The Japan Times
Tokyo, Japan
May 10, 1998
Ho Chi Minh was a nationalist
I feel obliged to comment on John T. Blackmore's letter "Pfaff wrong on
Cambodia," which was run with my letter "Pride in the name of truth,"
on May 3.
Blackmore writes "…even the most
inefficient, corrupt government is better than communists who, while
pretending to be nationalists, actually believe in class warfare
against their opponents."
In the case of Pol Pot,
Blackmore's assertion is probably true, but I believe it's debatable as
concerns the communist Ho Chi Minh, and in my letter I refer to Ho Chi
Minh as the leader of a
nationalist movement. I would like to point out the following:
• Ho Chi Minh had sought support for Vietnamese independence from the
international community, but only found that support from communists.
• In 1954, an agreement was drawn up for U.N.-sponsored, democratic
elections to be held in Vietnam. When it became clear Ho Chi Minh
would prevail, Ngo Dinh Diemh, the leader of the South, refused to
participate. France and the U.S. backed Diemh and elections were
called off.
• Many former U.S. policymakers have
concluded it was a mistake to assume Ho Chi Minh was a threat. Robert
McNamara writes in his book "In Retrospect" that "We…totally
underestimated the nationalist aspect of Ho Chi Minh's movement."
• Over 3 million Vietnamese and 58,000 Americans died in Vietnam
between 1954 and 1975 as a result of U.S. policy in Indochina.
Blackmore suggests U.S. troops should have been sent to Cambodia to
help stabilize the country in the 1970s. It is clear that someone had
to do something to stop Pol Pot, and in December 1978, Vietnam invaded
Cambodia. I was a 19 year old in the U.S. Navy at that time and there
were rumors we might intervene against Vietnam. However, I believe we
would have aggravated the situation at that point – only to find
ourselves trapped in another Indochinese quagmire.
Don MacLaren
Tokyo