By April 1975, still South Vietnamese Americans had retreated to the capital, Saigon. The economist wrote that this appeared to be a strategic withdrawal a month ago. However, it was revealed to be “head-on-the-fly”. The image shows Americans saying “refugees, rag soldiers, dehydrated babies filling their television screens.” These TV watchers were tired of the war and tired of the American bombing campaign that killed a huge number of Vietnamese civilians. That was also the council. He argued that the conflict caused Americans to question what they would gain by defending every country and setting it “at the expense of providing help.”
“According to recent polls, only one in three Americans will be ready to fight the US troops for Western Europe’s defense. The decline in public support for commitment to Europe is a sense that Europe is richer enough to be richer in its own defense, so the viable increase in Western Europe’s defense will bring that to myority.” Confidence.”
In April, America’s pride was hit hard twice. The first came on April 17th when the American-supported government in Cambodia fled the capital, Phnom Penh, and the communist Khmer Rouge rebels. A few days ago the helicopter was running the last American. It was “the end of the front post base of one of the Lost Frontiers.” Cambodia’s then-information minister felt that his country had been “snatched and abandoned” by the United States. A few years later, the then-US ambassador said his government had “handed it over.” [Cambodia] Over four years in the Khmer Rouge, 2m Cambodians died.
The second was the collapse of Saigon, which led to the end of the Vietnam War. The Economists covered “the last day of desperate” when the Northern Tanks were closed. The United States displaced diplomats and refugees first by plane and then overloaded helicopters. Tens of thousands of Vietnamese people fled themselves, some taking dangerous trips on small boats. (They will continue for more than a metre in later years.) On April 29th, a desperate crowd of 10,000 Vietnamese people gathered at the US Embassy. Thousands were rescued, but many were left behind as Saigon’s last American flew off around 8am on April 30th. The image of evacuation has become a symbolic symbol of the humility of the superpower. (Some people later compare it to the 2021 US chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan’s capital, Kabul.)
Later that morning, the Communist tanks smashed the gates of the President’s Palace. And the soldiers raised the flag above it.
“The Vietnam War ended at 10am on Wednesday morning. […] The victors apparently refused to organize an uprising in the city to welcome them. Communist supporters cheered on the army that arrived, but Western reporters’ accounts suggest that most people watched them silently.
What did the four consecutive US administrations discovered in Vietnam have, from Dwight Eisenhower to Richard Nixons? The economists argued that one mistake was believed to have political noos or military power to defeat North Vietnam and its allies. They also mistakenly believed that American opinions could win the war “before they were tired of victims and the atrocities that aired.” The United States also wanted South Vietnam to make “democratic structures” “faster and more persuasive.” The war turned out to be “not providing laboratory conditions for democratic experiments.”
“When those hopes were proven false, the US government thought it could still bump into policy without losing its support of its people and the acquiescence of its allies. It was wrong about that count, too. And it’s paying a big price for that misunderstanding.
The end of the conflict prompted questions about America’s role in the world. The post-World War II international order rested on the assumption of American superiority. Will Vietnam end it? “It would be unrealistic and unnatural to see acceptance of failure in Indochina as a complete rejection of foreign responsibility,” we wrote.
However, despite the war “was not the sole cause of the current decline in American influence”, he insisted that “it’s one.” The American alliance was not “as we once saw” when Americans thought “the threat to one of their friends was a threat to themselves.” “Assumed to be of interest” did not seem certain on either side. Some countries, such as Australia, sent their troops to Vietnam, but the US fought mostly on its own. Many of the allies, especially in Europe, were reluctant to take part in wars that some people deem misguided.
“Events over the past month have made American reliability issues authentic, and it is important that they do not exaggerate the answer either way. To some degree, a long list of countries around the world that rely on American connections could be ranked in rough order. Supporters within the US themselves.”
These tests argued that it was “consolation and true” to tell yourself that it was high on the American list, for Western Europe and Japan. Still, it was oversimplified that European leaders believe that “Indochina embarrassment” would not have any effect on the old American allies at all.
Years after Saigon’s collapse, it appeared to be confirming America’s global hideaway. Many Americans remained, accepting and accommodating their government’s overseas intervention, an attitude that has come to be known as “Vietnam syndrome.” The Communists captured Laos in December 1975. Iranian revolutionaries defeated the American-backed Shah in January 1979. The Soviet Union then invaded Afghanistan that end of the year, further halting the American status and adding concerns about the free world.
But far from collapse, American hegemony endured. The US de facto alliance with China over the Soviet Union helped it maintain the world’s highest power. Communism did not spread from Indochina across Asia. Vietnam opened its economy in the 1980s, and the US is now the largest export customer.
But today, when Trump pursues “America’s first” foreign policy, the US-led order is once again seriously questioned. And Americans are showing signs of a new version of Vietnam syndrome. ■
Source link
