indochina question and how to answer (1 Viewer)

[steph123]

how would you answer the question

"to what extent was nationalism a cause of conflict in Indochina in the period of 1954-1968"

so far i came up with the points about:

- Kennedy and LBJ's leadership and how they were both very nationalistic and considered the USA as the protector of smaller nations- can be supported by Kennedys quote "it is our offspring, we cannot abandon it we cannot ignore its needs, and if it falls victim to any of the perils that threaten its existance, we with some justification will be held responsible and our prestige in Asia will sink to a new low"

- The Gulf Of Tonkin resolution- Quote by LBJ "its like grandma's nightshirt; it covers everything"

- NV nationalistic feelings- their "reason" for being in the war. They had all the time in the world to fight the war, and can be contrasted to the USA and Allied troops "365 tour of duty"

any more points???

 

[JoeI]

hmm not really. at that time the american were very scared of communism. that's it. communism. they were afraid of communismn spreading from china to vietnam to all over of south east asia to everywhere. there's no nationalism in america for vietnam war. just fear.

for the viets, they're very cunning but i'm not going into that because it doesnt answer your question.

for your question, the viets use nationalism to unite vietnam. the north vietnam tried to persuade the south vietnam to unite under one vietnam. ho chi minh's intention was for nationalism and he was just using china's help and russia's help to achieve this unity by pretending to be a communist. but actually he wasnt.
but well, he died, and vietnam leaders followed him and became a communist country. this nationalism works and this nationalism causes south viet people to form a viet cong, taking order from the north viet to help and unite vietnam by killing their opposition and americans.

 

[Born Dancer]

to further on what Joe1 was saying, its probably a bit out of the timeframe but remember that the French rule in Vietnam is really what made the Vietnamese come together. Ho Chi Minh guided all the Vietnamese and brought everyone together under one united love: love for country. I think nationalism is an easy topic to talk about because really, it works for both America and Vietnam in terms of war, and war tactics etc

 

[melmelzz]

[just continuing from the above posts...]

Yerh but still..

The early american attitudes towards Indochina is that the USA consistently & tragically displayed a lack of understanding of the nationalistic aspirations of Southeast Asian countries.

The US ( who think they are so big :mad1: ) saw conflict in Indochina as a part of a larger global, ideological struggle between communist and the capitalist world. They did not give sufficient weight to the distinctive, nationalistic desire of the people of Indochina and those of the Vietnamese people in particular...

 

[newpearlgirl]

hey

i hav to do this question for my modern history assignment, and i was just wondering if the situation in cambodia should b mentioned?? i mean, theyre in conflict too with the khmer rouge and pol pot n all that but does that qualify as nationalism or as greed?
any help wud b great!
thanks

 

[CromptonChanan]

good point!
yes it does apply to cambodia and laos as well, as their communist parties Pathet Lao and the Khmer Rouge were inspired by both the french presence in indochina and the american presence and thus had nationalistic asppirations.
however, im not sure if this would be the right way to go about including cambodia and laos into the essay.