HEARTBREAK OF WAR . . .

Recently, an email was sent to me with an attached newspaper article "Heartbreak of war that echoes abroad". The article is about Vietnamese 'boat people' refugees who have "enriched Australia" but for whom the "tragedy of Vietnam lives on." It was an article by Ann Beveridge, but there were no details given as to where and when it was published.

The email had no message, just the attached article. Perhaps the person who sent me the email did so by way of criticism, because he had entitled his attachment "flip side"! If so, perhaps he was surprised by my response, which (with a few small changes) is below. The extracts in red are from the original article.

I think it might give some insights into Viet Nam, and also why I have been an anti-war activist for some 40 years. This is my response to the email.....

Thanks for the article you sent on "Heartbreak of war...."
I have read it, and agree with most of the comments made, although it is not new to me.

It beautifully explains just why war is so horrible and wrong, and why humanity has to find a more civilized way to settle our differences, if we want to survive or be considered better than barbarians. It is why I am anti-war!

This is summed up nicely at the end of the article by Pham herself:

".....I'm not a very political person but I feel for those who lost people in the war. In this war nobody won. In the end nothing was achieved and yet the costs were very great. I just hope that how war makes people feel is considered by the people who make the decision to go to war, that they feel what we feel before they let it happen again....."

However, I think it does help to be a "political person", or at least read lots of different history books, because then you can have a better idea of why such terrible and unnecessary things happened in the first place, and be better equipped to stop them in the future! (And also appreciate what exactly was fought for and won, and why it had to be won!)

It is not true that "nobody won"! Of course, the majority of Vietnamese, north and south, who supported Ho Chi Minh's quest for freedom, independence and reunification of their country, won. (That was conservatively 80% of the whole population, according to US President Eisenhower - which of course is why the US-backed side of 20% refused to hold the nationwide democratic elections under international supervision in 1956, as provided for in the Geneva Agreement!).

Yes, the Vietnamese majority won, but at a terrible price, of course. Even the Allies in World War 2 won, and were prepared to pay a terrible price for the victory they had to have. Sometimes important things don't come cheap.

THE Vietnam War cost the lives of more than 4 million people, half of whom were civilians....

But the most important question is: Who made the decision to "go to war" in the very first place, instead of allowing a peaceful outcome for the people of Viet Nam?

The answer to that is the government of the USA, in 1945. They decided to stop supporting the popular nationalist leader Ho Chi Minh (their ally against Japan in WW2, who seriously wanted to continue friendly relations with America), and instead to support the return of the cruel French colonialists, which most Vietnamese did not want.

From that wrong and fateful decision, everything else inevitably followed. Thus, the boat people refugees were just some of the resulting victims of a war decided in Washington!

It is usual in the aftermath of war or extreme poverty that some people will seek to leave for a better life. But the vast majority did not leave, despite the terrible consequences of war and the crippling 20-year US economic embargo. Instead, they stayed to rebuild their shattered country, despite the hardships. And, for most of these people, they were the 'victors' in the war anyway, north and south!

And yes, many horrible things happened on both sides - as they do in all wars.

"....Tet (New Year) Offensive in 1968. Instead of observing the expected ceasefire on this sacred day, Viet Cong (the guerilla force of the North Vietnam-backed National Liberation Front) attacked Saigon, capital of South Vietnam...."I still find it inexcusable that the communists violated the armistice during Tet....

The surprise Tet Offensive in 1968 was part of the consequence and strategy of winning the war. The Vietnamese did the same thing way back in Tet 1789, when they surprised the invading Chinese and defeated them in the famous Battle of Dong Da near Hanoi. Was this also "inexcusable" at the time? I don't think so! If invaders invade they will be defeated! The lesson should be: "Don't invade! And if you do, don't blame the defenders for the consequences!" A lesson the US government failed to learn years later, and still fails to learn today!

"....That month, television news revealed the massacre at Hue...."

And yes, at Hue in 1968 there was a masacre of civilians - on both sides! To some extent, the massacres that happened during Tet '68 in Hue were paybacks for the massacres already carried out by the Saigon government under President Diem and others. And when the siege of Hue was over, the Saigon government conducted more massacres. Massacres on all sides are another consequence of war. (Yet the article only refers to those of one side!)

War itself is a massacre. And a most inappropriate way to settle most disputes between people and nations. But, of course, it is "big business" to lots of powerful people who make their obscene wealth from the suffering of others. So anyone who wants to stop war has to battle some very powerful and selfish interests. Be prepared for a tough road!!!

Thanks for sending me the article, and I hope you will make good use of it, and other information, to help bring an end to this absurdity we call "war".

Best wishes to you.
Keep in touch.
Cheers from Bruce.