Knowt
Note
Studied by 4 peopleNoteStudied by 10 peopleNoteStudied by 8 peopleNoteStudied by 20 peopleNoteStudied by 24 peopleNoteStudied by 17 people
The Cold War - History Higher
How did the Cold War affect Truman and the USA?
The Grand Alliance
alliance between the USA, GB and USSR to decide what to do after WW2
USA kept USSR in the dark about the development of the atomic bomb
Stalin resented this American secrecy
The Power of the USA in 1945
the death of President Roosevelt in April 1945 left his relatively inexperienced vice - President, Harry Truman, in charge of a nation with unparalleled economic and military might
The USA was by far the most powerful country in the world; the war had drained the power and resources of all potential rivals
The USSR in 1945
did not have the atomic bomb
Truman’s Speech to Congress
→ made USSR understand how America feels towards USSR’s expansionist actions
→ communism is conveyed negatively ‘alternative ways of life’ - communism vs democracy
‘The Sources of Soviet Conduct’ - 1947 article in Foreign Affairs
“US must continue to regard the Soviet Union as a rival, not a partner, in the political arena.”
The Truman Doctrine
Increased Involvement in Europe
1947 speech made by Truman to Congress to outline foreign policy, saying that the US will help those being subjugated against their will - INTERVENTIONIST
the Truman Doctrine sparked increased involvement in Europe with the Marshall Plan
The Marshall Plan
Under the Marshall Plan, $13 billion was given to West European nations in order to revitalise them as allies and trading partners e.g. Greece and Turkey.
The political and economic association was militarily cemented in Europe from 1949, with the establishment of NATO.
Criticisms of the Truman Doctrine
Truman and containment (of democracy) led the USA into unimportant, undesirable and unaffordable commitments all over the globe.
an ‘ideological crusade’ that ‘has no limits’
Truman’s Involvement in Latin America
Changing Involvement in Latin America
The Rio Conference - 1947
members signed The Rio Treaty, agreeing that an attack one American Nation would constitute an attack on ALL
resistance would then occur if two thirds of the members agreed on action
established collective security
combated communism as Brazil, Chile and Cuba banned communist organisations and cut off diplomatic relations with USSR in 1948
Criticisms to The Rio Conference
Some Latin countries were deeply disappointed by the Rio Treaty - feeling it did not go far enough in establishing loyalty within Latin America.
Some felt like they had gone along with US containment and achieved next to nothing in return - no discussion of economic aid.
The Organisation of American States - 1948
several Pan-American conferences were held in 19th + 20th centuries
OAS laid down the administrative machinery for hemisphere consultation
OAS represented hemispheric unity in the struggle against communism
Truman and aid to Latin America
Latin American countries pressed for more aid from US
US said to rely on private US investment sectors instead
US did not see Latin America as a threat to Soviet Expansionism
1949, Truman aimed to promote self-help institute
Truman downgraded Latin American countries, only $79mill given not $18 bill
Anti-Americanism increased in Latin America
ECLA (Economic Commission for Latin America)
Set up in 1948 by UN
ECLA criticised US financial and economic policies, arguing that Latin American poverty owed much to its perceived role as a supplier of raw materials to the industrial nations that made more profitable manufactured goods.
Peaceful Co - existence in 1950s
The Thaw
What was Eisenhower’s ‘New Look’ policy?
preventing the extension of Soviet Communism outside of the areas already established.
→ use of military power to protect vulnerable areas e.g. West Berlin
→ use the CIA for covert operations more extensively than ever before
→ assisting forces fighting communism for example Diem’s gov in South Vietnam.
How was the new CIA organisation important?
undertook extensive covert anti-communist activities
e.g. infiltrating spies, saboteurs and resistance leaders into the USSR
involved in overthrow of governments considered to be too left-wing e.g. overthrow of Mohammed Mossadegh in Iran.
How did Khrushchev change the nature of USSR government?
→ US-Soviet summits took place during the 1950s
→ A ‘New Course’ with the west and peaceful co-existence
→ economic factors pushed the two superpowers into a friendlier relationship
→ Khrushchev rejected the idea the war was inevitable, instead pushing the idea that capitalism would die out due its own inherent weaknesses.
East German Uprising 1953
July 1952
Looming economic crisis in East Germany, production targets were increased by 10% in order to stop the crash however this just angered the citizens.
Spring 1953
Non - communist politicians were arrested and fears grew of a rebellion against the Com. government.
USSR leaders were concerned at the possibility of an uprising - not wanting to send in troops due to peaceful coexistence.
leader of East Germany summoned to Moscow and instructed to ‘tone down’ his socialisation programme - production targets remained high.
June 1953
Strikes erupted in East Germany - workers demanded higher wages and political freedoms. East Germany gov. appealed to USSR to intervene and Soviet Tanks appeared on the 17th June - uprising suppressed.
Eisenhower did not intervene with USSR but called a meeting to discuss Hungary, Austria and Germany govs.
Austria Treaty and Geneva Conference 1955
April 1955 -
USSR proposed a formal peace treaty with Austria - this would end 4 power occupation and created an independent Austria.
July 1955 Geneva Conference 1955 -
This was the first summit of the leaders of the major powers since 1945. Little of substance was achieved. USSR wanted NATO and Warsaw Pact to disbanded, USA said this was unacceptable.
Challenges to Peaceful Co - existence later 1950s
Eisenhower Doctrine
US must make more evident its willingness to support the independence of the freedom-loving nations of the area (Middle East.)
US would co-operate and give military, economic and political aid to any nation which requires help against overt armed aggression from any nation controlled by International Communism.
The Technology Race
USSR launched the world’s first artificial satellite - SPUTNIK and SPUTNIK II
This sent US into a state of panic as they became convinced of Soviet Superiority in missile technology.
The Missile Gap
US Air Force U-2 spy planes flying over USSR revealed that USSR did not have more missiles than US .
Eisenhower had to do something to alleviate public anxiety so he supported the establishment of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and in 1958 to promote missile development and exploration
U2 Incident - May 1960
US spy Gary Powers caught flying over USSR
Eisenhower humiliated on world stage
The Red Scare
Background to the Red Scare under Truman
→ The US people disliked Communism because it was atheistic and seemed to threaten the ‘American Dream’ that everyone was free to get ahead and to get rich.
A New Red Scare
→ At the end of WW2, most Americans regarded Communism as an alien ideology that was godless, repressive, aggressive and socialistic.
→ An era of unprecedented anti-communism hysteria due to the Red Scare
HUAC
→ in 1945 Congressman John Rankin suggested HUAC be made permanent and given broader powers in order to deal with communism in America.
→ the ‘Hollywood 10’ a group of writers and directors that had links with communism were convicted of contempt of Congress and given one year jail sentences.
Truman’s Responsibility for the Red Scare
Truman tried but failed to veto the International Security Act, saying ‘In a free country we punish men for crimes they commit, but never for the opinions they have.’
Soon after declaring the Truman Doctrine he contributed to the Red Scare by ordering Executive Order Number 9835, which ordered a loyalty investigation into federal employees.
J. Edgar Hoover ordered his men to follow up all leads - Truman compared Hoover to the Gestapo.
Order all wrong by the way —> ‘
15/11/23
Why did the Korean War begin and how did it affect the Cold War?
Traditional Orthodox Viewpoint -
Communist aggression was the cause of the Korean War as well as the US’s aims of containment.
Revisionist Viewpoint -
Korean nationalism and the desire for reunification of the peninsula was the cause of the war. However the USA bore a great deal of responsibility as they relied on Korea being a trading partner with Japan to aid their economic revival.
A Historian’s Perspective (John Lewis Gaddis 2005) -
‘Truman stressed that the American Intervention was a response to a Communist ‘challenge to the entire structure of post-war collective security and quotes Truman repeatedly telling his advisors “we can’t let the UN down” ‘
Events leading up to the Korean War
UN Security Council passed a resolution that declared that the UN should oppose North Korean aggression. (USSR boycotted UN at this point so could not use their veto.)
Truman sent US air and naval forces to help South Korea - resist Communism. Congress called it a ‘police action under the UN.’
Truman sent the US ground troops to Korea and ordered the US 7th Fleet to the Taiwan Straits. MacArthur appointed as commander, can only communicate with Washington.
Events of the Korean War:
A) PUSAN PERIMETER July-August 1950
No US/UN tanks could enter due to terrain and inexperienced troops fled the battlefield. The problem was nicknamed ‘bugout fever’.
8000 American casualties over the course of the fighting on the Pusan perimeter.
North Koreans were a tough enemy and the fighting was brutal.
Walker tried to manage the decreasing US moral, ‘There will be no more retreating.’
North Koreans had lost 58,000 men in their charge down South and were 40 tanks down.
Americans controlled the skies and seas as there was less territory to defend and a higher troop to land ratio.
Arrival of 6 US tank battalions miraculously transformed the situation, along with MacArthur’s successful assault in Inchon.
B) INCHON September 1950
MacArthur’s plan to bypass enemy strongholds with an amphibious assault that would leave enemy forces cut off and surrounded was accepted by Truman.
The assault was a triumph.
Inchon had dramatic political and military implications in the months to come.
C) CHINESE ENTRY into the WAR October 1950
The intervention of China into the war was motivated by security reasons and to reastablish its prestige and status after being dominated and humiliated by other countries. Mao also sought to repay previous North Korean aid.
US and South Korean troops reached Yalu river, the Chinese moved 150,000 men into North Korea.
The US/UN/ROK Forces were soon in trouble, surprised by the winter and the arrival of the Chinese.
MacArthur, who believed the Chinese were retreating, decided a big offensive would end the Korean War.
D) THE NOVEMBER OFFENSIVE 1950
was disastrous as there were insufficient supplies and the plan was broadcast on armed Forces radios which the N.Koreans intercepted - lost the element of surprise.
Chinese were ready with 400,000 troops, outnumbering the UN’s 270,000 troops.
Retreating US/UN troops were surrounded and froze to death, along with many Chinese troops.
E) FROZEN CHOSIN 1950
this was the hardest battle, 250,000 US troops against 120,000 Chinese troops near the Chosin Reservoir.
6000 US troops were killed, wounded or captured, whilst 6000 also suffered from frostbite.
Survivors told the US press that the Chinese burned prisoners of war alive and bayoneted anyone who tried to surrender.
F) US/UN/ROK Retreat
the UN troops retreated so quickly in the ‘big bugout’ that the Chinese couldn’t keep.
General Smith tried to cover up the situation by saying the troops were not retreating but attacking in another direction.
01/12/23
What was the impact of the Korean War?
The Diplomatic and Political Outcomes of the Korean War:
intensified McCarthyite hysteria that had begun in February 1950.
McCarthy and his followers claimed that the war proved Communist conspiracy
the war cost the US $67 billion —> this massive expenditure caused inflation which led to ½ a million steelworkers to strike for better wages in April 1952.
Truman then seized the steel mills which was ruled an unconstitutional act by the Supreme Court.
Truman failed to obtain a congressional declaration of war which reinforced the naming of the Korean war as ‘Truman’s War’.
Failures of the Korean war influences Truman to not stand for re-election in 1952 and virtually ensured Eisenhower’s victory.
Historian Patterson (1996) rendered Truman as ‘virtually powerless’ either to control Congress or to effectively lead the country.
The Korean War and US Foreign Policy
CONTAINMENT AND CREDIBILITY
Truman demonstrated his commitment to containment and to some extent he was successful in that aim with the Korean War
The USA had proved willing and able to halt Communist expansion and had ‘saved’ South Korea.
The war had ensured Japan’s security and development into a reliable and invaluable ally.
The US failed to reunify the Korean peninsula
THE USA AND ASIA
the Korean War seemed to signal that Western Europe was more important to US security than Asia
it could be argued that the Korean War had shifted the storm centre of the Cold War from Europe to Asia, as events in Korea convince
Korean War had a big impact on Sino-American relations. 2 years of bloody fighting coupled with Truman’s re-injection of the USA into the Chinese Civil War, greatly damaged the relationship.
08/12/23
L.O. To what extent could Eisenhower’s relations with Latin America be considered ‘new’ and ‘effective.'‘
Eisenhower’s ‘New Look’ Policy
→ reconcile conflicting demands of the military
→ Eisenhower believed US power depended on economic success and continued military expenditure (at Truman’s rate) would lead to inflation.
→ therefore he wanted to change industry focus away from military weapons production but on nuclear weapons as this would save US money and protect America as effectively as conventional forces.
→ Eisenhower believed in brinkmanship (pushing events to the point of war and then pulling out.)
Eisenhower and Latin America
Eisenhower revealed he would pursue a more constructive policy in terms of foreign policy in Latin America.
The USA and Revolutions
After their own American Revolution against the British, Americans were generally sympathetic to similar revolutionaries elsewhere.
Subsequently however, the USA’s concern for stability in trading partners and fears of communism combined to make the USA deeply suspicious of most 20th century revs.
Dealing with Revolutionaries
Having just got American troops out of Korea, Eisenhower did not want to get involved in another war, so he used other means to deal with revolutionaries whom he disliked,
Eisenhower hoped the USSR would refrain from helping revolutionaries for fear of massive retaliation.
Eisenhower sent US military advisers to assist friendly regimes in training native troops to oppose revolutionaries, such as in Vietnam.
Dulles organised military alliances such SEATO to help friendly regimes deal with the Communist threat.
The CIA used covert operations against revolutionary regimes in Iran and Guatemala. Covert operations were planned against the Cuban Revolution in the final months of Eisenhower’s presidency.
Guatemala Case Study
Background:
Most Guatemalans were poor, illiterate Indians who farmed the lands of the whites and mestizos who constituted only 2% of the Guatemala’s population but owned 70% of its productive land.
The inequality was exacerbated by the US United Fruit Company, which since its inception in 1899 had such a strangle hold over the Guatemalan Govs. including minimal taxes, protection from competition and the domination of Guatemalan port facilities.
The Start of the Revolution:
1944; student riots and a disgruntled middle class prompted a nationalist-liberal revolution led by a philosophy professor Juan Jose Arevalo, who became Guatemala’s first democratic President.
His government aimed for greater democracy and the division of the large plantations that dominated Guatemalan agriculture.
Actions taken by President Arevalo:
He initiated a programme of political, labour and land reforms and allowed strikes.
He tried to buy the land owned by US United Fruits but the company then upped their costs.
United Fruits claimed that the Guatemalan politician Arbenz was a communist and Eisenhower isolated Guatemala diplomatically and then planned to overthrow him.
The Election of President Arbenz:
In 1951, Arbenz was elected as President of Guatemala.
He bought land owned by US United Fruits and redistributed it to the peasants.
He legalised the communist Guatemalan Party of Labour.
All these reforms angered the powerful US United Fruits Company, leading them to run an influential lobbying campaign to persuade the US gov to overthrow the Guatemalan government.
Guatemala and the OAS
at an OAS meeting in Caracas, Venezuela in March 1954, Dulles pushed through a declaration that Communism was ‘incompatible with the concept of American freedom.’
the signatories vowed ‘to eradicate and prevent any subversive activities.’
many in the 17 had voted in the hope of gaining US aid and trade, however the OAS did not give a go-ahead for US intervention in Guatemala.
indeed most of the delegates gave the Guatemalan representative a standing ovation for his passionately anti-American speech.
The Overthrow of Arbenz:
From summer 1953, the CIA worked to overthrow Arbenz. At a cost of between $5million and $7million, around 100 Guatemalans were given military training.
The CIA chose Colonel Carlos; an American trained soldier to lead the division. He was given an army, a radio station in the neighbouring Nicaragua and the promise of a US blockade to halt arms imports from the Soviet Bloc.
Arbenz believed that the USA and the Nicaraguan dictator Somoza were conspiring to overthrow him, so he sought military aid from the USSR. In May 1954, the Soviets let Czechoslovakia’s Skoda company export weapons to Arbenz. Allen Dulles said this demonstrated contempt for the Monroe Doctrine and the Soviet plans to establish a military base in the Western Hemisphere.
In June 1954, Armas and his force of around 200 men entered Guatemala and CIA bombed Guatemala City. Arbenz fled due to loss of support from labour unions and middle class army officers.
Castillo Armas established a dictatorship in which United Fruits got its land back.
Results and Significance
From the contemporary American viewpoint, the new government in Guatemala was far more acceptable than the previous one, and the covert operations were considered successful.
On the other hand, the US involvement alienated Guatemalans who opposed the new regime and also many other Latin Americans.
15/12/23
L.O. How significant were Nixon’s visits to Latin America?
Context
many Latin American economies were highly dependant on US producers and consumers, and a US economic recession in 1957-58 hit Latin American nations hard.
Just before Nixon’s visit, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, troubled by United press reports that Latin American diplomats were deeply dismayed by the US attitude to their continent, had requested testimony from the State Department.
SD said ‘relations were never better’ however a Council on Foreign relations reported otherwise.
Aims of Nixon’s 2nd Visit 1958
Demonstrate US support for new elected leader of Argentina (Arturo Frondizi).
Reassure Latin America that they were respected and valued by USA and to try and counteract Soviet ‘wooing.’
Containment; trade agreements with Argentina would continue.
Problems faced by Nixon:
Argentina
Economic recession hit Argentina hard and Nixon' was met with an uneasy welcome by Argentinean government officials. Additionally, lack of economic aid made tensions rise. Nixon was also late to President Frondizi’s inauguration. Failure for US.
Peru
Economic ties between US and Peru were close and 3 days before Nixon’s visit, the US Tariff Commission increased export duties and put import quotas on zinc and lead. This further depressed the exports of Peru.
Some Peruvian students greeted Nixon with ‘Go Home Nixon’ or ‘Death to Yankee Imperialism.’
2000 students prevented Nixon from entering.
11/01/23
L.O. to understand the USA’s involvement with Vietnam.
L.O. to understand the impact of events on the USA and to analyse why Nixon ended the war.
Background 1945-54
Vietnam was a French colony; Indo-China
Increased nationalism - Viet-Minh (native people) wanted independence and started challenging the French post WW2.
Truman supported the French with $2billion of aid and military equipment and advice.
US money was invested in order to increase American popularity; problem was they were doing this blindly as the Americans knew little about Vietnam.
Truman claimed to only be ‘supporting’ the French, but by paying 80% of French costs, it was clear that the Americans were extremely close to direct involvement.
President Eisenhower and Vietnam
→ Initially continued aid to French; 1954 gave them armaments worth $385 million and US bombers accompanied by 200 American technicians.
→ He told Congress that he disliked putting Americans in danger but that ‘ we must not lose Asia.’
→ Eisenhower refused to deploy a US Air Strike on the Viet Minh even though the French forces were struggling in the battle of Dien Bien Phu (1954).
→ Eisenhower failed to get British support which Congress required before they would approve American Military intervention.
The Geneva Accords 1954
At the Geneva conference 1954, France and Viet Minh signed the Geneva Accords which ended French rule of Indochina and split the country into communist North and democratic South.
US and South Vietnam rejected the Geneva Accords; Ike would not hold national elections in Vietnam in 1956 as he knew that the Communist leader Ho Chi Minh would win around 80% of the votes.
South Vietnam under Diem
Diem governed South Vietnam; Eisenhower gave aid and commitment of a military nature and S. Vietnam joined SEATO.
Eisenhower gave nearly 1000 military and civilian advisors, a great deal of aid and military equipment.
Diem who was an upper class catholic caused tensions with Buddhist peasants by repressing their religion.
Diem also faced much opposition from within his own party and army
President Kennedy and Vietnam
→ the nature of US involvement underwent a quantitative change; the US provided more money, weaponry, helicopters and nearly 20,000 advisors.
The Battle of Ap Bac 1963
The JCS recommended Kennedy to put in US troops as the ARVN forces had an uneasy relationship with the US advisers and the influence of US forces.
Kennedy refused to put American ground troops in Vietnam in 1963.
The End of Diem
Some members of the Kennedy Administration disliked the emphasis of the military defeat of the Communists and urged Diem to introduce reform.
Diem refused to reform. Murders occurred in protest against Diem banning celebrations of Buddha’s birthday. Buddhist monks set themselves on fire. This shocked Kennedy.
As Diem refused to reform and the military option was not working, the USA chose a more ruthless option.
When several ARVN generals planned a coup, the USA gave them vital encouragement.
Diem was overthrown and killed by his generals. 1963 November.
Conclusions
→ Kennedy increased the USA’s level of commitment to an unpopular regime that he had helped overthrow.
→ Some historians believe he passed a poisoned chalice to his successor.
President Johnson and The Vietnam War
→ Arguably responsible for USA entering the war with troops
→ 1965, Spring he sent 200,000 troops into Vietnam and he ordered air strikes on the Viet-Minh supply routes from March 1965 - Nov 1968
Some say Johnson is responsible for escalating the condition of the Vietnam War:
eager generals
domino theory
containment
The Gulf Tonkin Resolution:
Allowed Johnson to have full control of the the US military in Vietnam. Johnson continued Operation Rolling Thunder - bombing raids on North Vietnam.
April 1965 Johnson’s Speech:
US should continue to fight to secure a ‘free’ world.
North Vietnam was a ‘puppet’ state of USSR and China.
Abandoning the war would be a ‘dishonour’ to South Vietnam.
Conclusion:
Johnson escalated the war by deploying ground troops and continuing bombing raids → deaths of US soldiers.
Historical Perspectives; Why did the USA get involved in the Vietnam War?
Historian Perspective (Robert Shulzinger 1997) -
‘Had American leaders not thought that all international events were connected to the Cold War there would have been no American War in Vietnam.’
Orthodox Perspective:
George Herring 1997 - saw the USA containing Communist aggression and expansion in Vietnam and as having little choice but to intervene.
The Revisionist Interpretation:
Gabriel Kolko 1985 - emphasised aggression and acquisitive US economic policies. Kolko said the markets and raw materials in South East Asia motivated US interest in Vietnam. (domino effect e.g. if Vietnam became an independent communist state other countries would follow).
The Post Revisionist Interpretation:
David Anderson (2005) saw the USA as motivated for a variety of reasons e.g. ‘geopolitical strategy, economics, domestic US policies and cultural arrogance.’
Why did US involvement continue to escalate?
The quagmire theory
US leaders (ignorant of Vietnam and over confident about US Power and ideals), became trapped in an expensive commitment in an unimportant area, unable to exit without losing credibility.
The Stalemate Theory
claimed that the USA continued and escalated the commitment not to win but to AVOID being seen to lose.
Why did the USA lose the War in Vietnam?
What was the Domestic Impact of the Vietnam War? 02/02/24
L.O. How did the Vietnam War impact on the US economy, politics and society?
Economy -
the was expensive and caused deficits in the federal government budget and the balance of payments.
Johnson could not achieve his Great Society due to the debt; he spent $15.5billion on the Great Society between 1965-73 and $120 billion was spent on the war.
US Society -
From 1964, the war bitterly divided Americans. Families were torn apart, including those of McNamara and Rusk.
The Nixon years were the most divisive. Moratorium 1969 - the largest anti-war protest in American History. Included all people. American flags were burnt.
In November, Nixon delivered one of his best speeches, asking ‘the great silent majority of my fellow Americans’ to be united for peace, saying only Americans could ‘defeat or humiliate the United States.’ His approval rating shot up to 68%.
Protests still occurred; Nixon tried to defend the Cambodian Offensive in 1970 and trouble erupted on campuses across America.
May 1970 - 4 students at Kent University Ohio were shot dead by the National Guard. Some were just changing classes.
Student protests escalated, 300,000 marched on Washington. Nixon backed down and said American troops would be out of Cambodia in June.
200,000 Americans were killed or wounded in Vietnam and many lives were ruined.
Veterans had physical or mental disabilities and many came back with drug and alcohol problems.
US Politics -
The war damaged the relations between the President and Congress. Congress hated the power the commander-in-chief had, as demonstrated in the Cambodian Offensive. This escalation was authorised solely by the president.
Throughout 1970-71, the Senate enthusiastically supported bills to stop Nixon waging war in Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam.
It could be argued that the war cost Nixon the Presidency. The difficulties of gaining ‘peace with honour’ in the face of domestic opposition and Vietnamese intransigence accentuated his tendency towards a siege mentality.
Nixon + Watergate. Could be argued that this pressure pushed him to play dirty tricks in order for him to win a second term.
The war also damaged the presidency - respect for the office decreased as the war exacerbated tendency of both men toward dishonesty and dissimulation.
It could be argued that the war made the USA more wary of foreign interventions. However this only lasted for about 2 decades.
Canadian and Latin American reactions to the Vietnam War
L.O. How did Canada and Latin America react to the Vietnam War? 07/02/24
Canada and their initial supportive response (1945-1963):
Victor levant 1986, characterised Canadian involvement in the Vietnam War as ‘quietly complicit. Canada never sent troops to Vietnam and welcomed Americans who did not want to fight, however they gave the US some support.
Canada’s French routes meant they gave some economic and diplomatic support to the French to fight AGAINST the Viet Minh.
After France signed the Geneva Accords in 1954, an International Control Commission (ICC) consisting of Poland, Canada and India was established to monitor the implementation of the provisions of the Geneva Accords.
Canada proved their loyalty to the US, feeding them information about Vietnamese Communist Activities.
As Eisenhower and then Kennedy escalated the US involvement in Vietnam, Canada gave public support.
Diefenbaker and then Pearson continued to give public support to US policies in Vietnam. They were motivated by economic, ideological and defensive considerations.
→ Canada had to support anti-communism as they were part of NATO.
→ Canada could not openly criticise another leading NATO power.
→ The US was Canada’s main trading partner and they had a vested interest in the US military-industrial complex.
→ Canada’s reward for co-operating with US defence policy was the Defence Production Sharing Agreement (1959)
Canadian Doubts in The Pearson-Johnson Era
ordinary Canadians turned against Johnson’s escalation of the war and the opposition was fuelled by the influx of American draft dodgers and deserters, whose numbers have been estimated as high as 50,000.
The Canadian anti-war protests were centred upon the universities. The Canadian Student Union for Peace Action maintained close contact with the anti-war Students for a Democratic Society in the USA.
Canadian Opposition in Nixon Years
Liberal Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau expressed doubts and criticisms around the Vietnam War and it seemed once in power he would steer in a different international direction.
Soon after his election, he told the National Press Club in Washington DC that Canada would not project itself as a ‘mirror image of the US.’ He questioned if the Soviet Union really threatened the international order, and whether the US would sacrifice NATO in the event of nuclear war.
Trudeau was forced to go public with his doubts about US policy after Nixon’s Christmas bombing of Vietnam in 1972 infuriated the Canadian left.
There was unanimous support for the House of Commons resolution condemning the bombing.
Nixon was furious but he remained restrained because he wanted Canadian support in the international peace force that would help enforce the Paris Peace Accords.
Trudeau sent a 400-strong military mission to Vietnam as part of the International Commission for Control and Supervision, but the mission proved ineffective so Trudeau recalled it in mid-1973.
The Vietnam War and Canada in the 1960s
Anti-Americanism increased in the 1960s due to…
the opposition of young and liberal Canadians to the Vietnam War and the influence of anti-war Americans who fled to Canada
the growth of Canadian nationalism
US attempts to cope with a growing trade deficit hurt the Canadian economy.
In conclusion:
→ Canada never sent troops, gave US draft dodgers sanctuary and condemned Nixon’s bombings in December 1972.
→ On the other hand, the Canadian government was supportive in public statements prior to 1972.
Canada’s policies were carefully calibrated so they did not infuriate liberals, did not damage Canadian defensive and economic issues, did not Cost Canada anything other than supportive speeches. Their policies helped maintain Canada’s international reputation as an exceptionally peace loving and moderate middle power.
A Historian’s view:
Canada’s role during the Vietnam War was not that of a neutral.’ Alvin Finkel, 1988.
Latin American protest against the Vietnam War
L.O. To what extent did Latin Americans criticize the Vietnam War? 08/02/24
Chile and the Vietnam War:
US arrogance = Vietnam war
anti-war protests 1967-68
News coverage for the June 1967 Peace March, 1000 marchers joined by large crowds in Santiago.
Shouted ‘Cuba yes, Yankees no’ and ‘Neighbour Johnson, fascist and murderer’
No government resistance due to economic incentives from US.
Cuba and the Vietnam War:
Castro was pro- Viet Cong and announced his support for them at the Tricontinental Conference in Havana.
Castro’s speech at the University of Havana ‘We have all been disturbed by the bitter and maddening reports that the Yankee imperialists, in their escalation, have committed the crime of directly bombing the capital of the sister Vietnamese nations.
The Cold War - History Higher
How did the Cold War affect Truman and the USA?
The Grand Alliance
alliance between the USA, GB and USSR to decide what to do after WW2
USA kept USSR in the dark about the development of the atomic bomb
Stalin resented this American secrecy
The Power of the USA in 1945
the death of President Roosevelt in April 1945 left his relatively inexperienced vice - President, Harry Truman, in charge of a nation with unparalleled economic and military might
The USA was by far the most powerful country in the world; the war had drained the power and resources of all potential rivals
The USSR in 1945
did not have the atomic bomb
Truman’s Speech to Congress
→ made USSR understand how America feels towards USSR’s expansionist actions
→ communism is conveyed negatively ‘alternative ways of life’ - communism vs democracy
‘The Sources of Soviet Conduct’ - 1947 article in Foreign Affairs
“US must continue to regard the Soviet Union as a rival, not a partner, in the political arena.”
The Truman Doctrine
Increased Involvement in Europe
1947 speech made by Truman to Congress to outline foreign policy, saying that the US will help those being subjugated against their will - INTERVENTIONIST
the Truman Doctrine sparked increased involvement in Europe with the Marshall Plan
The Marshall Plan
Under the Marshall Plan, $13 billion was given to West European nations in order to revitalise them as allies and trading partners e.g. Greece and Turkey.
The political and economic association was militarily cemented in Europe from 1949, with the establishment of NATO.
Criticisms of the Truman Doctrine
Truman and containment (of democracy) led the USA into unimportant, undesirable and unaffordable commitments all over the globe.
an ‘ideological crusade’ that ‘has no limits’
Truman’s Involvement in Latin America
Changing Involvement in Latin America
The Rio Conference - 1947
members signed The Rio Treaty, agreeing that an attack one American Nation would constitute an attack on ALL
resistance would then occur if two thirds of the members agreed on action
established collective security
combated communism as Brazil, Chile and Cuba banned communist organisations and cut off diplomatic relations with USSR in 1948
Criticisms to The Rio Conference
Some Latin countries were deeply disappointed by the Rio Treaty - feeling it did not go far enough in establishing loyalty within Latin America.
Some felt like they had gone along with US containment and achieved next to nothing in return - no discussion of economic aid.
The Organisation of American States - 1948
several Pan-American conferences were held in 19th + 20th centuries
OAS laid down the administrative machinery for hemisphere consultation
OAS represented hemispheric unity in the struggle against communism
Truman and aid to Latin America
Latin American countries pressed for more aid from US
US said to rely on private US investment sectors instead
US did not see Latin America as a threat to Soviet Expansionism
1949, Truman aimed to promote self-help institute
Truman downgraded Latin American countries, only $79mill given not $18 bill
Anti-Americanism increased in Latin America
ECLA (Economic Commission for Latin America)
Set up in 1948 by UN
ECLA criticised US financial and economic policies, arguing that Latin American poverty owed much to its perceived role as a supplier of raw materials to the industrial nations that made more profitable manufactured goods.
Peaceful Co - existence in 1950s
The Thaw
What was Eisenhower’s ‘New Look’ policy?
preventing the extension of Soviet Communism outside of the areas already established.
→ use of military power to protect vulnerable areas e.g. West Berlin
→ use the CIA for covert operations more extensively than ever before
→ assisting forces fighting communism for example Diem’s gov in South Vietnam.
How was the new CIA organisation important?
undertook extensive covert anti-communist activities
e.g. infiltrating spies, saboteurs and resistance leaders into the USSR
involved in overthrow of governments considered to be too left-wing e.g. overthrow of Mohammed Mossadegh in Iran.
How did Khrushchev change the nature of USSR government?
→ US-Soviet summits took place during the 1950s
→ A ‘New Course’ with the west and peaceful co-existence
→ economic factors pushed the two superpowers into a friendlier relationship
→ Khrushchev rejected the idea the war was inevitable, instead pushing the idea that capitalism would die out due its own inherent weaknesses.
East German Uprising 1953
July 1952
Looming economic crisis in East Germany, production targets were increased by 10% in order to stop the crash however this just angered the citizens.
Spring 1953
Non - communist politicians were arrested and fears grew of a rebellion against the Com. government.
USSR leaders were concerned at the possibility of an uprising - not wanting to send in troops due to peaceful coexistence.
leader of East Germany summoned to Moscow and instructed to ‘tone down’ his socialisation programme - production targets remained high.
June 1953
Strikes erupted in East Germany - workers demanded higher wages and political freedoms. East Germany gov. appealed to USSR to intervene and Soviet Tanks appeared on the 17th June - uprising suppressed.
Eisenhower did not intervene with USSR but called a meeting to discuss Hungary, Austria and Germany govs.
Austria Treaty and Geneva Conference 1955
April 1955 -
USSR proposed a formal peace treaty with Austria - this would end 4 power occupation and created an independent Austria.
July 1955 Geneva Conference 1955 -
This was the first summit of the leaders of the major powers since 1945. Little of substance was achieved. USSR wanted NATO and Warsaw Pact to disbanded, USA said this was unacceptable.
Challenges to Peaceful Co - existence later 1950s
Eisenhower Doctrine
US must make more evident its willingness to support the independence of the freedom-loving nations of the area (Middle East.)
US would co-operate and give military, economic and political aid to any nation which requires help against overt armed aggression from any nation controlled by International Communism.
The Technology Race
USSR launched the world’s first artificial satellite - SPUTNIK and SPUTNIK II
This sent US into a state of panic as they became convinced of Soviet Superiority in missile technology.
The Missile Gap
US Air Force U-2 spy planes flying over USSR revealed that USSR did not have more missiles than US .
Eisenhower had to do something to alleviate public anxiety so he supported the establishment of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and in 1958 to promote missile development and exploration
U2 Incident - May 1960
US spy Gary Powers caught flying over USSR
Eisenhower humiliated on world stage
The Red Scare
Background to the Red Scare under Truman
→ The US people disliked Communism because it was atheistic and seemed to threaten the ‘American Dream’ that everyone was free to get ahead and to get rich.
A New Red Scare
→ At the end of WW2, most Americans regarded Communism as an alien ideology that was godless, repressive, aggressive and socialistic.
→ An era of unprecedented anti-communism hysteria due to the Red Scare
HUAC
→ in 1945 Congressman John Rankin suggested HUAC be made permanent and given broader powers in order to deal with communism in America.
→ the ‘Hollywood 10’ a group of writers and directors that had links with communism were convicted of contempt of Congress and given one year jail sentences.
Truman’s Responsibility for the Red Scare
Truman tried but failed to veto the International Security Act, saying ‘In a free country we punish men for crimes they commit, but never for the opinions they have.’
Soon after declaring the Truman Doctrine he contributed to the Red Scare by ordering Executive Order Number 9835, which ordered a loyalty investigation into federal employees.
J. Edgar Hoover ordered his men to follow up all leads - Truman compared Hoover to the Gestapo.
Order all wrong by the way —> ‘
15/11/23
Why did the Korean War begin and how did it affect the Cold War?
Traditional Orthodox Viewpoint -
Communist aggression was the cause of the Korean War as well as the US’s aims of containment.
Revisionist Viewpoint -
Korean nationalism and the desire for reunification of the peninsula was the cause of the war. However the USA bore a great deal of responsibility as they relied on Korea being a trading partner with Japan to aid their economic revival.
A Historian’s Perspective (John Lewis Gaddis 2005) -
‘Truman stressed that the American Intervention was a response to a Communist ‘challenge to the entire structure of post-war collective security and quotes Truman repeatedly telling his advisors “we can’t let the UN down” ‘
Events leading up to the Korean War
UN Security Council passed a resolution that declared that the UN should oppose North Korean aggression. (USSR boycotted UN at this point so could not use their veto.)
Truman sent US air and naval forces to help South Korea - resist Communism. Congress called it a ‘police action under the UN.’
Truman sent the US ground troops to Korea and ordered the US 7th Fleet to the Taiwan Straits. MacArthur appointed as commander, can only communicate with Washington.
Events of the Korean War:
A) PUSAN PERIMETER July-August 1950
No US/UN tanks could enter due to terrain and inexperienced troops fled the battlefield. The problem was nicknamed ‘bugout fever’.
8000 American casualties over the course of the fighting on the Pusan perimeter.
North Koreans were a tough enemy and the fighting was brutal.
Walker tried to manage the decreasing US moral, ‘There will be no more retreating.’
North Koreans had lost 58,000 men in their charge down South and were 40 tanks down.
Americans controlled the skies and seas as there was less territory to defend and a higher troop to land ratio.
Arrival of 6 US tank battalions miraculously transformed the situation, along with MacArthur’s successful assault in Inchon.
B) INCHON September 1950
MacArthur’s plan to bypass enemy strongholds with an amphibious assault that would leave enemy forces cut off and surrounded was accepted by Truman.
The assault was a triumph.
Inchon had dramatic political and military implications in the months to come.
C) CHINESE ENTRY into the WAR October 1950
The intervention of China into the war was motivated by security reasons and to reastablish its prestige and status after being dominated and humiliated by other countries. Mao also sought to repay previous North Korean aid.
US and South Korean troops reached Yalu river, the Chinese moved 150,000 men into North Korea.
The US/UN/ROK Forces were soon in trouble, surprised by the winter and the arrival of the Chinese.
MacArthur, who believed the Chinese were retreating, decided a big offensive would end the Korean War.
D) THE NOVEMBER OFFENSIVE 1950
was disastrous as there were insufficient supplies and the plan was broadcast on armed Forces radios which the N.Koreans intercepted - lost the element of surprise.
Chinese were ready with 400,000 troops, outnumbering the UN’s 270,000 troops.
Retreating US/UN troops were surrounded and froze to death, along with many Chinese troops.
E) FROZEN CHOSIN 1950
this was the hardest battle, 250,000 US troops against 120,000 Chinese troops near the Chosin Reservoir.
6000 US troops were killed, wounded or captured, whilst 6000 also suffered from frostbite.
Survivors told the US press that the Chinese burned prisoners of war alive and bayoneted anyone who tried to surrender.
F) US/UN/ROK Retreat
the UN troops retreated so quickly in the ‘big bugout’ that the Chinese couldn’t keep.
General Smith tried to cover up the situation by saying the troops were not retreating but attacking in another direction.
01/12/23
What was the impact of the Korean War?
The Diplomatic and Political Outcomes of the Korean War:
intensified McCarthyite hysteria that had begun in February 1950.
McCarthy and his followers claimed that the war proved Communist conspiracy
the war cost the US $67 billion —> this massive expenditure caused inflation which led to ½ a million steelworkers to strike for better wages in April 1952.
Truman then seized the steel mills which was ruled an unconstitutional act by the Supreme Court.
Truman failed to obtain a congressional declaration of war which reinforced the naming of the Korean war as ‘Truman’s War’.
Failures of the Korean war influences Truman to not stand for re-election in 1952 and virtually ensured Eisenhower’s victory.
Historian Patterson (1996) rendered Truman as ‘virtually powerless’ either to control Congress or to effectively lead the country.
The Korean War and US Foreign Policy
CONTAINMENT AND CREDIBILITY
Truman demonstrated his commitment to containment and to some extent he was successful in that aim with the Korean War
The USA had proved willing and able to halt Communist expansion and had ‘saved’ South Korea.
The war had ensured Japan’s security and development into a reliable and invaluable ally.
The US failed to reunify the Korean peninsula
THE USA AND ASIA
the Korean War seemed to signal that Western Europe was more important to US security than Asia
it could be argued that the Korean War had shifted the storm centre of the Cold War from Europe to Asia, as events in Korea convince
Korean War had a big impact on Sino-American relations. 2 years of bloody fighting coupled with Truman’s re-injection of the USA into the Chinese Civil War, greatly damaged the relationship.
08/12/23
L.O. To what extent could Eisenhower’s relations with Latin America be considered ‘new’ and ‘effective.'‘
Eisenhower’s ‘New Look’ Policy
→ reconcile conflicting demands of the military
→ Eisenhower believed US power depended on economic success and continued military expenditure (at Truman’s rate) would lead to inflation.
→ therefore he wanted to change industry focus away from military weapons production but on nuclear weapons as this would save US money and protect America as effectively as conventional forces.
→ Eisenhower believed in brinkmanship (pushing events to the point of war and then pulling out.)
Eisenhower and Latin America
Eisenhower revealed he would pursue a more constructive policy in terms of foreign policy in Latin America.
The USA and Revolutions
After their own American Revolution against the British, Americans were generally sympathetic to similar revolutionaries elsewhere.
Subsequently however, the USA’s concern for stability in trading partners and fears of communism combined to make the USA deeply suspicious of most 20th century revs.
Dealing with Revolutionaries
Having just got American troops out of Korea, Eisenhower did not want to get involved in another war, so he used other means to deal with revolutionaries whom he disliked,
Eisenhower hoped the USSR would refrain from helping revolutionaries for fear of massive retaliation.
Eisenhower sent US military advisers to assist friendly regimes in training native troops to oppose revolutionaries, such as in Vietnam.
Dulles organised military alliances such SEATO to help friendly regimes deal with the Communist threat.
The CIA used covert operations against revolutionary regimes in Iran and Guatemala. Covert operations were planned against the Cuban Revolution in the final months of Eisenhower’s presidency.
Guatemala Case Study
Background:
Most Guatemalans were poor, illiterate Indians who farmed the lands of the whites and mestizos who constituted only 2% of the Guatemala’s population but owned 70% of its productive land.
The inequality was exacerbated by the US United Fruit Company, which since its inception in 1899 had such a strangle hold over the Guatemalan Govs. including minimal taxes, protection from competition and the domination of Guatemalan port facilities.
The Start of the Revolution:
1944; student riots and a disgruntled middle class prompted a nationalist-liberal revolution led by a philosophy professor Juan Jose Arevalo, who became Guatemala’s first democratic President.
His government aimed for greater democracy and the division of the large plantations that dominated Guatemalan agriculture.
Actions taken by President Arevalo:
He initiated a programme of political, labour and land reforms and allowed strikes.
He tried to buy the land owned by US United Fruits but the company then upped their costs.
United Fruits claimed that the Guatemalan politician Arbenz was a communist and Eisenhower isolated Guatemala diplomatically and then planned to overthrow him.
The Election of President Arbenz:
In 1951, Arbenz was elected as President of Guatemala.
He bought land owned by US United Fruits and redistributed it to the peasants.
He legalised the communist Guatemalan Party of Labour.
All these reforms angered the powerful US United Fruits Company, leading them to run an influential lobbying campaign to persuade the US gov to overthrow the Guatemalan government.
Guatemala and the OAS
at an OAS meeting in Caracas, Venezuela in March 1954, Dulles pushed through a declaration that Communism was ‘incompatible with the concept of American freedom.’
the signatories vowed ‘to eradicate and prevent any subversive activities.’
many in the 17 had voted in the hope of gaining US aid and trade, however the OAS did not give a go-ahead for US intervention in Guatemala.
indeed most of the delegates gave the Guatemalan representative a standing ovation for his passionately anti-American speech.
The Overthrow of Arbenz:
From summer 1953, the CIA worked to overthrow Arbenz. At a cost of between $5million and $7million, around 100 Guatemalans were given military training.
The CIA chose Colonel Carlos; an American trained soldier to lead the division. He was given an army, a radio station in the neighbouring Nicaragua and the promise of a US blockade to halt arms imports from the Soviet Bloc.
Arbenz believed that the USA and the Nicaraguan dictator Somoza were conspiring to overthrow him, so he sought military aid from the USSR. In May 1954, the Soviets let Czechoslovakia’s Skoda company export weapons to Arbenz. Allen Dulles said this demonstrated contempt for the Monroe Doctrine and the Soviet plans to establish a military base in the Western Hemisphere.
In June 1954, Armas and his force of around 200 men entered Guatemala and CIA bombed Guatemala City. Arbenz fled due to loss of support from labour unions and middle class army officers.
Castillo Armas established a dictatorship in which United Fruits got its land back.
Results and Significance
From the contemporary American viewpoint, the new government in Guatemala was far more acceptable than the previous one, and the covert operations were considered successful.
On the other hand, the US involvement alienated Guatemalans who opposed the new regime and also many other Latin Americans.
15/12/23
L.O. How significant were Nixon’s visits to Latin America?
Context
many Latin American economies were highly dependant on US producers and consumers, and a US economic recession in 1957-58 hit Latin American nations hard.
Just before Nixon’s visit, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, troubled by United press reports that Latin American diplomats were deeply dismayed by the US attitude to their continent, had requested testimony from the State Department.
SD said ‘relations were never better’ however a Council on Foreign relations reported otherwise.
Aims of Nixon’s 2nd Visit 1958
Demonstrate US support for new elected leader of Argentina (Arturo Frondizi).
Reassure Latin America that they were respected and valued by USA and to try and counteract Soviet ‘wooing.’
Containment; trade agreements with Argentina would continue.
Problems faced by Nixon:
Argentina
Economic recession hit Argentina hard and Nixon' was met with an uneasy welcome by Argentinean government officials. Additionally, lack of economic aid made tensions rise. Nixon was also late to President Frondizi’s inauguration. Failure for US.
Peru
Economic ties between US and Peru were close and 3 days before Nixon’s visit, the US Tariff Commission increased export duties and put import quotas on zinc and lead. This further depressed the exports of Peru.
Some Peruvian students greeted Nixon with ‘Go Home Nixon’ or ‘Death to Yankee Imperialism.’
2000 students prevented Nixon from entering.
11/01/23
L.O. to understand the USA’s involvement with Vietnam.
L.O. to understand the impact of events on the USA and to analyse why Nixon ended the war.
Background 1945-54
Vietnam was a French colony; Indo-China
Increased nationalism - Viet-Minh (native people) wanted independence and started challenging the French post WW2.
Truman supported the French with $2billion of aid and military equipment and advice.
US money was invested in order to increase American popularity; problem was they were doing this blindly as the Americans knew little about Vietnam.
Truman claimed to only be ‘supporting’ the French, but by paying 80% of French costs, it was clear that the Americans were extremely close to direct involvement.
President Eisenhower and Vietnam
→ Initially continued aid to French; 1954 gave them armaments worth $385 million and US bombers accompanied by 200 American technicians.
→ He told Congress that he disliked putting Americans in danger but that ‘ we must not lose Asia.’
→ Eisenhower refused to deploy a US Air Strike on the Viet Minh even though the French forces were struggling in the battle of Dien Bien Phu (1954).
→ Eisenhower failed to get British support which Congress required before they would approve American Military intervention.
The Geneva Accords 1954
At the Geneva conference 1954, France and Viet Minh signed the Geneva Accords which ended French rule of Indochina and split the country into communist North and democratic South.
US and South Vietnam rejected the Geneva Accords; Ike would not hold national elections in Vietnam in 1956 as he knew that the Communist leader Ho Chi Minh would win around 80% of the votes.
South Vietnam under Diem
Diem governed South Vietnam; Eisenhower gave aid and commitment of a military nature and S. Vietnam joined SEATO.
Eisenhower gave nearly 1000 military and civilian advisors, a great deal of aid and military equipment.
Diem who was an upper class catholic caused tensions with Buddhist peasants by repressing their religion.
Diem also faced much opposition from within his own party and army
President Kennedy and Vietnam
→ the nature of US involvement underwent a quantitative change; the US provided more money, weaponry, helicopters and nearly 20,000 advisors.
The Battle of Ap Bac 1963
The JCS recommended Kennedy to put in US troops as the ARVN forces had an uneasy relationship with the US advisers and the influence of US forces.
Kennedy refused to put American ground troops in Vietnam in 1963.
The End of Diem
Some members of the Kennedy Administration disliked the emphasis of the military defeat of the Communists and urged Diem to introduce reform.
Diem refused to reform. Murders occurred in protest against Diem banning celebrations of Buddha’s birthday. Buddhist monks set themselves on fire. This shocked Kennedy.
As Diem refused to reform and the military option was not working, the USA chose a more ruthless option.
When several ARVN generals planned a coup, the USA gave them vital encouragement.
Diem was overthrown and killed by his generals. 1963 November.
Conclusions
→ Kennedy increased the USA’s level of commitment to an unpopular regime that he had helped overthrow.
→ Some historians believe he passed a poisoned chalice to his successor.
President Johnson and The Vietnam War
→ Arguably responsible for USA entering the war with troops
→ 1965, Spring he sent 200,000 troops into Vietnam and he ordered air strikes on the Viet-Minh supply routes from March 1965 - Nov 1968
Some say Johnson is responsible for escalating the condition of the Vietnam War:
eager generals
domino theory
containment
The Gulf Tonkin Resolution:
Allowed Johnson to have full control of the the US military in Vietnam. Johnson continued Operation Rolling Thunder - bombing raids on North Vietnam.
April 1965 Johnson’s Speech:
US should continue to fight to secure a ‘free’ world.
North Vietnam was a ‘puppet’ state of USSR and China.
Abandoning the war would be a ‘dishonour’ to South Vietnam.
Conclusion:
Johnson escalated the war by deploying ground troops and continuing bombing raids → deaths of US soldiers.
Historical Perspectives; Why did the USA get involved in the Vietnam War?
Historian Perspective (Robert Shulzinger 1997) -
‘Had American leaders not thought that all international events were connected to the Cold War there would have been no American War in Vietnam.’
Orthodox Perspective:
George Herring 1997 - saw the USA containing Communist aggression and expansion in Vietnam and as having little choice but to intervene.
The Revisionist Interpretation:
Gabriel Kolko 1985 - emphasised aggression and acquisitive US economic policies. Kolko said the markets and raw materials in South East Asia motivated US interest in Vietnam. (domino effect e.g. if Vietnam became an independent communist state other countries would follow).
The Post Revisionist Interpretation:
David Anderson (2005) saw the USA as motivated for a variety of reasons e.g. ‘geopolitical strategy, economics, domestic US policies and cultural arrogance.’
Why did US involvement continue to escalate?
The quagmire theory
US leaders (ignorant of Vietnam and over confident about US Power and ideals), became trapped in an expensive commitment in an unimportant area, unable to exit without losing credibility.
The Stalemate Theory
claimed that the USA continued and escalated the commitment not to win but to AVOID being seen to lose.
Why did the USA lose the War in Vietnam?
What was the Domestic Impact of the Vietnam War? 02/02/24
L.O. How did the Vietnam War impact on the US economy, politics and society?
Economy -
the was expensive and caused deficits in the federal government budget and the balance of payments.
Johnson could not achieve his Great Society due to the debt; he spent $15.5billion on the Great Society between 1965-73 and $120 billion was spent on the war.
US Society -
From 1964, the war bitterly divided Americans. Families were torn apart, including those of McNamara and Rusk.
The Nixon years were the most divisive. Moratorium 1969 - the largest anti-war protest in American History. Included all people. American flags were burnt.
In November, Nixon delivered one of his best speeches, asking ‘the great silent majority of my fellow Americans’ to be united for peace, saying only Americans could ‘defeat or humiliate the United States.’ His approval rating shot up to 68%.
Protests still occurred; Nixon tried to defend the Cambodian Offensive in 1970 and trouble erupted on campuses across America.
May 1970 - 4 students at Kent University Ohio were shot dead by the National Guard. Some were just changing classes.
Student protests escalated, 300,000 marched on Washington. Nixon backed down and said American troops would be out of Cambodia in June.
200,000 Americans were killed or wounded in Vietnam and many lives were ruined.
Veterans had physical or mental disabilities and many came back with drug and alcohol problems.
US Politics -
The war damaged the relations between the President and Congress. Congress hated the power the commander-in-chief had, as demonstrated in the Cambodian Offensive. This escalation was authorised solely by the president.
Throughout 1970-71, the Senate enthusiastically supported bills to stop Nixon waging war in Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam.
It could be argued that the war cost Nixon the Presidency. The difficulties of gaining ‘peace with honour’ in the face of domestic opposition and Vietnamese intransigence accentuated his tendency towards a siege mentality.
Nixon + Watergate. Could be argued that this pressure pushed him to play dirty tricks in order for him to win a second term.
The war also damaged the presidency - respect for the office decreased as the war exacerbated tendency of both men toward dishonesty and dissimulation.
It could be argued that the war made the USA more wary of foreign interventions. However this only lasted for about 2 decades.
Canadian and Latin American reactions to the Vietnam War
L.O. How did Canada and Latin America react to the Vietnam War? 07/02/24
Canada and their initial supportive response (1945-1963):
Victor levant 1986, characterised Canadian involvement in the Vietnam War as ‘quietly complicit. Canada never sent troops to Vietnam and welcomed Americans who did not want to fight, however they gave the US some support.
Canada’s French routes meant they gave some economic and diplomatic support to the French to fight AGAINST the Viet Minh.
After France signed the Geneva Accords in 1954, an International Control Commission (ICC) consisting of Poland, Canada and India was established to monitor the implementation of the provisions of the Geneva Accords.
Canada proved their loyalty to the US, feeding them information about Vietnamese Communist Activities.
As Eisenhower and then Kennedy escalated the US involvement in Vietnam, Canada gave public support.
Diefenbaker and then Pearson continued to give public support to US policies in Vietnam. They were motivated by economic, ideological and defensive considerations.
→ Canada had to support anti-communism as they were part of NATO.
→ Canada could not openly criticise another leading NATO power.
→ The US was Canada’s main trading partner and they had a vested interest in the US military-industrial complex.
→ Canada’s reward for co-operating with US defence policy was the Defence Production Sharing Agreement (1959)
Canadian Doubts in The Pearson-Johnson Era
ordinary Canadians turned against Johnson’s escalation of the war and the opposition was fuelled by the influx of American draft dodgers and deserters, whose numbers have been estimated as high as 50,000.
The Canadian anti-war protests were centred upon the universities. The Canadian Student Union for Peace Action maintained close contact with the anti-war Students for a Democratic Society in the USA.
Canadian Opposition in Nixon Years
Liberal Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau expressed doubts and criticisms around the Vietnam War and it seemed once in power he would steer in a different international direction.
Soon after his election, he told the National Press Club in Washington DC that Canada would not project itself as a ‘mirror image of the US.’ He questioned if the Soviet Union really threatened the international order, and whether the US would sacrifice NATO in the event of nuclear war.
Trudeau was forced to go public with his doubts about US policy after Nixon’s Christmas bombing of Vietnam in 1972 infuriated the Canadian left.
There was unanimous support for the House of Commons resolution condemning the bombing.
Nixon was furious but he remained restrained because he wanted Canadian support in the international peace force that would help enforce the Paris Peace Accords.
Trudeau sent a 400-strong military mission to Vietnam as part of the International Commission for Control and Supervision, but the mission proved ineffective so Trudeau recalled it in mid-1973.
The Vietnam War and Canada in the 1960s
Anti-Americanism increased in the 1960s due to…
the opposition of young and liberal Canadians to the Vietnam War and the influence of anti-war Americans who fled to Canada
the growth of Canadian nationalism
US attempts to cope with a growing trade deficit hurt the Canadian economy.
In conclusion:
→ Canada never sent troops, gave US draft dodgers sanctuary and condemned Nixon’s bombings in December 1972.
→ On the other hand, the Canadian government was supportive in public statements prior to 1972.
Canada’s policies were carefully calibrated so they did not infuriate liberals, did not damage Canadian defensive and economic issues, did not Cost Canada anything other than supportive speeches. Their policies helped maintain Canada’s international reputation as an exceptionally peace loving and moderate middle power.
A Historian’s view:
Canada’s role during the Vietnam War was not that of a neutral.’ Alvin Finkel, 1988.
Latin American protest against the Vietnam War
L.O. To what extent did Latin Americans criticize the Vietnam War? 08/02/24
Chile and the Vietnam War:
US arrogance = Vietnam war
anti-war protests 1967-68
News coverage for the June 1967 Peace March, 1000 marchers joined by large crowds in Santiago.
Shouted ‘Cuba yes, Yankees no’ and ‘Neighbour Johnson, fascist and murderer’
No government resistance due to economic incentives from US.
Cuba and the Vietnam War:
Castro was pro- Viet Cong and announced his support for them at the Tricontinental Conference in Havana.
Castro’s speech at the University of Havana ‘We have all been disturbed by the bitter and maddening reports that the Yankee imperialists, in their escalation, have committed the crime of directly bombing the capital of the sister Vietnamese nations.
NoteStudied by 4 peopleNoteStudied by 10 peopleNoteStudied by 8 peopleNoteStudied by 20 peopleNoteStudied by 24 peopleNoteStudied by 17 people