Latest news with #SouthVietnam
Forbes
04-07-2025
- General
- Forbes
Will The EU Replace NATO As Europe's Defence Shield?
The USS New Jersey, an Iowa-class battleship serving the United States Navy, firing 16-inch shells ... More into the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) from the waters off the coast of South Vietnam, 30th September 1968. These were the first shells fired by the USS New Jersey in the Vietnam War. (Photo by) It looks like I will have to burn all the Biggles books I collected as a child and jettison any antique copies of 'Eagle' comic books, because there are reports that Britain and Germany are about to sign a defence co-operation agreement, ending a long stretch of history where they have been on opposing sides. Indeed, the entire literature of what George Orwell described in his essay 'Boys' Weeklies' could now be caught offside. For instance, the work of John Buchan, once Governor General of Canada, and well known as the author of the 'Thirty Nine Steps', may be especially dislodged by an agreement that casts Germany and Britain as best geopolitical friends, as many of his books, like those of Captain W.E. John, depend on the role of the indispensable British hero seeing off his German nemesis. An innovation on the part of Buchan, was the glamorous female mastermind, Hilda von Einem, who vies with the handsome Irish intriguer Dominic Medina (please do read 'Greenmantle' and the 'Three Hostages') as the foil to Richard Hannay. One of the significant moments of history when Britain and Germany (Prussia then) found themselves on the same side was the Battle of Waterloo, one of the great contests, where during a pounding from French guns Wellington's officers asked for orders he replied, 'there are no orders, except to stand firm to the last man'. One of the survivors was Henry Percy, aide de camp to Wellington, who after the Battle had to row halfway across the Channel with the news of the Duke's victory, as an absence of wind had halted his sloop. On arriving in England he found that many (in the City) already knew of the victory owing, allegedly, to a network of agents assembled by Nathaniel Rothschild who is said to have made a fortune on the event and thereby spawned the phrase 'buy on the sound of cannons'. It is a useful illustration of the roles of communications (social media today) and finance in war. Indeed, part of the reason that Germany and Britain are moving closer together on defence (France is even closer to each one militarily) is finance. Gone are the days when London and Berlin could afford to spend 9% of GDP building great battleships in the lead-up to the First World War (Margaret MacMillan's 'The War That Ended Peace' is worth a read), and now they must do with more meagre ambitions and newfound collaborations. In this context, the recent NATO Summit was a watershed as it signalled a headline commitment to 5% defence spending across NATO countries (as a % of GDP), something that would have been unthinkable four years ago. In Europe, there is a sense that some of the defence spending pledges amount to a 'fudge', and it is very clear that defence spending as a % of GDP does not translate into defence readiness. Of the European members of NATO, the UK, Greece, France, Poland, the Nordics and Baltics are the most defence ready, and some of them are already spending ambitiously. For example, Poland is set to reach a level of defence spending of 4% of GDP and has already struck a strategic military procurement partnership with South Korea. On the other hand, countries like Italy and especially Spain have been castigated for their reluctance to spend. Italy has talked of including investment in a bridge from the mainland to Sicily as defence infrastructure and in the case of Spain, it has apparently tried to 'kitchen sink' other tangential forms of spending into the defence segment. Still, the broad 5% target is a gamechanger, and is comprised of two parts – close to 3.5% on defence spending and then 1.5% on areas like cyber security and AI driven defence capabilities. Momentum will be boosted by the EU's Eur 150 bn lending facility for defence procurement, up to Eur 3bn in loans from the EIB (European Investment Bank), and the German government's significant augmentation of its defence budget. Still, this fiscal support leaves an enormous shortfall that will likely require capital from the private sector. In this respect, we are at the cross-over of geopolitical forces. NATO as an operating construct has been thrown into doubt by Donald Trump and the actions of his defence policymakers (the latest act being to deprive Ukraine of defensive missiles). As such, Article 5 no longer seems as watertight as it did in the early 2000's (it has only been invoked once, in September 2011, by Nick Burns, then US Ambassador to NATO). The impression many in Brussels have is that Europe will be left to defend itself from Russian aggression – there is now a parlour game amongst the various European intelligence agencies to estimate when a Russian incursion might occur. As a result, the EU will become a much bigger player in defence procurement (see the recent White Paper here), Europe's defence centric innovation economy will grow rapidly, and 'war bonds' will become a new asset for investors. Europe's main threat is most obviously Russia, in addition to cyberwar from further afield. The danger in the long-term is that it finds itself as the last bastion of democracy, amidst a range of large, autocratic countries. To return to Germany and Britain, anyone who reads the MacMillan books can't escape the recognition that the arms race between Germany and Britain over one hundred years ago, is now being repeated by the US and China. Ultimately Europe may count itself lucky to stay out of this contest.
Fox News
01-07-2025
- Politics
- Fox News
MORNING GLORY: A week that changed the world
"If, when the chips are down, the world's most powerful nation, the United States of America, acts like a pitiful, helpless giant, the forces of totalitarianism and anarchy will threaten free nations and free institutions throughout the world." That is an excerpt from President Richard Nixon's speech on April 30, 1970, when he announced the U.S. attacks on North Vietnamese-controlled areas inside Cambodia along the border with South Vietnam. This speech and the decision to strike across the South Vietnam-Cambodian border into the North Vietnamese sanctuaries in "neutral" Cambodia came six months after Nixon's November 3, 1969, speech appealing to the country's "great silent majority of my fellow Americans," and asking for their support as he began the "Vietnamization" of the long-running war he inherited when he took office in January 1969. More than a half million American troops were in Vietnam then, the result of eight consecutive years of escalation of the war and the commitment of combat troops under Presidents Kennedy and Johnson. Nixon knew that he could not simply pull out and allow South Vietnam to collapse, as President Biden did in Afghanistan in August of 2021. Fleeing any conflict and leaving allies in chaos and confusion meant not only defeat, but a crushing blow to America's standing in the world. Russian dictator Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine the second time, six months after the debacle in Kabul. Weakness and retreat by America emboldened our enemies to attack our allies. 10/7/24 was waiting for Israel down the road. An impotent America led inexorably to the massacre in Israel that day and to the Houthis terrorizing the global economy. Nixon also knew so long ago he could not achieve peace in Vietnam while allowing the Soviet and Chinese proxy of North Vietnam to operate out of Cambodia unmolested. Nixon asked for and got the support he needed from the majority of Americans, and it held steady even after the campus upheavals following the attacks in Cambodia. The shootings at Kent State University happened on May 4 following the April 30 address was just one of the many tragic demonstrations, riots and shootings that wracked the country in the years 1967-1972, awful outbursts of violence which included the assassinations of Dr. Martin Luther King and Senator Bobby Kennedy, Jr. Nixon held firm on all fronts in the face of withering criticism from Democrats who had long supported the war in Asia. Despite the violence and the collapse of legacy media objectivity, Nixon maintained his course and even escalated the bombing of North Vietnam when he needed to in order to obtain a peace agreement with North Vietnam, which was signed in January, 1973 after Nixon's landslide re-election in November of 1972. The middle of the country's political spectrum surged to support Nixon in 1972 even as the Democrats lurched left and nominated Senator George McGovern. Now President Trump has "escalated to de-escalate" by ordering the B-2s to fly from Missouri, take out hardened sites in Iran's nuclear weapons assembly line, and fly home. Trump's display of American reach and military power was followed quickly by a Trump-orchestrated cease-fire between Israel and Iran. Rumors of ongoing talks about expansion of the Abraham Accords from Trump's first term continue to multiply, and if they come to pass, "peace through strength" will be demonstrated, again, and a future Trump Presidential Library and Museum has another room to fill out. "Trump derangement syndrome" has taken such a toll on so many in the Beltway that they are unable to applaud this massive win for the United States, or any of the others that the past five months have revealed, but most especially the strikes on Iran's nuclear ambitions. Trump re-established the credibility of the threat of American military power and stood alongside the equal of any of our allies. Trump then rallied NATO to collectively increase their commitments to defense spending. Markets surged and trading partners like Canada retreated from extortionate trade barriers aimed at U.S. companies. At the same time that the president was confirming American power as a genuine and powerful force to be reckoned with abroad, his "One, Big Beautiful Bill" was moving forward with most of his domestic legislative agenda wrapped up within it. A nearly unbroken series of victories at the Supreme Court has also checked the most absurd of the unconstitutional overreaches of federal district court judges. At the same time, Democrats have nominated the most radical major party candidate for a major office —Zohran Mamdani to be mayor of New York City— while their aging hippies-wing held rallies around the country organized around the absurdist slogan "No Kings." June 2025 thus marks a turnaround for America and an energizing series of achievements for the country as we round into our 249th birthday. This month also marks a bottom for the Democrats, though it's a party perfectly capable of falling off a floor. Donald Trump, by contrast, is at the peak of his authority and gaining momentum, having closed the border and followed through on his major campaign promises. June 2025 marked neither a collapse of democracy nor a slide into autocracy for the U.S. It's a return to an America confident of its future, secure in its liberties, and enthusiastic about its future. Hugh Hewitt is a Fox News contributor, and host of "The Hugh Hewitt Show," heard weekdays from 3 pm to 6 pm ET on the Salem Radio Network, and simulcast on Salem News Channel. Hugh drives America home on the East Coast and to lunch on the West Coast on over 400 affiliates nationwide, and on all the streaming platforms where SNC can be seen. He is a frequent guest on the Fox News Channel's news roundtable hosted by Bret Baier weekdays at 6pm ET. A son of Ohio and a graduate of Harvard College and the University of Michigan Law School, Hewitt has been a Professor of Law at Chapman University's Fowler School of Law since 1996 where he teaches Constitutional Law. Hewitt launched his eponymous radio show from Los Angeles in 1990. Hewitt has frequently appeared on every major national news television network, hosted television shows for PBS and MSNBC, written for every major American paper, has authored a dozen books and moderated a score of Republican candidate debates, most recently the November 2023 Republican presidential debate in Miami and four Republican presidential debates in the 2015-16 cycle. Hewitt focuses his radio show and his column on the Constitution, national security, American politics and the Cleveland Browns and Guardians. Hewitt has interviewed tens of thousands of guests from Democrats Hillary Clinton and John Kerry to Republican Presidents George W. Bush and Donald Trump over his 40 years in broadcast, and this column previews the lead story that will drive his radio/ TV show today.
Al Jazeera
16-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Al Jazeera
The Take: How ICE raids echo US wars abroad, with Viet Thanh Nguyen
What does it mean to be the 'other'? Viet Thanh Nguyen, a South Vietnamese-born American writer links his personal story to US actions abroad and at home, discussing ICE raids, protests, and the war on Gaza, showing how these issues are deeply connected. In this episode: Episode credits: This episode was produced by Chloe K Li, Sonia Bhagat, and Haleema Shah with Phillip Lanos, Spencer Cline, Mariana Navarrete, Sari el-Khalili, Kisaa Zehra, Remas Alhawari, Marcos Bartolome, and guest host Natasha Del Toro. It was edited by Noor Wazwaz. Joe Plourde mixed this episode. The Take production team is Marcos Bartolome, Sonia Bhagat, Sari el-Khalili, Tamara Khandaker, Phillip Lanos, Chloe K Li, Ashish Malhotra, Haleema Shah, Khaled Soltan, Amy Walters, and Noor Wazwaz. Our editorial interns are Remas Alhawari, Kingwell Ma, Mariana Navarrete, and Kisaa Zehra. Our guest host is Kevin Hirten. Our engagement producers are Adam Abou-Gad and Vienna Maglio. Aya Elmileik is lead of audience engagement. Our sound designer is Alex Roldan. Joe Plourde mixed this episode. Our video editors are Hisham Abu Salah and Mohannad al-Melhem. Alexandra Locke is The Take's executive producer. Ney Alvarez is Al Jazeera's head of audio. Connect with us: @AJEPodcasts on Instagram, X, Facebook, Threads and YouTube
Yahoo
11-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
The fall of Saigon
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. The capture of Saigon – the capital of America's ally South Vietnam – by communist North Vietnamese forces on 30 April 1975, marked the end of the Vietnam War. The war had been fought between the two halves of the former French colony since 1955. The US had been deeply involved since 1965; almost three million Americans, mostly young conscripts, had fought against North Vietnam, which was backed by Russia and China, and the Viet Cong, the communist guerillas in the south. The US had spent billions of dollars – and 58,220 of its own soldiers' lives – to block the emergence of another communist regime in Asia. Vietnamese losses were vastly larger: about two million civilians and perhaps 1.3 million soldiers were killed on both sides during the conflict. But the departure of the last helicopters from the rooftop of the US embassy in Saigon has gone down in history as a symbol of American hubris and defeat. America's direct military involvement had ended in 1973, with the signing of the Paris Peace Accords. Washington knew that the peace wouldn't hold and the North was likely to win the war, but wanted, in the words of national security adviser Henry Kissinger, a "decent interval" between the US departure and the South's defeat. So the US continued to give financial and military aid. But involvement in Vietnam was by that time extremely unpopular in the US, and President Nixon's political career was soon to be ended by the Watergate scandal. By late summer 1974, Nixon had resigned, and Congress had cut military and economic aid to South Vietnam by 30%. The South Vietnamese government, led by President Nguyen Van Thieu, was corrupt and inefficient; it was struggling with runaway inflation, unemployment and rising rates of desertion from the army, as well as a heroin addiction epidemic. The North duly pressed home its advantage. In March 1975, it launched what was expected to be a two-year offensive to conquer South Vietnam. In the event, the South Vietnamese army soon crumbled. After capturing the central highlands, the North Vietnamese took Hue, about halfway between Saigon and the northern capital, Hanoi, and then Da Nang, the South's second-largest city, sparking a refugee exodus. Its forces pushed on to Saigon, a city largely untouched by the war until then. Realising the imminent danger, President Thieu resigned on 21 April, delivering a furious televised speech in which he accused Washington of having "sold" its ally to the communists. He fled to Taiwan, taking 15 tonnes of luggage, and later lived for a time in Surrey. President Ford, who had succeeded Nixon, had pleaded with Congress to release additional military aid, to no avail. On 23 April, Ford delivered a speech in New Orleans, in which he declared that America's involvement in Vietnam was now "finished". Four days later, Saigon was encircled by 100,000 North Vietnamese troops and Viet Cong. By now, America had evacuated some of its citizens from Saigon; but about 6,000 remained, along with large numbers of South Vietnamese closely associated with the US, to whom Ford said it owed a "profound moral obligation". On the morning of 29 April 1975, US forces launched "Operation Frequent Wind" to extract them. The code for the operation's launch was the declaration on US Armed Forces Radio that "the temperature in Saigon is 105 degrees and rising", followed by the playing of the song "White Christmas". On 28 April, North Vietnamese artillery had shut down Tan Son Nhut Air Base, from which 50,493 people had been evacuated. The only option available, therefore, was to use US military helicopters to ferry evacuees from the embassy in Saigon to 26 US navy vessels stationed about a 30-minute flight away in the South China Sea. A crowd of some 10,000 Vietnamese gathered outside the embassy, desperate for a flight out; some 2,500 more would-be evacuees were in the embassy compound. Marines guarded the embassy, lifting US citizens and a lucky few Vietnamese over the walls. As flights began taking off, the scenes were chaotic. Keyes Beech, an American war reporter, described being caught in the "seething mass" of bodies outside the embassy, "fighting for our lives, scratching, clawing, pushing ever closer to the wall". The military collapse had been rapid; by the morning of 29 April, North Vietnamese tanks were rolling through Saigon. And the US ambassador to Vietnam, Graham Martin, had deludedly believed that South Vietnam would cut a deal with Hanoi, so had ignored advice to expedite the evacuation. In light of this, Operation Frequent Wind was a remarkable feat: in less than 24 hours, the US evacuated more than 7,000 people, including more than 5,500 South Vietnamese. Some pilots flew for 19 hours straight. South Vietnamese helicopters carrying refugees joined US aircraft on the US navy carriers; about 45 military helicopters were reportedly pushed overboard to clear space for new arrivals. The last helicopter out of Saigon, just before 8am on 30 April, evacuated the Marine guards. Thousands of South Vietnamese – intelligence officers, special police – were left behind at the embassy. Although surprisingly few were executed, more than 200,000 South Vietnamese spent between three and 18 years in labour and re-education camps. Many more fled the country. By 30 April, Saigon, soon to be renamed Ho Chi Minh City, was under full North Vietnamese control. By the end of 1975, Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos were all under communist rule – which in Vietnam has endured to this day. In the 20 years that followed the fall of Saigon, about 800,000 Vietnamese refugees safely fled the communist regime, in one of the largest mass exoduses in modern history. Escaping over land was extremely difficult: Vietnam is bordered only by Cambodia (where the Khmer Rouge had taken control), China and Laos (both allies of Vietnam). So most refugees fled in small boats over the South China Sea – becoming known as the "boat people". Many made their way to Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand and Hong Kong; some reached Japan, or even Australia. Journeys were fraught with risk: boats were often unseaworthy and sank, or ran out of food and water; many were raided by pirates, mainly from Thailand, who raped women and killed those on board. It is estimated that 200,000 to 400,000 Vietnamese died at sea. In 1979, the UN declared a "grave crisis", and urged countries to take in refugees. Some 402,000 were eventually settled in the US; Australia and Canada also welcomed substantial numbers; about 19,000 came to the UK. Despite US public opinion initially being opposed to accepting refugees from Vietnam, 2.3 million people of Vietnamese extraction were living in the US by 2023.
New York Times
10-05-2025
- General
- New York Times
A Brass Bracelet With Both History and Meaning
Many memories were awakened this year, the 50th anniversary of America's withdrawal from Vietnam. Ralph Blumenthal, who covered the Vietnam War for The New York Times from November 1968 to February 1971, had more than memories. He brought home a brass bracelet from the Montagnard people of the Central Highlands, who sided with America and the non-Communist government of South Vietnam during their long, losing war with the Communist North. The bracelet symbolizes friendship and loyalty. Montagnard fighters cooperated with the U.S. Army Special Forces (the Green Berets) and the Central Intelligence Agency. So did reporters. 'It was a different era,' Mr. Blumenthal told me when I interviewed him in 2020 as he donated the bracelet and other artifacts from his time in Vietnam to the Museum at The Times. 'We were very cozy with the C.I.A. and the Special Forces.' On a reporting trip to the Highlands in 1970, Mr. Blumenthal took part in a fraternal induction ceremony, during which he received the bracelet. 'We'd drink a vaguely intoxicating, vomitous liquid out of a big vat and we'd put our naked foot on an ax blade lying flat on the ground,' he said. As Mr. Blumenthal told it, his Green Beret escort had said to a tribe member: 'This man here is from The New York Times. Do you know what that is?' 'And the guy said, so help me God: 'No. I don't know what that is, because I can't read. But people who know how to read, they know.''
