The report, more than any other gesture, helped bring the American public on board for reengaging with Hanoi.
The George W. Bush and Obama administrations have continued to grapple with some of the old differences. The Bush administration, prodded by Congress, began funding efforts to study the extent of chemical contamination and clean up pollution in areas near a former U.S. facility in Da Nang. And this month, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton hosted Vietnam's foreign minister and vowed to expand trade links between the two countries.
At the same time, the large Vietnamese American community, many of whom fled to the United States after the communist takeover of their homeland in 1975, gradually abandoned their fears and began pouring investment into Vietnam in the late 1990s and early 2000s. This trade has helped heal old wounds, crowding out memories of war with new commercial influence, as American products compete for space in the shops and open-air markets of Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City.
Undoubtedly, Afghanistan would offer different postwar challenges than Vietnam. Of course, the campaign there is far from over -- it may even be escalated, if Obama agrees to Gen. Stanley McChrystal's request for additional troops -- and how and when it ends will shape Washington's future relationship with Kabul. The eventual results of Afghanistan's presidential election notwithstanding, the lack of a strong central government could make it difficult to build postwar ties, since there may be no leaders or institutions powerful or legitimate enough to sway the public.
Still, the parallels should not be ignored. After the war in Indochina, the United States wanted to build a close relationship with Vietnam, an important player in a critical region; Afghanistan has even higher strategic value. And much like Vietnam after the war, Afghanistan would have its own reasons for seeking strong ties to the United States. While Hanoi feared being dominated by its giant neighbor China, Afghanistan could use an outside power's help to hedge against the influence of regional powers such as Iran, Pakistan, India and China.
In Vietnam, just as the battle for public opinion was critical to the fight against an enemy enmeshed in the civilian population, it was also important to postwar reconciliation. Similarly, after the Afghan war, one can imagine U.S. investigations into the lasting impact of the conflict on the population, perhaps a well-publicized government study on the effects of airstrikes and an acknowledgement of the damage done on the ground.
Congress, meanwhile, could steal a page from the Vietnam Education Foundation Act of 2000, which established a foundation to support exchanges between the old adversaries, such as bringing Vietnamese graduate students to the United States and paying for American academics to teach in Vietnam. Such a program could ensure that the next generation of Afghan leaders sees an image of the United States beyond that of the war.
**(MY THOUGHTS ON THIS: Ah, but considering the fact that we may have a Marxist president in our midst, would this actually be a good idea? I mean, correct me if I am wrong, but if this were to happen, then our president's views of our own country and Constitution would do more harm than good in Afghanistan. He has made it quite clear that he is ashamed of America and shows his shame in the fact that he is always going on 'apology tours' and making our country look weak and vulnerable. So, I really do not understand how this Administration would be able to do any good for the Afghan people, especially if they end up hating us because of our president.)**
American servicemen and women often return to the United States seeking to improve lives and conditions in the countries where they served, and new vets could be critical to rebuilding ties with Afghanistan after the war. With support from the U.S. Agency for International Development or other aid agencies, veterans going back to Afghanistan to do nonprofit work could not only improve Afghans' standard of living but also promote the kind of healing that veterans groups fostered in Vietnam.
**(MY THOUGHTS ON THIS: Ok, I might be able to see this happening, and it being a good thing--HOWEVER--and this is my own 'personal opinion', could this type of mission even be a success? And if so, would we not have to disban the Taliban and Al-Qaeda first before it is a success? I mean, these terror organizations are going to continue to plan attacks, unless we put a complete end to them. So, how do we make this mission successful?)**
The stated goal of the Vietnam War was the defeat of communism. But three decades later, the United States has gotten much of what it really fought for: a stable friend who could prove an ally against China. After all, it was China, the expansionist giant, that terrified American policymakers and sparked U.S. interest in Indochina in the first place.
Of course, a close relationship with Vietnam will never erase the pain of the war, and the ability to forge closer links today does not mean that the United States was wise to escalate the conflict there decades ago. Still, once Washington decided to fight on in Vietnam, a postwar reconciliation made sense for both sides -- politically, strategically and economically. In Afghanistan, where the United States has been fighting for eight years, it makes sense to consider how to build a postwar relationship.
**(MY THOUGHTS ON THIS: I kind of agree with this, but, again, how do we make this mission a successful one as long as the terror cells are still intact? I believe that we should first dismantle these terrorists, and then we can talk about some sort of postwar reconcilliation.)**
As in Vietnam, the stated aim of the Afghan war -- denying al-Qaeda a haven, thereby protecting the United States -- to some extent masks the larger goal: building a stable, pro-Washington nation that, in the long run, can provide enough political and economic success to dry up militant groups' recruiting pool. Reaching that goal will require as much savvy postwar planning as it does smart war-fighting.
*******************************************************************
**(Ok, first of all, I have been trying to get this article re-posted from the 'Washington Post' since 12:00am. It is now 11:25am (Memphis, TN time) and I am just now getting it posted here. Every time I tried to go back to the article, my computer would 'freeze up' or just completely 'shut down'. Which is very strange and unusual because this is a brand new computer. But it took me 16 tries to get this article from the Washington Post's Opinion Page.)**
