The loss of the Viet Nam war certainly continues to shape American (and world thinking). I wonder if we had won the war in Viet Nam, e.g., fought the Viet Cong insurgency to a standstill, and successfully interdicted North Vietnamese troops from attacking the South Vietnamese region, what would have happened?
Specifically, would an American presence in a stable South Viet Nam have been a force that would have prevented the Cambodian genocide? Would the Khmer Rouge even have come to power if the Americans had not been defeated?
What might have been other consequences had we won? I have not been able to find any serious study of this issue.
I should note that I consider winning, in the way that I have defined, a possibility, though not a likelihood. I don’t care to debate whether we could have won or not, but rather what would have happened if we did.
For those who believe that we could not have won, and therefore the question I pose pointless, I should point out that the communist forces were debilitated, at least short term, after their debacle of the Tet offensive and Khe San, and the Phoenix program was destroying the Viet Cong leadership. Most scholars of the war (that is, not including those with strong opinions not matched by mastery of the facts), find it ironic that American victories in 1968 were interpreted by the press to be reversals, and precipitated the decision to draw down and exit.
Had the Americans continued with strategic wisdom and tactical success, had the enemy not, and had the S.V. regime and army operated with greater efficiency (none of this likely), a win was possible, hence my question.
No. I can’t remember the timeline exactly but I think the Khmer Rogue took over a few days after the last troops left Indochina. Communists took over in Laos, Vietnam & Cambodia within a year of the US leaving the area.
I suppose it would depend on HOW we ended up winning…and what the final cost was. That said, I doubt we would allow a communist government to have its way in Cambodian after fighting a brutal war in Vietnam…and after all, we’d pretty much be right there (we are still in South Korea after all), so we would know what was going on and be in a position to stop it.
Certainly if the U.S. came to a decisive victory in Vietnam they could use resources to shore up Cambodia and thus prevent the Khmer Rouge from coming to power.
However, one could also make the argument that if the U.S. had withdrawn sooner, Vietnam would be more powerful by the time Cambodia was about to fall, and thus either bring another group other than the Khmer Rouge to power, or influence the Khmer Rouge through either material support or political persuasion.
Although I guess the killings could have still taken place, albeit in a modified form that skipped over ethnic Vietnamese, in much the same way that ethnic Chinese were also skipped over.
The point of my above snark, which I should have explained: It’s just that the scenario in which the Viet Cong give up resistance to American occupation takes place in a universe different from the one we live in. I can’t see Charlie ever giving up, not as long as villages continue to exist and produce food. The only way the Cong could have been stopped would be to exterminate a majority of Vietnam’s villages, scorched earth over 60% of the territory.
I think that perhaps a more relevant question is whether the genocide would have occurred had the U.S. not entered the Vietnam War…or had not gone on to start bombing Cambodia.
Noone can be sure…but my guess is probably not. Our fighting there most likely helped the most radical, extreme elements gain control. That is one of the problems of fighting wars…You often help your worst enemies.
Yeah, I’ve seen A Fish Called Wanda, too. You mean, we quit after conducting an idiotic war of attrition and getting our asses handed to us. Sorta like now.
True, the North Vietnamese didn’t invade the US, overthrow our leaders, and establish a Communist dictatorship, so in that sense, I guess we didn’t lose…
Which doesn’t clear up much, for “what if” purposes. The Khmer Rouge came to power in the context of a regional political situation that was heavily shaped by American military intervention in Vietnam (and bombing of Cambodia). But the movement had been a going concern since the 1950s, antedating U.S. involvement, and might have prevailed even if the U.S. had kept its nose out. If the U.S. had “won” in Vietnam – what would that mean, anyway? Invading North Vietnam and unseating its regime? Or just preserving South Vietnam as a stable non-Communist state like South Korea? If the latter, then the U.S. and/or South Vietnam might have had enough strength left over to preserve Lon Nol’s regime – or maybe not.
Communist Vietnam. You are aware that Communist Vietnam and Cambodia went to war? Which could have been different or maybe perhaps avoided if Vietnam had had more time to consolidate their win? Or not.
In the context of Vietnam I’d say ‘lose’ is in the eye of the beholder. Certainly we were not driven from Vietnam due to military reasons…we didn’t ‘lose’ from a military perspective. We were’t decisively (or otherwise) defeated on the battle field…in fact, quite the opposite. From a military perspective and by any definition we were easily winnning…militarily. We lost due to political will. In that context I’d say the statement ‘…we didn’t lose, exactly, we quit…’ is apt. YMMV of course and probably does.
Thats the question, isn’t it. What entails the US winning in Vietnam?
::sigh:: We lost. It doesn’t matter why the NVA was able to march into Saigon; what matters is that it did march into Saigon.
“War is a continuation of politics by other means”. If it was political considerations that led the US to leave Vietnam, rather than military ones, it doesn’t matter to the end result.
The US tried to send funds, food and ammunition to fight the Khmer Rogue in 1975 but congress vetoed it.
A US-funded airlift of ammunition and rice ended when Congress refused additional aid for Cambodia.
Ford also tried to get funding for the Cambodian resistance in 1975 but was shot down by congress.
Then again the bombings and perpetual war that the US helped create created an environment where radicals like the Khmer Rogue became a viable opportunity. However in that case tons of countries are at fault including France, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, China & the USSR as well as the US.