Forced Out Of Vietnam

By Ben Wood Johnson

The Vietnam War was an unfortunate moment in human history. It was, for a fact, a horrific event in Indochina. It was also a tragic event in the history of modern warfare. This war was an unnecessary military venture, which led to an innumerable lost of lives.

Vietnam was also a complex military undertaken. Over the years, many inquirers have explored the conflict from various angles. In this text, I have approached Vietnam differently. I proffer a policy exploration of the end of the Vietnam War.

The text explores the policy rationale that led to the decision to evacuate American embassy personnel from Saigon. At the time, this city was among the last American strongholds in Indochina. In order to depict a larger tableau of what transpired in Vietnam, I consulted several outside sources as well. I explored both academic and governmental databases. I strolled through the web. I accessed governmental archives; I reviewed popular online libraries. I examined the views echoed in a number of blogs and websites.

This work is not an exhaustive piece of literature. But that should not undermine its empirical value. The manuscript is the result of a research endeavor. It is well crafted to present a coherent argument about the Vietnam War.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Tesko Publishing
• Release date: Apr 26, 2017
• ISBN: 9780997902877

Ben Wood Johnson

Ben Wood Johnson is an author, educator, and philosopher. He graduated from Penn State and Villanova University. He is a multidisciplinary scholar. Johnson writes about philosophy, law/legal theory, public and foreign policy, education, politics, ethics, race, and crime. His intellectual roots reflect several literary traditions, including, but not limited to, Modern Existentialism, Survivalism, Pragmatism, and Marxism. Johnson is fluent in many languages, including, but not limited to, French (native tongue), English, Spanish, Portuguese, and Italian. He enjoys reading, poetry, painting, and music.

Book preview

Forced Out Of Vietnam

Forced Out Of Vietnam

A Policy Analysis of the Fall of Saigon

Ben Wood Johnson

Eduka Solutions/Tesko Publishing

Copyright © 2021 Tesko Publishing

Copyright © 2017 by Ben Wood Johnson

---

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, or by any information storage and retrieval system without the prior written permission of the publisher, except in the case of very brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other noncommercial uses permitted by copyright law.

---

Johnson, Ben Wood

Forced Out of Vietnam: A Policy analysis of the Fall of Saigon / Ben Wood Johnson.—Eduka Solutions/Tesko Publishing ed.

---

Cover Design by Wood Oliver

---

Includes bibliographical references (p.)

1. National security—United States of America. 2. United States—Military policy. 3. United States—Foreign policy. 4. United States—War policy.

---

ISBN-10: 0-9979028-7-6

ISBN-13: 978-0-9979028-7-7

Format: eBook

---

Tesko Publishing website address: www.teskopublishing.com

Contents

Preface

Acknowledgments

Introduction

I. The Vietnam Culprit

1. A Treacherous War

2. Mixed Views About Congress

II. A War of Pride

3. A Military Graveyard

4. The First Vietnam War

5. The Second Vietnam War

III. A Tough War

6. A Complex Military Conflict

7. Long-Term Effects of the War

8. Vietnam As a Litmus Test

IV. The Politics of War

9. Political Support for Vietnam

10. Popular Writings About Vietnam

11. Leaving Vietnam

12. Examining War-Exit Strategies

V. The Withdrawal Decision

13. A Scientific Approach

14. A Change of Direction

15. Applying the Models

16. Politics and Policy Making

Final Words

Bibliography

A Class Assignment

About the Book Project

About the Author

Selected Works by Ben Wood Johnson

Other Info

Notes

To Boss Ferrell

Preface

What makes me qualify to write about the Vietnam War? I am not a Vietnam War veteran. I do not have a military background. I do not even have any relative or close friend who experienced the conflict directly or vicariously. I am not sure how to answer the previous question with a convincing tone. However, certain facets of the war are in line with my academic interests.

Although I do not have a real-world experience ¹ in policymaking, I do have the necessary background and the academic expertise in foreign politics to navigate the issues I discuss in this document. Writing a book about Vietnam gives me the opportunity to share my views about the conflict. It is a rare occasion to explore an important event in human history.

I chose to write about Vietnam because the effects of the war are still resounding in world affairs. Since the 1970s, every foreign military action envisaged or taken by the United States revert to the Vietnam debacle. There is a genuine concern (in the United States) to avoid a repeat of the mistakes of the past; in this case, the errors American officials made in Indochina.

Any military actions (on a global scale) incited by the United States, whether directly or else, often create scrutiny. The common understanding is that it is always best to tread with caution when it comes to international conflicts. The idea is to prevent another Vietnam at all costs. Truth be told, this was not always the case.

Vietnam changed everything. The war left many people bitter and resentful towards the United States. The war itself still evokes passionate responses both in America and in Vietnam. The effects of the war are still obvious in the lives of the Vietnamese people.

The same is true for American politics. The ramifications of war efforts continue to resound in American foreign affairs. For many commentators, the issue of Vietnam is a curse in American politics. This book is likely to evoke similar passions.

I do not poise myself as an authority about Vietnam. I could not pretend to be an expert on the subject. I could not pretend to enlighten you about the war. As the conflict winded down, I came into this world. ² Most of the data I gathered about Vietnam came from books, magazines, and articles I read many years after the conflict ended.

What I am trying to say here is that I did not experience Vietnam personally. My sense of what occurred in Indochina came from video footage and other images, which I had the chance to review several decades after the fact. Thus, I could not characterize myself as a connoisseur about Vietnam in any way, shape, or form.

With that confession out of the way, there is a need to examine the war. There is a need to revisit the events that led to the war. It is pertinent to assess the final moments of the conflict. To do that, I do not need any specific skills or talent about the war itself.

The book contains sixteen chapters. They are relatively short. The manuscript includes five sections; they outline the gist of each chapter. The sections are as follows:

The Vietnam Culprit (Chapters 1 to 2)

A war of pride (Chapters 3 to 5)

A tough war (Chapters 6 to 8)

The politics of war (Chapters 9 to 12)

The withdrawal decision (Chapters 13 to 16).

The first few chapters provide an outline of the war, including cost and casualties. The middle part examines the political ramifications of the war. They assess the American side of the war.

Later chapters reassess the literature and summarize the chosen models. They examine the conditions that led to the withdrawal policy. The book ends with a conclusion [final words]. That section summarizes the main arguments echoed in the document. The final part restates the purpose of this work. It assesses the limits of the views presented throughout the manuscript.

Despite its defect, this work offers a glimpse into the underlying causes that led to the political rift, which, in turn, appeared conducive to the end of the war. It provides insights to help you make sense of the issues. You would be able to decipher the reason the United States withdrew from Indochina in the spring of 1975. Let us introduce the Vietnam War. Let us examine, though briefly, the worldview that incited this military venture.

Good Reading!

Ben Wood Johnson, Ph.D.

April 12, 2017

Updated May 11, 2021

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank several individuals for their contribution to my education in general. I would like to thank them for their relentless support to my emotional and intellectual well-being. They include family members, friends, former teachers, and mentors.

During my elementary and secondary schooling (from 1978 to 1994), I had the privilege of learning from their expertise in various fields. These people were part of my day. They were part of my evenings. They were part of my personal growth in every facet.

Each of these individuals (in his or her own way) inculcated a sense of inquisition in me. I am forever grateful for their support. I first learned about a place called Vietnam from these fine educators. I would like to thank them here.

These individuals laid down the foundation of my education. They are the pillars of my academic efforts. These people include, but are not limited to, my mother (Mama), Mr. Cassion, Mr. Gerald, Mr. Jean-Charles (École Primaire or Primary School), Mr. Germain, Mr. Casséus, Mr. Michel, Mademoiselle Timothée, Mr. Sanon, Mr. Jean-Louis, Mr. Baudelaire, Mr. Roudler, Mr. Chérie, Mr. Alain, Mr. Jean-Charles (École Secondaire or Secondary School), Mr. Edwidge, Mr. Auguste, Mr. Ludovic (Dodo), Mr. Pierre-Paul Charles, and Mr. Fièvre, among others…

Introduction

The Vietnam War was an unfortunate moment in human history. It was, for a fact, a horrific event in Indochina. It was also a tragic event in the history of modern warfare. This war was an unnecessary military venture. It led to an innumerable loss of lives.

No matter how critics may frame the debate, the most logical conclusion is that the conflict was a waste. It was a Dilapidation of countless resources, which could have put Vietnam, not to mention several other nations in the Asian Continent, in a better economic shape. The war was a mistake. It was the result of a policy blunder.

The Americans could not contain the mess they made in Indochina. Those who created the war, those who financed it, and even those who conducted this military disaster, including civilian and military leaders, could not explain their failure in Indochina. After many years of endless fighting and after a few diplomatic difficulties (including moments of triumphs), the Americans ran from the region. The question is why.

To this day, the debate is brewing about the degree to which America caused hardships in Indochina, mainly to the Vietnamese people. Discussions are growing about Vietnamese resistance as well. One reality is certain. There is no consensus about whom was the bad guy in Vietnam.

Although the war took place several decades ago, facets of this military escapade are public while others are not. Certainly, there are scores of data available about the war. The history of the conflict is not a mystery. Yet, few people agree about what took place in the jungles of Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam between the 1960s and the mid-1970s.

There is less certitude about what took place in Washington during the final months, weeks, days, and even hours of the conflict. Views diverge about the war. Here, I hope to fill that literary gap.

Because of the contentious nature of the debate, I do not expect that the views presented throughout this work will be unchallenged. It could be difficult to explain the conflict objectively. Before we go further, let me echo that from most people’s belief, What Happened in Vietnam must stay in Vietnam. I try my best to be as neutral as possible in my analysis here.

Vietnam was a complex military undertaken. Over the years, many scholars explored the conflict. Some have done so from various angles. In this instance, I propose to approach the topic differently. There is a need to examine the ramifications of this war from a policy angle.

This work examines the events that transpired in both Indochina and Washington. The goal is to get a sense of the war. It also examines how the battled took place. It revisits the actions taken by some of the actors who managed the conflict. Despite subjective interpretations about the war, I could not offer a firsthand account about those who managed war efforts, for facets of my approach may seem biased as well.

Since this project was born out of a class assignment, the issues were difficult to appraise. After months of research, I could not come up with a theoretical lens, which would allow me to assess the policy rationale for the war. The instructor recommended the use of three models, which Graham T. Allison made famous. ¹ I researched the models. I decided to use them in the class assignment.

Allison’s models became an important tool to understand the policy side of war efforts in Vietnam. These models became a valuable analytical tool, which helped me understand important realities about the war. As an empirical tool, these models allowed me to cater a better grasp of the realities that characterized the war.

Allison’s models made it possible for me to develop a sound understanding of the issues. It made it possible for me to come up with a compelling explanation to make sense of the Vietnam debacle. The models are the foundation of the present analysis. Keep in mind that these models are not perfect. A few limits are worth noting here.

First, I could not use the models [on their own] to explain every policy decision taken during the conflict. Second, Allison’s models provided little [or no insights] about the reality on the ground. Third, they helped shed little or no light on the political struggles, which had been festering at home.

The models could not explain the political issues, which the branches of government, including the Legislature, faced during the war. The only way I could cater a sound view of the war was to examine the history of the conflict. But the book is not a rendition of the history of the war itself.

Allison’s models could not help me decipher the nature of the political struggle that led to the abrupt end of the conflict. The Vietnam War was more complicated than pointing out that a mere political decision upended American involvement in Indochina. I had to dig deeper in the literature. Allison’s models had important benefits as well. They are the crux of the present inquiry.

The final portion of the book includes chapters 13 through 16. They center on the models. These chapters examine how Allison’s models explain the war in Vietnam. They offer an analysis of the withdrawal decision. The analysis is limited to the degree to which the models could help make sense of the war. The focus is on the decision to get out of Vietnam.

Allison originally developed the models in the 1970s. He did so to explain the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 (See Chapters 7, 12, and 15 to learn more about the models). My approach here is surgical. I focus on the policy ramifications of the war. Granted, examining the nature of the Vietnam debacle could be difficult. In the present context, I explore the political ramifications of the war. I assess the effects of the conflict both during and after military combats officially ended.

Further, it was necessary to examine the role of the individuals (that is, the policymakers), the entities, and the atmosphere that started the conflict from a broader perspective. It was also necessary to explore the possible reason (or reasons) American officials had to leave Vietnam in the manner that they did. Allison’s models were the only way I could explain the policy rationale for the war. I examine the actions or the omissions, which led to the end of the war.

I consulted outside