South Vietnam

  • Ngo Vinh Long
Part of the Problems in Focus: Manchester book series (PIFM)


The name South Vietnam was first officially used by the United States in August 1954 when it decided to establish a separate state south of the seventeenth parallel in direct contravention of the Geneva agreements.1 Two of the most fundamental provisions of the agreements were the establishment of the seventeenth parallel as a temporary dividing line between two military regrouping zones, with ‘the People’s Army of Vietnam forces to the north of the line and the forces of the French Union to the south’ (article 1), and the projected reunification of the country through internationally supervised general elections scheduled for July 1956 (article 14 and the final declaration).


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and References

  1. 3.
    James Gavin (General), Crisis Now (New York, 1968) pp. 57–9.Google Scholar
  2. 4.
    Fore details see: Truong Nhu Tang A Viet Cong Memoir: An Inside Account of the War and Its Aftermath (New York, 1986) pp. 234–90.Google Scholar
  3. 7.
    Van Tien Dung, Our Great Spring Victory: An Account of the Liberation of South Vietnam (New York, 1977).Google Scholar
  4. 12.
    George McT. Kahin, Intervention: How America Became Involved in Vietnam (New York, 1987), pp. 96–8 (hereafterGoogle Scholar
  5. 12.
    Marilyn B. Young The Vietnam Wars, 1945–1990 (New York, 1991), pp. 55–7 (hereafter Vietnam Wars)Google Scholar
  6. 12.
    Gabriel Kolko, Anatomy of a War: Vietnam, the United States and the Modern Historical Experience (New York, 1994) pp. 92–6 (hereafter Anatomy).Google Scholar
  7. 13.
    Quynh Cu, Dong Khoi o Ben Tre (General Uprisings in Ben Tre) (Hanoi, 1985) (hereafter Dong Khoi) pp. 24–6.Google Scholar
  8. 16.
    Jayne S. Werner and Luu Duan Huynh (eds), The Vietnam War: Vietnamese and American Perspectives(New York, 1993) p.xxii (hereinafter Vietnamese and American Perspectives).Google Scholar
  9. 19.
    Nguyen Khac Nhan, ‘Policy of Key Rural Agrovilles’, Asian Culture vol. 3, nos. 3 and 4 (July-December 1969)p.32;Google Scholar
  10. 19.
    Milton E. Osborne, Strategic Hamlets in South Vietnam(Ithaca, New York 1965), p. 22;Google Scholar
  11. 19.
    William A. Nighswonger Rural Pacification in Vietnam (New York, 1966) p. 46 (hereafter Rural Pacification). Colonel Nighswonger was a senior AID (Agency for International Development, a CIA front) officer for the Pacification Programme.Google Scholar
  12. 24.
    Truong Nhu Tan, A Viet Cong Memoir: An Inside Account of the Vietnam War and its Aftermath (New York, 1985) pp. 70–80 (hereinafter Viet Cong Memoir). Also see the appendix on pp. 319–28 for complete transcripts of the manifesto and programme of the Front.Google Scholar
  13. 28.
    Vietnam Wars pp. 82–4; for the use of chemicals to destroy crops, also see Seymour M. Hersh, `Our Chemical War’, The New York Review of Books 25 April 1968;Google Scholar
  14. 28.
    Ngo Vinh Long,‘Leaf Abscission?’in Barry Weisberg (ed.),Ecocide in Indochina (New York, 1970)pp.54–63.Google Scholar
  15. 44.
    R.W. Apple Jr, ‘Vietnam Signs of Stalemate’, New York Times 7 August 1967, pp. 1, 14.Google Scholar
  16. 48.
    For an account of the election, see Francis H. Craighill III and Robert C. Zelnick, ‘Ballots or Bullets: What the 1967 Elections Could Mean’, in Vietnam: Matter for the Agenda (Los Angeles, 1968). For reports in the Saigon press, see Than Chung 16 August 1967; Chanh Dao, 3 October 1967.Google Scholar
  17. 49.
    Tran Bach Dang, ‘Mau Than: Cuoc Tong Dien Tap Chien Luoc’ (Mau Than (Tet Offensive): A Strategic General Rehearsal), Tap Chi Lich Su Quan Su ( Journal of Military History ), February 1988, pp. 57–64.Google Scholar
  18. 53.
    W. Averell Harriman, America and Russia in a Changing World (New York, 1971) pp. 136–40.Google Scholar
  19. 54.
    For the Pentagon admission, see Richard McCarthy, The Ultimate Folly (New York, 1969) pp. 49–50. For official Vietnamese documents and accounts of ecological damage and hunger, see 12 November, 17 November, 20 November, 26 November and 8 December 1970 issues of Tin Sang a Catholic Saigon daily. Also see the 2 December 1970 issue of Xay Dung the most pro-Thieu Catholic daily in Saigon.Google Scholar
  20. 58.
    Wilfred Burchett, Grasshoppers and Elephants: Why Viet Nam Fell (New York, 1977) pp. 144–5.Google Scholar
  21. 60.
    Tran Vu, ‘1971: Nam Phan Cong Thang Loi Gianh Quyen Chu Dong Chien Truong’ (1971: A Year of Successful Counter-offensives that Regained Initiatives on the Battlefronts’), Lich Su Quan Su April 1991, pp. 4–5.Google Scholar
  22. 63.
    Dong Chi ‘Le Duc Tho not ve mot so van de tong ket chien tranh va bien soan lich su quan su’ (Comrade Le Duc Tho discusses a number of questions on the General Assessment of the War and the Writing of Military History) Tap Chi Lich Su Quan Su (March 1988) pp. 1–10.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© David L. Anderson 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ngo Vinh Long

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations