Icons, myths, and the Vietnam War

Brian M Downing 

My brother need not be idealized, or enlarged in death beyond what he was in life; to be remembered simply as a good and decent man, who saw wrong and tried to right it, saw suffering and tried to heal it, saw war and tried to stop it.

– Edward M Kennedy’s eulogy for his brother Robert

The recent commemoration of Robert F Kennedy’s assassination has naturally caused many to wonder what he might have accomplished had he become president. Would social divisions have eased? Would institutions fared better? And would the war in Vietnam have ended sooner than it did?

The great “what ifs” in history make for interesting thought. Arguments and findings are based only partially on any history though. They are based more on what we might want to have happened. They can also be shaped by strong feelings toward beloved leaders, especially if they died tragically. Thinking on the disastrous war in Vietnam is influenced by the untimely deaths of Franklin Roosevelt, John F Kennedy, and Robert F Kennedy.

Franklin Roosevelt

Though allied with major colonial powers such as Britain and France during World War Two, President Roosevelt envisioned a new era following the war which would see decolonization. France, the president is thought to have said, would not reestablish control of Indochina. 

However, FDR died from a stroke in April of 1945 just as allied forces neared Berlin and fought for Okinawa. The demise of the Axis powers did not bring peace and decolonization. A new conflict emerged with the Soviet Union which was encouraging anti-colonial movements in Africa and Asia. 

France insisted that it had to reestablish control over Vietnam to limit the spread of communism. More importantly, France would not participate in the newly-forming coalition against the Soviet Union, NATO, unless the United States helped in Southeast Asia. President Truman agreed and US arms and money went to the French war for Vietnam which brought defeat in 1954. President Roosevelt is unlikely to have ignored the Soviet dangers and French conditions.

John F Kennedy

After France left Indochina, Truman and Eisenhower kept training missions in South Vietnam. As the South’s army and government continued to fare poorly, Kennedy upped the stakes by increasing the American presence from 900 when he took office to 16,300 three years later. Vietnam was a sizable commitment, though not yet an American war.

As the war turned into stalemate then disaster by the late 60s, a myth arose that Kennedy was planning to leave Vietnam. Kennedy was planning no more than a token withdrawal to demonstrate displeasure with the Diem government. And of course Kennedy also backed the coup that ousted Diem in the hope that a better government would stem the insurgency The coup took place just three weeks before the president’s trip to Dallas.

The pullout story is not widely credited but it fits with narratives of CIA and military complicity in Kennedy’s assassination. It’s based on an allegation by Kenny O’Donnell, a Kennedy loyalist and advisor on domestic matters. 

Robert F Kennedy 

By late ’67, more Americans opposed the war than supported it. The high casualties of the Tet Offensive in early ’68. Eugene McCarthy showed that an antiwar candidate could fare well against President Johnson, which led to LBJ’s decision not to run for reelection and RFK’s entry into the primary. His opposition to the war was clear, his plans to end it were not. He was assassinated the night he won the California primary. 

Could RFK have ended the war quickly? Polls showed considerable support for immediate withdrawal, but support fell away if it entailed a communist victory in the south, as it certainly would have given the relative strength of opposing armies. One poll in early 1969 showed only 9% of Americans supported withdrawal if it meant defeat.1 Americans didn’t want the war, but didn’t want defeat either.  

The consequences of an immediate pull-out would have been painful and long-lasting. The collapse of S Vietnam would have brought a vicious backlash, much like the one after the fall of China, which poisoned domestic politics for over a decade. Defeat would have fueled intense hatreds and paralyzed the president’s agenda. His party would have suffered badly in the next elections and America’s theretofore harmonious civil-military relations would have deteriorated ominously.

***

Arguments predicated on had a certain figure lived must be greeted with suspicion. There may be far more sentiment and wishful thinking than sound analysis.

1 See John M Mueller, Wars, Presidents, and Public Opinion (pp 42-65).

Copyright 2018 Brian M Downing

Brian M Downing is a national security analyst who has written for outlets across the political spectrum. He studied at Georgetown University and the University of Chicago, and did post-graduate work at Harvard’s Center for International Affairs. Thanks to Susan Ganosellis.