Draginol Draginol

Should making Europe like us be a campaign issue?

Should making Europe like us be a campaign issue?

How doing what France wants helped cause the Vietnam nightmare

In American politics, presidential candidates like Howard Dean stress the need of getting other countries to like us "again". Do you think that French candidates sweat whether the United States likes France? In fact, the United States has a 200+ year obsession with wanting other countries to like us or to accept us.

The upper crusts of the American life have traditionally felt scorn and embarrassment at the "crass" culture of the United States. In the United States, the middle class has always ruled the day. And to those elites, who consider their tastes and intellects much more refined, such a situation is abhorrent.

As a result, American leaders, particularly on the left, have generally gone to great lengths to appease "their betters" in Europe and in particular western Europe. Most Americans have no idea how much we have suffered as a result of politicians, like Howard Dean, wanting to be accepted and liked by countries like France.

Let's take Vietnam as an example since those who want us to do what France would have us do use to compare the situation with Iraq with. The implication is, if we just listened to the wise, sagely advice of our "allies" in France we wouldn't be in this "Vietnam-like" mess.

But Vietnam, in a nutshell, was a result of trying to placate the French. The more you know the history, the more infuriating it gets. In 1944, the OSS worked with Vietnamese nationals such as Ho Chi Min against the Japanese. We trained them to try to help liberate Indochina from the Japanese in World War II.

But where things get interesting is France's behavior. It's not commonly known that France was an Axis power for most of World War II. "Vichy France" is treated as some sort of puppet but it was an active participant in World War II as an Axis power. Most history books gloss over France's behavior in South East Asia. But in fact, France actively aided the Japanese, a fellow Axis power, in Indochina. Most people aren't aware of this, they think after France got taken out in 1940 that they were essentially like a chess piece off the board. In actuality they switched sides and from 1940 to 1944 they fought for the Germans and Japanese. Only after those bloody Anglo-Saxxons (UK/USA) conquered, er liberated France for Charles De Gaulle (and boy he sure showed his appreciation didn't he?) and his small contingent of "Free French" did France nominally return to being an "ally". And that was in the last 6 months or so of the war in Europe.

This is important because it sets up everything that happened next. So World War II ends and in the chaos that followed in Indochina, Ho Chi Min, an ally of the United States, sets up the Republic of Vietnam...

And then the French return.

Unlike Britain who started freeing its colonies and the United States who made the Philippines an independent country in 1946, the French wanted to keep their empire and fought tooth and nail before losing it.

The first thing the French did when they got back in force to Vietnam was arm the un-repatriated Japanese troops to "police" the population. Think about that. After fighting for their freedom from brutal Japanese occupiers while the Vichy French stood back and let it happen, the French return and rather than make clear that thought the Axis was an evil thing, they arm the Japanese again. They only stopped doing this because the Americans and British threw a fit about it. Most Americans on the ground believed that the French had no business in Indochina after their behavior during the war. They had seen the bravery and nationalism of the Vietnamese. To put it in perspective, Italy lost more troops fighting on behalf of the allies than the French did and Italy wasn't given back their various overseas possessions. But having France like us was apparently more important than doing the right thing in Indochina at the time.

Eventually France alienated Ho Chi Min who fled to the hills and began a guerilla war. The United States, wanting to support its "ally" France intervened in increasing ways which culminated in what we call the Vietnam war.

The United States, by no means, is blameless in the matter. But if we're going to start comparing the current situation with Iraq with Vietnam then let's not cherry pick. Let's remember that the whole ugly mess was largely caused by doing what France wanted. Hoping that they would like us more if we did.

update: The commenting system seems to be a bit messed up, should be fixed soon  In the meantime, you can email me and I'll try to respond in a follow-up.

update 2: okay, commenting fixed. comment away!

41,540 views 29 replies
Reply #26 Top
Making Europe like us should never be a campaign issue.

Making Europe respect us maybe should.

That's a two way issue. You must respect other countries and treat them with that respect for them to return it. I think that if the US started treating other countries with respect then they would begin to like it more. To add/reply to some of bigshot3754's comments

4) America through it's agencies and from top levels of governments has organised coups to overthrow elected governments. Chile being an excellent example of this. They put Pinochet in power and 30k people go missing. How can countries respect the US when they are willing to do this? America refuses to even answer such charges and people like Kissinger will never have to pay for their actions.

5) America tried to bully the UN into passing a resolution authorising war is weapons of mass destruction were not handed over. When it couldn't produce proof it bypassed the UN. Treated the UN and it's valid questions with no respect. When the war was over it continued to rub salt into the wounds by rewards rebuilding projects to American companies, refusing to allow the UN have any say in the rebuilding. America has no respect for the wishes of the world community so why does it feel surprised when they have no respect for it?

6) I would agree with this. Weapons of Mass Destruction was purely an excuse. I believe America made the right decision though. Saddam would easily have become a threat in the future and the Iraqi people were repressed. But they've only swapped one set of masters for another. Why does America refuse to respect the authority of the UN and give it a say in the rebuilding? It could have done so from immediately after the war and the world would have respected America for doing what it felt it had to do, now the world thinks America is trying to control Iraqi oil and dominate the muslim middle east.

7) Here is a classic case of America really failing to respect world opinion. The UN court for human rights has been ratified by enough countries world wide to bring it into being. A court founded to take those responsible for genocide, terrorism and repressing people to justice. Not only does America refuse to be bound by it, but it then bribes and threathens other nations to exempt it. How can anyone respect a country which does that?

So I say to Americans, don't waste election energy on a campaign issue of making France like you. It's pointless. Focus on gaining some respect for your country and on why the world doesn't respect you. That's far more important and countries will like you because of it.

Paul.
Reply #27 Top
Re: America's history in rebuilding nations, the two efforts I'm aware of are generally regarded as sucesses: Japan and the Marshall Plan in Europe. The other countries mentioned here were not part of any US supported rebuilding process that I'm aware of. Kosovo and Bosnia I believe are in the hands of the UN.

Different circumstances and cultures so I'm not comparing post WWII Japan and Western Europe, Germany specifically, to Iraq which will be a much more problematic prospect for a variety of reasons.

As for US involvement in Vietnam. I doubt it was to please the French. They were out of there in what, 1954? Don't forget the 50's was the era of McCarthy and communists were to be hunted and routed out at home and abroad. This carried over into the 60's. The domino theory and all that. Anticommunism and other factors fueled US involvement in Vietnam, but to please the French? I don't think so. Nevertheless, that didn't stop France from criticising US involvement in Vietnam, conveniently forgetting its own recent history in the area.

As for Frrance's history with the US during the Revolutionary War, the French King was all for deposing the power of a monarchy as long as it was the English monarchy, the old enemy of France. It certainly wasn't out of a commitment to democracy and a republican form of government.