How and Why did the Vietnamese

people win the Viet Nam War( 1954

– 1975)?
• Some general information:
• 1/ Names of the war:
• From the Vietnamese perspectives: in Vietnamese
“Cuộc kháng chiến chống Mỹ, cứu nước” (the resistant
Text hinzufügen
war against American for national salvation);
• From the American perspectives: in English
• + the Vietnamese war
• + the Viet Nam war
• + the American war in Viet Nam
• From both sides, in English: the Viet Nam war.
• 2/ Tc
• 3/ The periodization of the war:
• From the Vietnamese
• - 1954-1960: Defeating the “One-side war”(
“Unilateral war”) by President Eisenhower;
• - 1961-1965: Defeating the Special war
strategy by President Kennedy and President
Johnson;
• - 1965-1968: Defeating the Local ( Limited)
war strategy by President Johnson
• -1969-1972 Defeating Vietnamization of the war strategy by
President Nixon
• -1973-1975: Defeating the final efforts of Vietnamization of
the war strategy for liberating the whole South Viet Nam.

• From the American

• - 1965-1968: the local war ( limited War) strategy by
President Johnson
• -1969-1972 : the Vietnamization of the war strategy by
President Nixon
• -1973-1975: the final efforts of Vietnamization of the war
by President Nixon and President Ford.
• 4/Could we (American and Vietnamese) have avoided
this war?
• No. The domination of bi-polar geopolitical world order
leading to deep reasons of the Viet Nam war. We could
not have avoided this war.
• Yes. We could…
• +Typically, Prof Mark Philip Bradley made clear that
• (1)Ho Chi Minh had many efforts to contact with the
American: As soon as the August revolution, Ho Chi
Minh sent 8 letters to President Truman (no reply from
Truman),
• (2) In 1947 Ho Chi Minh sent The Pham Ngoc
Thach delegation to Thailand in order to
contact with the embassy of the US,.. ( once
again Truman had no reply).
• +Why did the American refused Ho Chi
Minh’s proposals? The Mc Carthyism was
dominating American politics at that time? (“
the ghost of communism” !)
 5/Military Art and Strategy
+Definition of the ‘’ military Art”, “military strategy” term. A system of military
viewpoints, concrete arts, strategy, campaign, tactics,…for winning the war.
Ex, The military art of knowing how to win in every step exactly defeating
ideology for the escalation of war in condition of bipolar world order.

+Nature of the Neo-colonialist war

• - Neo-colonialism
• - Neo-colonialist war
+ Nature of the People’s war – Vietnamese
Revolutionary war/ resistant war against
invaders for national independence and democracy.

• +The “historical clash” between Vietnam and America: the international

revolutionary forces/ world imperialism headed by the American. The
bipolar world order was reflected in the Viet Nam war.
 6/SOME BASIC VIEWPOINTS FOR THE WAR
OPERATION OF THE AMERICAN IMPERIALISM

• 1 /Summary of the U.S. Military history –Military

doctrine based on the emphasis on firepower, modern
weapons, etc. of the U.S. Army (“American power”)
• 2 /Theory of Attrition Warfare (“War of attrition”) in
the American Military Strategies
• 3 /Theory of Conventional Warfare, Counter-
insurgency War, and Nuclear Warfare
• 4 /Theory of Flexible Response and the Escalation of
war
• 5/ The Nixon doctrine: American power + skillful
diplomacy”, “the chess of China” on the Asian table.
 7/BASIC CONTENTS OF THE OPERATIONAL ART OF WAR
AND THE THEORY OF PEOPLE’S WAR STRATEGY
• 1 /People’s war in the comprehensive, long-term, relied
mainly on their own strength way
• 2/ Art of winning step by step in the right way and at the
right time
• 3 /Theory of Offensive Strategy
• 4 /The comprehensive power of People’s war
• 5/ Methods of revolutionary, methods of conducting
People’s war (the combined revolutionary violence: two
legs, three heads, three areas, three types of armies, three
scales, three battlefields, offensing-uprising, uprising-
offensing, offensing-general offensing and uprising, etc.)
8/ “Formula to win” or the methodology
of conducting “revolutionary violence”:

X= {2,2,3,3,3,3,2,2,3,…2}
2 : local uprisings – revolutionary war
2: 2 feet ( military- political forces)
3: 3 arrows (military- political struggles,
mobilization of the enemy)
3 regions( mountain rural, delta rural, urban
area)
3 armies ( regular, local, guerrilla)
3 scales ( large, medium, small)
2 offensives – uprisings
2 General offensives- uprisings
3 fronts ( military, political, diplomatic
fronts)
2 General offensives- uprisings : to win the
war.
 II/The Viet Nam War

• 1/ Defeating the one-side war by President

Eisenhower (1954-1960)
• a/ The Eisenhower strategy: The “one-side “ war.
• The nature of the Geneva agreement: Although Viet
Nam had defeated the French in Dien Bien Phu , it
could liberate only a half country. The Geneva
agreement was a limited victory.
• What was reason for that? ( balance of power, interests
of some powers, super powers around the Geneva
solution for the Viet Nam, the ticklishness of China,…).
• The American jumped down South Viet Nam to establish neo-
colonialism in order to stop the development of communism in
S.E.A. (the Domino theory and the Eisenhower strategy ).
• + Politically, the government of Ngo Dinh Diem; a repressive
machine controlled the whole South from Saigon capital to the
most remote villages (Massacres, tortures, deportations, mass
imprisonment and raids,…).
• + In military, building up the Saigon army; under the support of the
US the Diem government suppressed bloodily the revolutionary and
patriotic forces in the South. In the early 1960, had 100,000 Saigon
troops.
• +Economically,…starting some infrastructures of neo-colonial
economy
• + Culturally,...some neo-colonial factors transmitted into the South
• b/ Defeating the Eisenhower strategy:

• According to the Geneva agreement, the Vietnamese revolutionaries had to accept the regroup of
cadres, troops into the North (deep reasons?)
• South Vietnam Imbalance of power in favorable direction to Saigon and American : 100,000
revolutionary troops had to regroup to the North ; the revolutionary, patriotic forces were
suppressed bloodily.
• What were some regrettable disadvantages to revolutionaries? The Revolutionaries applied only
political struggles mainly. It was very late to have revolutionary way for the Southern revolution (
1956:
• The Le Duan ‘’Outline for Southern Revolution’’ appeared, but not yet outline by the Central
Committee). It was also very slow to have combination of political and military struggles, even
though Vietnamese revolutionaries had had good experiences of revolutionary violence in the
August Revolution -1945. The political movements from 1954-56 and 1957-1959 were only political
movements without armed struggle! All of them were suppressed bloodily by Saigon Army and
Police.
• The 15th Central resolution of the Party( 1-1959) has launched the ideology of revolutionary
violence for the South. Analyzing dialectically the balance of power in 1959 to reconfirm favorable
moment of the simultaneous uprisings ( “ Dong Khoi ”).
• In August 1959, in Tra Bong and western Quang Ngai uprising had the important significance. In
January 1960, the uprisings in Ben Tre ( Dinh Thuy, Binh Khanh, Phuoc Hiep,…) started the Dong
Khoi in the Mekong delta.
• Analyzing the favorable moment for the 1959-1960 Dong Khoi
Simultaneous uprisings:
• + American/ Saigon side:
• - Strength: + Regular army (100,000 troops); police, system of local
government, American support,…
• - Weakness: +Political failure: the mass did not support government
( unjust cause);
• + Revolutionary side:
• -Strength: + Just cause( the mass has supported…) + good cadres,
good system of local Party,...; strong political force.
• - Weakness: + No armed forces/ weapons,…
So, having not yet favorable moment in entire South VN; but there
were favorable moments in many localities in SVN.
• c/The significances for the victory of the
Dong Khoi:
• + Defeating the Eisenhower strategy: the
Unilateral war failed down!
• + Changing posture of the Southern revolution
from defensive to attacking on the basis of
revolutionary violence.
• + Learning some experiences of revolutionary
violence.
• 2/ Defeating the special war strategy by President
Kennedy and President Johnson (1960-1965):
• a/ The special war strategy: .
• What was the bi-polar world order and its influences to Viet
Nam? The Soviet –USA : only the “cold war”. The “hot war”
was only in the third world. The case of Vietnam: Applying
the escalation of war ideology in the Viet Nam war.
• President Kennedy applied the “Flexible Response” global
strategy with 3 wars: the Special war (the war of the
American without the attendance of the American army),
the Local war ( Limited war) and the All-out war( similar to
the world war).
• The special war :
• + Building up the stronger Saigon army
• + The new tactics: “the helicopter tactic”, “the
armored personnel carrier ( tank) tactic”;
• +Establishing the system of the strategic
hamlets ( 18,000 as planned) to perform the
slogan “bail water out…for catching fishes”:
• b/ Defeating the “special war” strategy ( Kennedy and Johnson ):
• Applying the methodology: 2 feet, 3 arrows ( “one point of three
attacks), 3 regions, 3 armies,…
• The Ap Bac victory( 1/1963): ability to beat the special war. For the
first time “the helicopter ”, “the armored personnel carrier” tactics
were defeated by revolutionary troops.
• The victories of Binh Gia, Ba Gia , Dong Xoai, Deo Nhong , An Lao
from the late 1964 until the mid-1965 demonstrated the ability to
win the Saigon regular army in the special war. They would lead to
the unavoidable collapse of the special war.
• The political movements in urban and rural areas, especially
student, worker, Buddhist movements in Saigon –Hue,...
• The system of strategic hamlets in rural area collapsed basically
until the late 1963.
• c/ The significances :
• + Defeating the special strategy was the
second strategic victory
• + Changing the balance of power in the South.
The first step for the escalation of war failed
down. The American had passively changed
into the higher step of the local war strategy.
• 3/Defeating the local war strategy in the South and the war of
destruction in the North by President Johnson (1965-1968):

• a/ The local war strategy: .

• On the failed posture of the special war, President Johnson had to

change into the local war with the direct attendance of American
and allied armies ( South Korean, Australian, …).

• The American performed the counterattacks within two arrows: “

search and destroy” and “ rural pacification” in order to destroy the
revolutionary regular forces ( “ to break “the backbone of the VC”)
and “to win the heart and the mind of peasants” for controlling
population and land in the rural area.
• Analyzing the balance of power in 1965:
• + American/ Sai Gon side:
• - Strength: + Regular army (180,000 US+ 600,000 Saigon troops;);
American support ( modern weapon, US dollars,…)
• - Weakness: +Political failure ( unjust cause war); passive posture of
failure in the special war.
• + Revolutionary side:
• -Strength: + Just cause war/ the great rear in the North VN /strong
political force/ the supports of international socialism and
progressive forces. VN could prolong the war in order to win exactly
in every step.
• - Weakness: + Poor economy, limitation of modern weapons, …
• So, the Vietnamese could win the Local war in the long-term war!
b/ Defeating the local war in the South and the war of destruction in the North
- Totally, in 1965: 180,000 American troops – 600, 000 Saigon troops.
In 1968 : 543,000 American troops and 800, 000 Saigon troops
The 1965-1966 dry season: 450 “search and destroy” operations; the 1966-67
dry season : 895 “search and destroy” operations, especially 3 key operations :
Attleboro, Cedar Falls and Junction city operations ( 35,000 American troops +
10,000 Saigon troops). All of American counter-attack operations failed down.
Malcolm Browne, journalist, decided Westmoreland’s strategy was “like a
sledgehammer on a floating cork, somehow the cork refused to stay down” (
Most of
the “search and destroy” operations could not search for VC troops to destroy! )
• The Vietnamese defeated most of these operations for continuing
development of the attacking posture. The campaigns of rural
pacification were also collapsed step by step.
• In the North, the war of destruction by naval and air forces ( from
1965-1968) failed down heavily.
• In the early 1968 the balance of power was changed in favorable
direction to revolutionary force in Viet Nam.
• Utilizing the favorable moment in the early Spring- 1968, the
Vietnamese forces launched the general offensive and uprisings for
attacking simultaneously most of cities, downtowns in the South.
The revolutionaries started to send the war into urban area of the
South. Due to some great mistakes, the revolutionary troops had to
sacrifice a lot, but basically it was the strategic victory. The
American had to stop the local war strategy.
• c/ Significances:
• -Defeating completely the local war was the
3rd strategic victory of Viet Nam in the Viet Nam
war.
• - The American had to de-escalate the war
and accept the four- side Paris peace talk with the
Vietnamese revolutionaries. President Johnson
was enforced to stop the sending of American
troops into the South.
•
• 4/Defeating the Vietnamization of the war strategy by
President Nixon (1969-1972):
• a/ The Vietnamization of the war strategy:
• Richard Nixon launched the new global strategy so-called as
“the Nixon doctrine”: (+ the US strength +Readiness to
negotiate + Sharing the responsibility). “American power +
skillful diplomacy”. Nixon tried to play “the chess of China”
on the Asian table.
• On the failed posture of the local war with half million
American troops, President Nixon had to change into the
new strategy so-called as Vietnamization of the war with
the step-by- step withdrawal of American army out of Viet
Nam.
• The Vietnamization of the war strategy was filled
with deep contradictions. Nixon wanted to de-
escalate the war, but on the stronger posture to
win the war. It was very unreasonable. Based on
the maximal increase of fire-power, he wanted to
overcome this military contradiction.
• The protection of South Viet Nam could be
ensured only if Laos and Cambodia were
integrated the US sphere of influence. Therefore
the Vietnamization of the war had to lead the
Indochinization of war.
• b/ Defeating the Vietnamization of the war strategy in the South
and the second war of destruction in the North

• In 1969, American troops started to counter-attack the rural area

and control more and more population and land. Revolutionaries
lost the liberated zones, especially in the Mekong delta.

• In 1970, revolutionary forces defeated the great operations by

100,000 American –Saigon troops to Cambodia. In 1971
Vietnamese revolutionaries continue to win the Lam Son -719
operations in the Southern Laos by 45,000 American –Saigon
troops. The Indochinization of the war collapsed basically. In 1972
Vietnamese revolutionaries launched the Spring-Summer
campaigns to counter-attack the Saigon troops in Quang Tri,
highland and Southeastern areas of the South.
• In the North, although there were lots of heavy damages from the
American bombing, the Vietnamese continued to win the second war of
destruction by naval and air forces ( from April to December, 1972),
especially the 12-day bombing in Ha Noi and Hai Phong cities. Nixon could
not change the will of Vietnamese people. The failure of the B52s in North
Viet Nam compelled Nixon to halt the bombing and return to Paris
negotiating table.

• The diplomatic struggle in the Paris peace talk from 1968 to 1972,
Vietnamese delegation developed the wining posture of military political
victory from Viet Nam for attacking American-Saigon delegations.
• The Paris-1973 agreement (“ the Agreement on the Cessation of the
War and the Restoration of Peace in Vietnam”) was the great turning
point of the Vietnam War. The American army must withdraw out of Viet
Nam.
• c/ Significances:
• - The Paris-1973 agreement was the great
strategic victory of the Vietnamese people
bringing to the period of final victory: The
American Army went out; the imbalance of
power in South Viet Nam appeared in favorable
direction to revolutionary forces. The Saigon
would collapse.
• - The U.S should respect the fundamental
national rights of the Vietnamese people.
•
• 5/Defeating the final efforts of the Vietnamization for liberating
the whole South Viet Nam(1973-1975):
• a/ Balance of power after the Paris agreement.
• Imbalance of power in favorable direction to Vietnamese
revolutionaries: Before the US, Saigon Armies could not win. Now,
the American army withdrew; the Saigon army would collapse !
• The American and the Saigon regime wanted to destroy the Paris
agreement in order to perform the rural pacification and defeating
revolutionary forces partly. Nixon had declared that the Thieu
administration was recognized as “the sole legitimate government
of South Viet nam”. The Saigon government violated the cease-fire
and both sides tried to gain control of as much territory as possible.
• Recognizing exactly situation of the war for releasing the new way
of revolutionary violence.
• b/ The general offensive and uprisings in the 1975
Spring.
• After the Paris Agreement, the US and Saigon had chosen the
military solution. The defeats of 1974 did not diminished their
aggressiveness! In December 1974 there were victories in some
provinces. Particularly, the revolutionary victory of Phuoc Long (1-
1975) had the turning significance of Saigon-side weakness.
• The Tay Nguyen Campaign ( March 10th – 12th ):
The Buon Ma Thuot victory of March 10th,1975 had the great
significance. It has led to the sudden mutation for imbalance of
power. The SVN from the two- year of 1975-76 to only a year of 1975.
Only during 1975, the final general offensive and uprisings would be
finished.
• The Hue- Da Nang Campaign ( March 5th – April 2nd ):
For the new project of 1975 liberation, this campaign would liberate Quang
Tri, Thua Thien provinces and Hue, Da Nang cities.

• The Ho Chi Minh Campaign ( April 26th – 30th ):

• In the early April-1975, the Saigon forces regrouped around Sai Gon in
defending the key transportation of Phan Rang-Xuan Loc. They lost the will
of fighting to defend the Saigon regime. On 21 April, 1975 President
Nguyen Van Thieu had to resign. There were a large imbalance of power in
Saigon battles: Saigon army having only 5 divisions; revolutionary army
about 5 army corps. In such favorable conditions, revolutionary forces
defeated the Saigon army in the best way for limiting ravages of the city:
surrounding to defeat divisions of regular army outside city; there were
only small battles inside city. April 30th , 1975 Saigon was liberated . May
1st ,1975 the Mekong delta was completely liberated. The Vietnamese
people won the Viet Nam War!
• III/ Significances, Reasons:
• 1/ Significances: Click to add text
• -For the Vietnamese:
• The great turning point in Vietnamese history (
Defeating the Viet Nam war would lead to the
southern liberation, the unification of the country, the
era of independence and freedom and comprehensive
development towards socialism)
• - For the world:
• The neo-colonialism that collapsed in Vietnam would
lead to the basic changes for the global strategy of the
American in Asia.
• 2/ Reasons for the victory:
• a/ Subjective:
• The political leadership; Vietnamese military
arts ( strategy, tactics,…):
• + The attacking military strategy and the
military art of knowing how to win in every
step exactly defeating ideology for the
escalation of war in condition of bipolar
world order.
• + “Formula to win” or the revolutionary
methodology and way. Ideology of “synthetic
revolutionary violence”.
• The heroism of Vietnamese people ( the
population from both the North-South,
Army,…developing the Vietnamese tradition of
resistant struggles against foreign invaders).
• b/ Objective:
• The international solidarity and supports
to the Vietnamese people: Soviet Union,
China, other socialist countries and the
progressive peoples in the world, including
the progressive American (the anti-war
movement in the US,…).