Bright Shining Lie: John Paul Vann and America in Vietnam - Research Paper Example

?Analysis of A Bright Shining Lie: John Paul Vann and America in Vietnam by Neil Sheehan and consequent attempt to critically evaluate waging of war by the United States against Vietnam Introduction: The War in Vietnam has influenced political, social and cultural scenario of the modern United States of America to such an extent that impact of the same can be realized in different dimensions of American life even in the contemporary time. While on one hand, the entire system of American bureaucracy attempted to project the war as an important step to protect national security, and interventional of communism with the purpose of jeopardizing lives of common Americans, on the other hand, a large part of the American general population clearly believed that the War is not only affecting image of the nation in the global scenario but consequently in terms of economic as well as social stability, also resulting in irreparable damage. The cultural revolution in the American social context, during the Vietnam War, not only gave birth to a tremendous anti-war sentiment but active participation from some of the most recognized academic scholars of the time, namely Stanley Karnow and Gabriel Kolko, also revealed the “bumbling and misinformed, or imperialistically aggressive” (Wiest 8) nature of the American politics. Though the process of exposing the deceit behind American foreign policy towards Vietnam and deception of common people by the bureaucracy commenced during the continuation of the war itself, however, layers of the actual purpose behind waging war over Vietnam was gradually becoming clear with time. A Bright Shining Lie: John Paul Vann and America in Vietnam by Neil Sheehan is one such book that exposes the political manipulation of the passion of common people surrounding the war and consequently the plight that the United States suffered throughout every dimension of its social, political and cultural both during and aftermath the war period. Thesis Statement: No matter how much the United States of America attempted to maneuver and suppress the actual reasons to wage an attack over Vietnam, outcomes of the Cultural Revolution perfectly pointed out the elements of deceit. While the process of exposing treachery of the nation against its citizens commenced during the very war time period, however, with progress of time it started taking a more conspicuous form. By analyzing A Bright Shining Lie: John Paul Vann and America in Vietnam by Neil Sheehan an attempt will be made to revaluate the actual reasons of America’s declaration of war against Vietnam and consequently with reference to other sources it would be attempted to show that to which extent the socio-cultural dimensions of American life encountered plight of such decision making. Methodology: In order to understand the entire issue as well as to develop the right kind of argument in the context of rethinking America’s declaration of war against Vietnam, at first, efforts will be made to understand the political history of Vietnam and its political relation with the United States. This effort will attempt to focus on the actual reasons that excited the American political system to take such a radical step. The next step would be association of the findings with that of Neil Sheehan’s narrative in the book A Bright Shining Lie: John Paul Vann and America in Vietnam. Finally, efforts will be made to find out that to which extent Sheehan’s arguments are acceptable. In this context special focus will be provided on narrative of two films The Deer Hunter and Apocalypse Now. As both these films have attempted to encompass the consequent impacts of America’s declaration of war on Vietnam quite from a realistic perspective, establishing a relation between Sheehan’s narrative with these films would be effective in understanding the consequences of such political decision making from humanistic perspective. The History: The history of Vietnam can be classified into four parts, namely, a) the history of Vietnam till 1802, b) problems in the social history of Vietnam since 1802 till the World War II, c) Decline of political relationship with the United States in the post World War II situation and finally d) the Vietnam War. According to the available historical references the modern Vietnamese people are successors of the people from a tribe named Viet and these ancestors actually migrated from China. Though the Viet kingdom was independent until the year 208 B.C., however, under attack of Trieu Da, a warlord of the Han Dynasty of China it came under direct influence of the Chinese rule as well as cultural dominance (Addington 3). Irrespective of Chinese political and cultural dominance the Vietnamese people never really escaped from their respective sense of nationalism. Starting from the year 40 A.D. to early fifteenth century there are several instances of Viet rebellion against Chinese dominance (Key Dates in the History of Vietnam). In the year 1418, under leadership of Prince Le Loi the Vietnamese people united in an organized manner to overthrow roots of Chinese dominance and magnitude of the struggle was so intense that aftermath 1426 the Chinese government was almost compelled to declare Vietnam as an independent state. However, since 1612 onwards a change in the Vietnamese political-religious structure started occurring as the Roman Catholic priests from France arrived in this place and started converting the minority section of the Vietnamese people to Christianity. The grip of French Catholic missionaries over the political structure of Vietnam became stronger as Monsignor Pierre Pigneau de Bahaine brought help from the French government to help Nguyen Anh against rebellion of Tay Son group (Addington 8). Quite naturally the French government received scope to capitalize on the help that they provided to Nguyen Anh. At the same time, the influence of French Catholic priests over socio-religious structure of the nation was also threatening the issue of national stability. Thus, in the year 1825 the Emperor Minh Mang took adequate legal actions to forbid the entry of French Catholic priests within the national territory of Vietnam. In order to gain back the lost position the next head of Catholic mission in Vietnam, Bishop Pellerin approached the government under rule of Emperor Napoleon III and consequently made it clear that “… Vietnam should be brought under French control both for the protection of Roman Catholicism and for the commercial advantage of France” (Addington 8). Though the initial effort from the French government to invade Vietnamese territory failed, however, their first success came in February 1859 through capturing Saigon and in 1861 they again defeated the Vietnamese army. The defeat of Vietnamese army by their French counterparts in 1861 was of such devastation that the “Treaty of Saigon” was signed by the Vietnamese army and imperialist rule of France over Vietnam officially commenced. In 1887 formation of the Indochinese Union was another step forward by the government of France to strengthen their grip on Vietnam. However, position of the French government in the context of ruling Vietnam started changing considerably prior to the World War II. While Japan’s imperialist aggression dominated China since 1931 onwards, consequently, Japan’s participation in the Axis Force provided the Nazi force with the strength to eradicate French colonialism from Eastern part of the globe. In 1940, the Nazi Force overpowered various Western Nations including France (Addington 20-21). Quite naturally, in order to retrain their existence France asked for help from both the United Kingdom and the United States. By the end of the World War II Japan’s surrender to the Allies can be considered as a matter of extreme importance in the political history of Vietnam. On one hand, World War II put an end to Japanese imperialism and on the other devastating consequences of the World War II made French hold over Vietnam so weak that it could not resist impact of the August Revolution from gaining sufficient control over most of the country. Under leadership of Ho Chi Minh the independence of Vietnam was declared in September 1945 and at the political level refusal of the Vietnamese people to accept interference of the United States started worsening the situation. The commencement of the First Indochina War (1946-54) provided the United States with opportunity to gain control over Vietnam and for the same purpose Truman Doctrine was also introduced, claiming to provide assistance to any nation that is under threat of Communism. While the Cold War commenced, the United States did not cease from helping the French government to bear the huge cost burden of war. Finally, under presidential rule of the John F. Kennedy the United States forced itself to involve directly with the internal politics of Vietnam (1961) and in the following year arrival of John Paul Vann was a clear indication of the policy of the United States to attain complete control over internal affairs of the state (Key Dates in the History of Vietnam). Rethinking the War: The attempt to revaluate America’s war in Vietnam with close reference to Neil Sheehan’s biographical narrative of John Paul Vann draws attention to manifold aspects, namely, the futility of the reasons to declare the war, exposition of the political gimmick in name of nationalism and protecting liberty, plight of soldiers engaged in the warfare and finally, the exploitative nature of the American imperialism. Andrew A. Wiest in the evaluating the relevance of America’s declaration of the War clearly suggested that “Whether bumbling or misinformed, or imperialistically aggressive, this traditional view of the Vietnam War painted a public and academic portrait of an America that was predestined to fail in Vietnam …. The first fundamental mistake was that, blinded by the Cold War concept of containment, the United States chose not to side with the stalwart Vietnamese nationalists of Ho Chi Minh, but instead to defend ramshackle and morally bankrupt South Vietnam at any cost. Once in the war, the Americans committed their second mistake by relying on brutal and ham-fisted military tactics better suited to conventional war in Europe that to a people’s war in Vietnam. In short, the United States fought the wrong war, in the wrong place, backing the wrong ally in the wrong way. The American war was doomed to failure” (Wiest 8). It was not that the military masterminds of the United States did not realize the flaw but by that time they went so ahead with their involvement in the war that it could have been a disgrace for a superpower like that of the United States if they would have decided to shirk from their path. John Paul Vann was clearly one of the most distinguished military leaders of the nation for whom it was almost difficult to accept that the war could not be won, irrespective of the fact that he clearly recognized the reasons behind declaring the war in Vietnam are wrong: “He saw much that was wrong about the war in Vietnam, but he could never bring himself to conclude that the war itself was wrong and unwinnable. To admit this would have been to admit the inevitability of defeat, and at a certain point in him intellect stopped and instinct took over” (Sheehan 8). His refusal to accept defeat both of himself as well as his nationalism for the United States was one of the main reasons that he let himself carried away to the situation, where empowered with his instincts he can attain triumph over the obstacles even at the cost of sacrificing his military values. While his nationalism was completely genuine and all he wished is to serve his nation to the best extent possible, his maverick nature and professional boldness “put him in disfavor with those in authority” (Sheehan 6). The United States as a nation and its political system are completely responsible for development of war machines such as John Paul Vann but when it comes to their functioning the nation also wanted to tame the wilderness unleashed. Judging from this perspective, John Paul Vann can be regarded as a representative of a particular section of the US population, the soldiers, who were engaged indiscriminately by the government of the nation without any proper realization to the consequences of their actions. In addition to such reluctance to the citizens, the War authorities of the United States such as General Harkins and his followers in Saigon also underestimated capacity of the Vietnamese freedom fighters: “General Harkins and his Saigon staff regarded the Viet Cong with the contempt conventional soldiers from great powers usually display toward the guerillas of small nations” (Sheehan 204). While experts like John Paul Vann had actual realization of the capabilities of the Viet Cong freedom fighters and he kept on advising the authorities to reconstruct their battle strategies accordingly, passivity of the authorities toward capability of the opponent did not change. The landmark films, based on the incidents of the Vietnam War, such as, Apocalypse Now (1979) and The Deer Hunter (1978) have quite realistically depicted the traits of such negligence. Both these films have emphasized on the contrast of activism of the American soldiers in battlefield. While on one hand, audience witnesses abundance of luxury, comfort and sensuality, on the other we witness merciless butchering of helpless soldiers by the guerillas. The most striking that both these films have focused on is the passivity of soldiers towards one another (Apocalypse Now). Most of the veterans do not have any clue regarding cruelty of the war while the others have seen so much of the gore part that they remain almost unaffected by others plight (Apocalypse Now). All they care about is to fulfill the mission, receiving orders from the superiors (Apocalypse Now) and keep searching for chances so that they can escape from witnessing unbearable human misery through the path of death (The Deer Hunter). John Paul Vann can be regarded as a representative of those soldiers, who due to ignorance of the authority were victimized to such an extent that their psychologically traumatized existence led them either to the state of self-annihilation, such as Nick (The Deer Hunter) or depended entirely on their instincts almost as animals such as Colonel Kurtz (Apocalypse Now). As a commander of several battles and with extensive experience in military strategy development John Paul Vann remained the authorities several times that they must not take the freedom fighters casually. However, General Harkins’ lack of confidence on Paul Vann resulted in a two and a month respite in the war. Joe Galloway, an American reporter in a recent interview shared his experiences of interacting with one of the commanders of the Vietnam corps. He was asked by the commander “Are you Americans serious about this? Are you here for the long run? Because we've been fighting this war for 20 years and if you come in and take it over, I want you to know if you cut and run, your helicopters taking you out will have people shooting at them, and it will be me and my troops” (Galloway 2). While the American soldiers were used by the nation just as an instrument to prove its military supremacy before the whole world and consequently in the hostile situation the American marines were struggling to survive, on the other hand, the Vietnamese were fighting for their national dignity and freedom and moreover they mastered the art of guerilla warfare with proper knowledge of the climate as well as natural environment of the country. The two and a half month of respite from war clearly put the Vietnamese corpses at an advantageous position compared to the Americans and “The guerilla battalion and company commanders had taken full advantage of the time to replace losses and to train their men in the new tactics and in use of captured American arms” (Sheehan 207). Conclusion: While rethinking the American war in Vietnam with special focus on Neil Sheehan’s biographical narrative, A Bright Shining Lie: John Paul Vann and America in Vietnam it becomes clear that quest of the United States to retain its position as the superpower in international politics, imperialist aggression are main reasons that led the nation to war. It is worse that citizens of the country were clearly deceived by political system to believe that the war is necessary in order to secure lives, security and freedom of common Americans. As there was no substantial reason to wage war against Vietnam, it was difficult to motivate the veterans. In addition to the situation utter reluctance of the authority regarding strategic development and consequent ignorance about opponent’s potential caused immense damage to the US veterans. The war in Vietnam was not only a wrong move by the American political leaders but also the strategies adopted due to overestimation of their own capabilities in an alien situation led the American soldiers to a situation of encountering complete futility. Experts like John Paul Vann attempted to draw attention to the authority towards the situation but reluctance of the authority was so deep that without finding a proper solution to get rid of the situation Paul Vann later on breached the limits of war ethics. The films like Apocalypse Now and The Deer Hunter clearly show plight of US veterans in terms of both psychological and socio-cultural crisis. Finally, the America’s war in Vietnam can be observed as such a flaw that resulted entirely due to wrong decision making in terms of both political and military level only to jeopardize numerous lives. Works Cited Addington, Larry H. AMERICA'S WAR IN VIETNAM: A SHORT NARRATIVE HISTORY. Bloomington: The Indiana University Press, 2000. Apocalypse Now. Dir, Francis Ford Coppola. Cinemato, Vittorio Storaro. Starr. Martin Sheen, Marlon Brando. Los Angeles, California: United Artists, 1979. “Interview with Joe Galloway: Soldier's Reporter Speaks His Mind”. VIETNAM MAGAZINE. April 18, 2011. Available at: http://www.historynet.com/interview-joe-galloway-soldiers-reporter-speaks-his-mind.htm. Accessed on: June 17, 2011. “KEY DATES IN THE HISTORY OF VIET NAM”. Available at: http://www.deanza.edu/faculty/swensson/vnhist.html. Accessed on: June 17, 2011. Sheehan, Neil. A BRIGHT SHINING LIE: JOHN PAUL VANN AND AMERICA IN VIETNAM. New York: Modern Library, 2009. The Deer Hunter. Dir, Michael Cimino. Screen, Deric Washburn. Starr, Robert De Niro, Christopher Walken. Los Angeles, California: Universal Pictures, 1978. Wiest, Andrew A. TRIUMPH REVISITED: HISTORIANS BATTLE FOR THE VIETNAM WAR. London: Taylor & Francis, 2010. Read More