The turning point in history for Vietnam all began in Geneva, Switzerland during the year 1954 in the Geneva Conference. The Geneva Accords both put an end to the Indochina War and set in motion the divide of territory in Vietnam. The Geneva Accord was an obligatory agreement stating Vietnam was to be separated at the 17th parallel, a line of separation, into two distinct territories. Vietnam was now separated into North and South Vietnam, the communist north and the south, which was anti-communist. Ho Chi Minh controlled North Vietnam, better known as the Democrat Republic of Vietnam, with its capital in Hanoi. Whereas in South Vietnam, better known as the Republic of Vietnam with Saigon as its capital, Ngo Dihn Diem commanded the South Vietnamese. Even with the different viewpoints on how each commander believes Vietnam should be controlled by their governing styles, however both Ho Chi Minh and Ngo Dihn Diem display overwhelming support by maintaining the overall objective of sovereignty and self-sufficiency for the Vietnamese people. Both their leadership styles and personal attributes enabled both of them to enter into the spirit of the Vietnamese people and gather together support. The leadership of both, Ho Chi Minh and Ngo Dihn Diem, in the perspective of Vietnamese culture will be analyzed. Was their leadership style a success or failure?
Ho Chi Minh and Ngo Dihn Diem were devoted to the Vietnam regions and despite their differences; preferably Ho Chi Minh and Ngo Dihn Diem wanted unity for their country. They wanted Vietnam to stay undivided, to be whole once again. In comparison to each other, their childhoods were quite different, which may explain their strong yet different directions in captivating, motivating, enco...
... middle of paper ...
...f his charismatic energy and his overwhelming ability to put his people and their needs first. Ngo Dinh Diem was a selfish dictator; he made decisions he believed he would benefit from and not his country as a whole. Diem did not respect the principles of his Buddhist citizens. Ngo Dinh Diem reign was short lived whereas Ho Dinh Diem was loved and respected.
Works Cited
Head, William. “Ngo Dinh Diem.” United States at War: Understanding Conflict and Society. 2008. ABC-CLIO. 29 Apr. 2008. Retrieved May 18, 2014, from http://www.coldwar.org/articles/50s/NgoDinhDiem.asp
Moss, G. D. (2010). Vietnam. An American Ordeal. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall
WHITMAN, A. (1969, September 4). Ho Chi Minh Was Noted for Success in Blending Nationalism and Communism. . Retrieved May 18, 2014, from http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/bday/0519.html#top
From the 17th century on, Vietnam had never had a steady period of peace or prosperity. Vietnam fell into a civil war between the 16th to early 19th century between three powerful lords, Trinh and Nguyen, and the Tay Son brothers. Next, French influence and invasions took over Vietnam and established Fre...
The Vietnam War: A Concise International History is a strong book that portrays a vivid picture of both sides of the war. By getting access to new information and using valid sources, Lawrence’s study deserves credibility. After reading this book, a new light and understanding of the Vietnam war exists.
The aim of this book by Bui Diem with David Chanoff is to present the Vietnam War told from a South Vietnamese perspective. The large-scale scope of the work concerns the fighting between North and South Vietnam over which party would run the country and wanting to become an independent state free from the Western powers. Diem's memoir contains in-depth details about his life and politics in Vietnam in 1940-1975. The book serves as a primary source in documenting the events in Vietnam during the war and as an autobiography of Diem's life. The purpose of this book is to give insight of the war through Diem's eyes and how it affected his life.
This basically sums up how the majority of people thought of Ngo Dinh Diem. He was a narrow leader only worried about gaining and keeping loyalty. Diem believed that he had a mandate of God to rule over Vietnam, and he did not have to earn the public's trust and admiration. Rather, these two items should be automatically bestowed. Diem thought the people owe him that much. The factors that led to his increased unpopularity and later demise are well documented in nearly all works on the Vietnam War. But is there more to the story? How did the people of Saigon, the ones that were most loyal, view their leader?
The Vietnam War to this day is thought of as a grim, long-lasting battle that took place between 1955 and 1975. The American people were never fond of this war, as they polled and constantly spoke out against the idea of being involved in Vietnam throughout the entire duration it took place. This war was fought between North Vietnam (with their Soviet, Chinese and other communist allies) and South Vietnam whose main supporter and ally was the United States. This paper will validate what this war was like for the American troops and all the diversity they were able to overcome. Ranging from the lack of American support, to the physical combat and hardships the soldiers had to face while on the battleground.
In the same vein, Zinoman in his forthcomong article, Nhân Văn–Giai Phẩm and Vietnamese “Reform Communism” during the 1950s: A Revisionist Interpretation, challenge a well established view about a NVGP movement, a surge of domestic political protest that peaked in the Democratic Republic of Vietnam during 1956 that takes its name from two incendiary journals – Nhân Văn [humanity] and Giai Phẩm [masterworks]. He points out that foreign scholars and local intellectuals who interested in NVGP affair succeed “in conveying a plausible image of NVGP as a robust movement of political dissent against the party-state” (Zinoman forthcoming 2011, 3). He argues that it caused from their narrow study upon a most dramatic statements of opposition of NVGP and failure to analyze, in any depth, the content of NVGP’s published writing (Zinoman forthcoming 2011, 4).
He was popular among his people and was a practical administrator for the “Great Leap Forward.” Chou En-Lai was a held a positive impact for America’s plan for containment of communism as he was largely responsible for the re-establishment of contacts with the West during Nixon’s presidency.
World War II and the Vietnam War are very different when it comes to their political factors. For example, during World War II two presidents were active in the war’s aim. President Franklin D. Roosevelt was the...
While, Mao Ze Dong, he was a prominent philosopher and founder of the People's Republic of China. He is one of the most important figures in the modern history of China. Mao Ze Dong practiced the socialist communism ideology. The ideology increased
The Vietnam War brought many tears and casualties to both the United States and Vietnam. Millions of soldiers lost their lives in the time consuming battle. On February 8, 1967 President Lyndon B. Johnson wrote a letter to Ho Chi Minh, Dictator of Vietnam at the time. President Johnson’s letter expresses his hopes of ending this conflict that has gone on so long in Vietnam. President Ho Chi Minh replied back on February 15, 1967 stating that it had been the United States that prolonged the wicked war. President Ho Chi Minh’s reply to President Johnson was the more persuasive of the two letters, because he appealed more to pathos, used stronger and bolder diction, and asked an important rhetorical question.
Herring begins his account with a summary of the First Indochina War. He reports that the Vietnamese resisted French imperialism as persistently as they had Chinese. French colonial policies had transformed the Vietnamese economic and social systems, giving rise to an urban middle class, however; the exploitation of the country and its people stimulated more radical revolutionary activity. Herring states that the revolution of 1945 was almost entirely the personal creation of the charismatic leader Ho Chi Minh. Minh is described as a frail and gentle man who radiated warmth and serenity, however; beneath this mild exterior existed a determined revolutionary who was willing to employ the most cold- blooded methods in the cause to which he dedicated his life. With the guidance of Minh, the Vietminh launched as a response to the favorable circumstances of World War II. By the spring of 1945, Minh mobilized a base of great support. When Japan surrendered in 1945, the Vietminh filled the vacuum. France and the Vietminh attempted to negotiate an agreement, but their goals were irreconcilable.
Both Mao and Gandhi made their countries what they are today socially, economically, and politically. Both by taking the same things and using them in different ways. Gandhi on one hand was more peaceful and did not believe in war. And wanted the whole of the country to unite as one. Mao on the other hand, was more military induced and used war to sometimes get what he wanted. China and India could not be what they are today with out Mao and Gandhi.
In order to give a just analysis, to give an examination of the Vietnam Counter-Culture, one would have to look to the preliminary causes, the debates and diplomacy of the youth themselves, and the reflection where this has influenced today’s youth. I am proud to say that as an American I am proud of the simple origins of the peace and love philosophy. Coupled with the causes of freedom, comes a cause for peace and love. Simply put, why can’t we be friends? Why can’t we love our neighbors in the world? Why not peace and love?
When Vietnamese revolutionary Ho Chi Minh and his political organization, the Vietminh, seized control of their independence from France United States Politicians saw it as another communist take over. When really Ho was more a nationalist than a communist. All Minh wanted was for the United States to recognize its independence from France and to send aid to help it reach its nationalistic goals. "Before the Cold War Ho and the Vietmin...
...ism is not love. Communism is a hammer which we use to crush the enemy.” Mao did what was more important to the Chinese society no matter the consequences to achieve it. Mao did a lot of good things for China, but the overall impact was in great amount that the good part couldn't cover up the bad parts in its revolution. One of the major impacts was his bad start of “The Great Leap Forward,” then to “The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution” had to make up the losses. Many historians see this revolution was a failure, even though he did accomplish some of its goals. When Mao had power in the hands, he had to deal with numbers of interventions, from beginning to end. He faced criticisms when his first idea failed. Then with intervention of the US. At last the revolution changed people way of thinking, doing and equality. Everything was done for the good of China.