Viet Minh and Strategic Hamlets

From david.biggs@ucr.edu Tue Apr 26 16:14:00 2005

Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 16:13:11 -0700

From: David A Biggs <david.biggs@ucr.edu>

Reply-To: Vietnam Studies Group <vsg@u.washington.edu>

To: vsg@u.washington.edu

Subject: [Vsg] viet minh and strategic hamlets

I was reading a report about a strategic hamlet program at Kien Hoa(Ben Tre) by a US AID person, John O'Donnell, and he reported that besides Ngo Dinh Nhu as the central moving force, a number of younger"former Viet Minh" were centrally involved in planning the strategic hamlets from 1962, including "young major Tran Ngoc Chau".

Is there any credence to the idea of Viet Minh defectors working on the RVN strategic hamlet programs in 1962?

David

David A Biggs

6600 HMNSS Building - History

University of California - Riverside

Riverside CA 9252, 1 (951) 827-1877

From Edward.G.Miller@Dartmouth.EDU Wed Apr 27 12:19:55 2005

Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 15:19:25 -0400

From: Ed Miller <Edward.G.Miller@Dartmouth.EDU>

Reply-To: Vietnam Studies Group <vsg@u.washington.edu>

To: 'Vietnam Studies Group' <vsg@u.washington.edu>

Subject: RE: [Vsg] viet minh and strategic hamlets

David:

On Chau's involvement in the Strategic Hamlet program, see Philip Catton, DIEM'S FINAL FAILURE, pp. 134-136. See also Chau's own autobiographical account in PRELUDE TO TRAGEDY (Neese and O'Donnell, eds.). I believe Zalin Grant also has something on Chau and Strategic Hamlets in his FACING THE PHOENIX. It should be pointed out that O'Donnell was not the only American who was impressed with Chau and his Viet Minh background; indeed, Chau eventually became something of an oracle of counterinsurgency wisdom for those Americans in Vietnam eager to uncover the secret to the Communists' success. Daniel Ellsberg was among Chau's American admirers; see his memoir SECRETS, esp. pp. 169-170.

As far as I can tell, Chau was involved in the Hamlet program mainly at the level of implementation, in his capacity as chief of Kien Hoa/Ben Tre province. This is significant, but it suggests that he probably didn't have much influence over the theoretical formulation of the program. Besides Chau, there were at least a few other ex-Viet Minh who were also involved in the Hamlet program in various capacities. The most famous, of course, was Pham Ngoc Thao, who turned out to be less "ex" than he purported to be, and who is credited by some as having deliberately sabotaged the program on behalf of the communists. However, Catton suggests that Thao's alleged influence over the program has been greatly exaggerated, and my guess is that this would probably also hold for other former Viet Minh (whether or not they were still cooperating with the Party). There were several ex-Viet Minh who played key roles in South Vietnam during the early years Diem was in power--Information Minister Tran Chanh Thanh is the outstanding example--but many of these folks had been shunted to the sidelines by the time the Hamlet program came on line in 1961-62. Most of what I've seen suggests that the Hamlet program really was Ngo Dinh Nhu's baby, and that he wasn't much interested in letting others (be they ex-Viet Minh or Sir Robert Thompson) have anything other than minor roles in the formulation of the program.

Cheers,

Ed

From david.biggs@ucr.edu Wed Apr 27 13:06:17 2005

Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 13:05:58 -0700

From: David A Biggs <david.biggs@ucr.edu>

Reply-To: Vietnam Studies Group <vsg@u.washington.edu>

To: Vietnam Studies Group <vsg@u.washington.edu>

Subject: RE: [Vsg] viet minh and strategic hamlets

thanks ed for a great, informative reply. one point of clarification regarding Viet Minh.

Does Chau in his biography indicate whether as "Viet Minh" he was a member of the Party? On a broader note, to what extent are "former Viet Minh" who work with in the Diem government after the "denunciation" campaign (who aren't spies) Party members?

David

From giebel@u.washington.edu Wed Apr 27 15:39:48 2005

Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 15:39:26 -0700

From: Christoph Giebel <giebel@u.washington.edu>

Reply-To: Vietnam Studies Group <vsg@u.washington.edu>

To: Vietnam Studies Group <vsg@u.washington.edu>

Subject: Re: [Vsg] viet minh and strategic hamlets

David --

Officially, in 1951, the Viet Minh / Viet Nam Independence League was dissolved and absorbed by the new Lien Viet Front, an expanded united front organization (soon after the CP had been openly reconstituted as the DLD). Throughout its decade of existence, only a minority of Viet Minh were party members. So for the most part, I'd assume, the term Viet Minh was used loosely (in the RVN context you cite) to identify former followers/supporters and/or the actual fighters of the DRVN during the First Indochina War (a.k.a. Franco-Viet Minh War). Whether they were also members of the ICP or DLD would have to be determined on an individual basis.

I'd also hazard that Viet Minh in that loose sense carried a somewhat positive connotation among some US (and RVN?) observers, as fervent anti-colonial/anti-French nationalists/patriots fighting an idealistic cause, albeit misguided by the CP. Symbolically, the RVN was established as a clean break from the past of French colonial domination and ASVN collaboration with its Bao Dai-supplied whiff of dynastic restoration. And the US in its self-delusion as the benign freedom-bringer certainly did not see itself as the successor, God forbid, to the French. So in late 50s/early 60s hindsight, the anti-French war demanded a certain measure of respect if not admiration for its patriotic (not CP) partisans. In that view, the RVN/US endeavor was the actual fulfillment of Vietnamese national aspirations (minus the communist manipulations) and as such the rightful choice of the "good" and "true" former Viet Minh patriots. It might in fact be a good thing and reaffirmation now to have them in one's corner. Quite a number of people (like Tran Ngoc Chau?) might have fit that category -- neither did they see themselves as 'defectors' (your term), nor were they necessarily seen as such by your US observers.

The other former Viet Minh, of course, in not rallying to the RVN/US, showed themselves to be not 'patriots' but simply 'commies' ("Viet Cong") and had it coming to them.

-- Christoph

C. Giebel

UW - Seattle

From dgm405@coombs.anu.edu.au Wed May 4 18:52:15 2005

Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 11:46:26 +1000

From: David Marr <dgm405@coombs.anu.edu.au>

Reply-To: Vietnam Studies Group <vsg@u.washington.edu>

To: Vietnam Studies Group <vsg@u.washington.edu>

Subject: Re: [Vsg] viet minh and strategic hamlets

Sorry to be so late, but I found this exchange (below) about former Viet Minh in the RNV's First Republic really interesting. In 1961-63, first at the Army Language School in Monterey, and then in Soc Trang and Da Nang, I repeatedly encountered Vietnamese who expressed pride in their earlier participation in `the Viet Minh', then proceeded to denounce `the Communists' for perverting the true national cause. I lacked the historical background to evaluate such assertions, but was convinced from the glint in their eyes and excited tone of voice that they felt they had participated in something big and life-transforming.

Later, as I rummaged around for books or articles published in the First Republic, there were authors who tried hard to define and promote a current national revolution based largely on their late 1940s experiences, but of course minus any role whatsoever for the Lao Dong Party. Indeed, the activities of the ICP in the 1940s was often not mentioned, sort of a black hole behind the door. RVN school textbooks went further, halting the historical narrative at either 1930 or 1945. On this front, I'd love to hear if anyone has found a history of 1945-54 published in the RVN?

As I try to fathom what happened in 1945-54, I'm convinced that SRV historians have greatly overstated the control exercised by the Party on events, although that control clearly increased from 1950 onward. But it's hard to just read available SRV sources `across the grain', without materials for comparison from Viet Minh participants or subsequent scholars who have no reason to toe the party line. Suggestions or leads welcome!

David Marr

From david.biggs@ucr.edu Mon May 9 15:51:36 2005

Date: Mon, 9 May 2005 15:51:09 -0700

From: David A Biggs <david.biggs@ucr.edu>

Reply-To: Vietnam Studies Group <vsg@u.washington.edu>

To: Vietnam Studies Group <vsg@u.washington.edu>

Subject: [Vsg] "former viet minh" in the early years of the RVN

I found a few more references to "former Viet Minh" that indicate a significant level of Party influence if not direct participation in RVN activities concerning land reform and strategic hamlets. Truong Ngoc Tuong describes his colleague, Pham Ngoc Thao, in _Viet Cong Memoir_, stating that Thao had been a "Maquis" and was a high-ranking

member of the NLF and may have deliberately sabotaged the strategic hamlet program under Nhu before his (Thao's) assassination in 1965.

Also, Wolf Ladejinsky's 1955 report, "South Vietnam Revisited" describes his encounter with some ex-Viet Minh officials in Ca Mau province:

"It was clear that the ex-Viet Minh official and two of his assistants, also ex-Viet Minh, had a good knowledge of the Viet Minh tax practices. Without referring to the Communist tax bible, "The Agricultural Tax," published by the Communists on July 15, 1951 with that singular page title inscription, "Democratic Republic of Vietnam, Seventh Year, Independence-Freedom-Happiness," they launched into a jotting down of Viet Minh tax practices. They coincided fairly closely with the items contained in the Viet Minh tax book."

Ladejinsky: "South Vietnam Revisited" (41)

This seems to suggest a few things. One that there was a tendency by non-VN observers to use Viet Minh and Communist interchangeably at least in the mid-1950's. Two, that describing people as "former Viet Minh" involved in the RVN administration was a way of disassociating someone from their murky past where it benefited the administration; however, while they may never have joined formally the Party they nevertheless appear to be fully versed in the day-to-day operations of tax collecting and other core activities of building a rural-based insurgency on Communist principles articulated from Ha Noi, even way down in Ca Mau.

Thanks, Christoph, for pointing out the formal distinction of the term Viet Minh describing the organization formally disbanded in 1951 with the loose use of the term by foreigners, farmers and many southerners well past 1954.

David (Biggs)