US-Vietnam Relations

Amanda C. Demmer
{"title":"US-Vietnam Relations","authors":"Amanda C. Demmer","doi":"10.1093/acrefore/9780199329175.013.612","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is a truism in the history of warfare that the victors impose the terms for postwar peace. The Vietnam War, however, stands as an exception to this general rule. There can be no doubt that with its capture of the former South Vietnamese capitol on April 30, 1975, the Democratic Republic of Vietnam won unequivocal military victory. Thereafter, the North achieved its longtime goal of reuniting the two halves of Vietnam into a new nation, the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (SRV), governed from Hanoi. These changes, however, did not alter the reality that, despite its military defeat, the United States still wielded a preponderant amount of power in global geopolitics. This tension between the war’s military outcome and the relatively unchanged asymmetry of power between Washington and Hanoi, combined with the passion the war evoked in both countries, created a postwar situation that was far from straightforward. In fact, for years the relationship between the former adversaries stood at an uneasy state, somewhere between war and peace. Scholars call this process by which US-Vietnam relations went from this nebulous state to more regular bilateral ties “normalization.”\n Normalization between the United States and Vietnam was a protracted, highly contentious process. Immediately after the fall of Saigon, the Gerald Ford administration responded in a hostile fashion by extending the economic embargo that the United States had previously imposed on North Vietnam to the entire country, refusing to grant formal diplomatic recognition to the SRV, and vetoing the SRV’s application to the United Nations. Briefly in 1977 it seemed as though Washington and Hanoi might achieve a rapid normalization of relations, but lingering wartime animosity, internal dynamics in each country, regional transformations in Southeast Asia, and the reinvigoration of the Cold War on a global scale scuttled the negotiations.\n Between the fall of 1978 and late 1991, the United States refused to have formal normalization talks with Vietnam, citing the Vietnamese occupation of Cambodia and the need to obtain a “full accounting” of missing American servicemen. In these same years, however, US-Vietnamese relations remained far from frozen. Washington and Hanoi met in a series of multilateral and bilateral forums to address the US quest to account for missing American servicemen and an ongoing refugee crisis in Southeast Asia. Although not a linear process, these discussions helped lay the personal and institutional foundations for US-Vietnamese normalization.\n Beginning in the late 1980s, internal, regional, and international transformations once again rapidly altered the larger geopolitical context of US-Vietnamese normalization. These changes led to the resumption of formal economic and diplomatic relations in 1994 and 1995, respectively. Despite this tangible progress, however, the normalization process continued. After 1995 the economic, political, humanitarian, and defense aspects of bilateral relations increased cautiously but significantly. By the first decade of the 21st century, US-Vietnamese negotiations in each of these areas had accelerated considerably.","PeriodicalId":105482,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of American History","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of American History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199329175.013.612","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

It is a truism in the history of warfare that the victors impose the terms for postwar peace. The Vietnam War, however, stands as an exception to this general rule. There can be no doubt that with its capture of the former South Vietnamese capitol on April 30, 1975, the Democratic Republic of Vietnam won unequivocal military victory. Thereafter, the North achieved its longtime goal of reuniting the two halves of Vietnam into a new nation, the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (SRV), governed from Hanoi. These changes, however, did not alter the reality that, despite its military defeat, the United States still wielded a preponderant amount of power in global geopolitics. This tension between the war’s military outcome and the relatively unchanged asymmetry of power between Washington and Hanoi, combined with the passion the war evoked in both countries, created a postwar situation that was far from straightforward. In fact, for years the relationship between the former adversaries stood at an uneasy state, somewhere between war and peace. Scholars call this process by which US-Vietnam relations went from this nebulous state to more regular bilateral ties “normalization.” Normalization between the United States and Vietnam was a protracted, highly contentious process. Immediately after the fall of Saigon, the Gerald Ford administration responded in a hostile fashion by extending the economic embargo that the United States had previously imposed on North Vietnam to the entire country, refusing to grant formal diplomatic recognition to the SRV, and vetoing the SRV’s application to the United Nations. Briefly in 1977 it seemed as though Washington and Hanoi might achieve a rapid normalization of relations, but lingering wartime animosity, internal dynamics in each country, regional transformations in Southeast Asia, and the reinvigoration of the Cold War on a global scale scuttled the negotiations. Between the fall of 1978 and late 1991, the United States refused to have formal normalization talks with Vietnam, citing the Vietnamese occupation of Cambodia and the need to obtain a “full accounting” of missing American servicemen. In these same years, however, US-Vietnamese relations remained far from frozen. Washington and Hanoi met in a series of multilateral and bilateral forums to address the US quest to account for missing American servicemen and an ongoing refugee crisis in Southeast Asia. Although not a linear process, these discussions helped lay the personal and institutional foundations for US-Vietnamese normalization. Beginning in the late 1980s, internal, regional, and international transformations once again rapidly altered the larger geopolitical context of US-Vietnamese normalization. These changes led to the resumption of formal economic and diplomatic relations in 1994 and 1995, respectively. Despite this tangible progress, however, the normalization process continued. After 1995 the economic, political, humanitarian, and defense aspects of bilateral relations increased cautiously but significantly. By the first decade of the 21st century, US-Vietnamese negotiations in each of these areas had accelerated considerably.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美越关系
战争史上的一个不言自明的事实是,战胜国强加了战后和平的条件。然而,越南战争是这一普遍规律的一个例外。毫无疑问,1975年4月30日,越南民主共和国占领了前南越首都,赢得了明确的军事胜利。此后,朝鲜实现了其长期目标,将越南的两个部分统一为一个新的国家——越南社会主义共和国(SRV),由河内统治。然而,这些变化并没有改变这样一个现实,即尽管美国在军事上失败了,但它仍然在全球地缘政治中拥有压倒性的力量。战争的军事结果与华盛顿和河内之间相对不变的权力不对称之间的紧张关系,再加上战争在两国引发的激情,造成了战后的局势远非直截了当。事实上,多年来,这两个昔日对手之间的关系一直处于一种介于战争与和平之间的不稳定状态。学者们把美越关系从模糊状态走向更正常的双边关系的过程称为“正常化”。美越关系正常化是一个旷日持久、充满争议的过程。在西贡沦陷后,杰拉尔德·福特政府立即采取了敌对的方式,将美国之前对北越实施的经济禁运扩大到整个国家,拒绝给予SRV正式的外交承认,并否决了SRV向联合国的申请。1977年,华盛顿和河内似乎有可能迅速实现关系正常化,但长期的战时敌意、两国的内部动态、东南亚地区的变化以及冷战在全球范围内的复苏,使谈判破裂。在1978年秋至1991年底期间,美国拒绝与越南进行正式的正常化谈判,理由是越南占领了柬埔寨,并且需要获得失踪美国军人的“全面统计”。然而,就在这些年里,美越关系远未冻结。华盛顿和河内在一系列多边和双边论坛上会面,以解决美国寻求解释失踪美国军人和东南亚持续的难民危机的问题。尽管这不是一个线性过程,但这些讨论为美越关系正常化奠定了个人和制度基础。从20世纪80年代末开始,内部、区域和国际的转变再次迅速改变了美越正常化的更大地缘政治背景。这些变化导致两国分别在1994年和1995年恢复了正式的经济和外交关系。然而,尽管取得了这一具体进展,正常化进程仍在继续。1995年以后,双边关系在经济、政治、人道主义和国防方面的发展谨慎而显著。到21世纪的第一个十年,美越在这些领域的谈判都大大加快了。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Environmental History of New England Atlantic History Death and Dying in the Working Class Civil War Regiments Red Summer and Early 20th-Century Race Massacres
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1