American experience in the Vietnam War

Vietnam (APA).

Lessons of Vietnam

Vietnam is often called the first war America lost, and whether or not you agree with that statement, it is almost impossible to say that America won the war. However, one learns more from failure than from success and the United States can learn some very valuable lessons from the war. The reason for American failure, or at least lack of outright victory, can be traced to three main causes: a lack of a coherent diplomatic strategy, lack of public support, and lack of presidential and congressional cooperation.

One the diplomatic lesson to be learned from the Vietnam War is that when entering negotiations always have a specific goal by which negotiations should proceed, and always negotiate from a position of strength. The United States never had an overall strategy for dealing with the North Vietnamese, instead the U.S. strategy evolved over time. When it began it's commitment in the early-1960's, the United States never even considered negotiating with the North Vietnamese; it was the American belief that they would win the war militarily and dictate terms to the enemy. Unfortunately, the Vietnamese were more resilient than believed; and the war dragged on without victory. When it became apparent that the United States would have to negotiate to end the war, there was really no starting point and no overall diplomatic strategy.

The North Vietnamese wanted an end to the American bombing campaign before they would even sit down to talk. While the United States' only plan was the ending of the war, and thus they were constantly reacting to the North Vietnamese. For every concession the Americans made, the North demanded three more; and the U.S. was desperate to end the war. As U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger wrote, the United States was "constantly offering concession after concession while the North Vietnamese change nothing in their diplomatic positions." (Kissenger) U.S. public opinion had turned against the war and Americans wanted out. The North Vietnamese used this a leverage to gain more and more concessions, and since the U.S. didn't have an overall strategy for negotiations, they were caught off-guard by the Vietnamese constant change of position and seeming refusal to make concessions.

In the end the U.S. lack of strategy allowed the North Vietnamese to direct the negotiations and drag them out, caused the U.S. To be on the diplomatic defense, and used the American public's desire for peace to push pressure on the American negotiators. When negotiating, do not allow the other side to direct the course of negotiations, always have a well researched strategy. Also, never negotiate from a position of weakness, as demonstrated by the American position of wanting out of the war at any cost. And one must always have public support for the goals of the negotiations so the opposition cannot use a split between the American public and the government to increase pressure on the negotiators to make concessions.

The lack of public support was something that evolve over time, and in the Kennedy administration of the early 1960's, there was a great amount of support for the American effort to back the South Vietnamese. Both liberal Democrats as well as conservative Republicans backed the U.S. effort, but as time went by and the U.S., government demonstrated a distinct lack of candidness about the war, U.S., public support began to decline. It began with the liberal Democrats who "could not long support a war against a revolutionary movement, no matter how reactionary the domestic tactics of that movement." (Kissinger) In other words, liberal Democrats could not long support a war against fellow socialists and by the late 1960's, their opposition to the war was quite substantial. Democrats will only support a war if it is aimed at what they considered to be evil, mainly a capitalistic dictatorship.

Another reason for the lack of public support was the obviously faulty official statements from the U.S. Government about how the war was proceeding. Official reports were always much too optimistic, creating a feeling among the American public that the war would be won at any time. The "Tet Offensive" in January of 1968 was a clear demonstration of the organization and power of the enemy, as well as a clear demonstration that the U.S. Government had been either lying about the war, or simply did not know what it was talking about. Either reason, lies or incompetence, the American public lost faith in the government, it's proclamations about the war, and the war itself. Without public support and confidence in the war effort, it was doomed to failure.

Finally, if there is one lesson for the president to learn from Vietnam it is "never go it alone," always have the Congress behind you when taking the United States into military action. After the war, Congress passed the War Powers Resolution, and after overriding a veto by President Nixon, it became law. This law, sometimes called the "War Powers Act" makes certain "that the collective judgment of both the Congress and the President will apply to the introduction of the United States Armed Forces into hostilities." (War Powers) It is vitally important that the Congress is involved in the decision to commit U.S. forces into combat so that the people's representatives will have their say. This will insure public support, at least at the start, for any operation involving American troops. It will also insure that the operation will only continue as long as the people of the United States support the mission, otherwise their representatives in Congress will withdraw their support and the mission will end. Without public support, the American military cannot perform successfully.