Abstract
There were ideological and political conflicts between the capitalist and communist countries under the name of Eastern Bloc and Western Bloc. Ideological and political conflicts did not only remain in this area, the two blocs almost competed with each other on every issue. The Soviet Union led by the blocs and the United States' desire to make allies in different regions and to encircle each other, this strife has had its effect in every region. The United States is attempting to establish a new political-economic region that includes the Pacific. East Asia and the Pacific region are among the regions where these conflicts take place. United States of America two "hot wars" in the East Asian region; played a dominant role in the Korean and Vietnam wars. This article is an in-depth study of the Korean and Vietnam wars and the American role in these wars.
Key words: East Asia, Pacific, War Of Vietnam, War Of Korean, United States.
1. Introduction
When the second world war ended in 1945, the destruction was not limited to Europe, but also a major devastation in Asia. Japan's surrender on August 15, 1945 caused chaos and revolutions in Asia. ‘Over the next decade a new international order very different to that which had existed before the Pacific War slowly emerged from the wreckage’ (Antony Best, Jussi Hanhimaki, Joseph A. Maiolo, Kirsten E. Schulze, 2008). Many new independent states were emerged. Indigenous nationalist movements in South and Southeast Asia liberated themselves from the presence of colonial Europe. Meanwhile, Japan moved away from expansionism and focused its attention on economic growth, while China emerged once again as the regional Great Power after the Communist Party's (CCP) victory over the Koumintang.
The reason why the violence created by the Cold War became a bomb ready to explode was that Asia was a region where nationalism was rising and new and unstable states emerged. The establishment of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 1949 meant not only that China was now united under a strong centralized state, but that it was ruled by a communist government with close political and military ties to the Soviet Union (Antony Best, Jussi Hanhimaki, Joseph A. Maiolo, Kirsten E. Schulze, 2008). Fearing that such a regime would pose a threat to its economic and strategic interests in the region, the US reacted to this obvious threat by applying a similar containment policy. ‘Thus, from 1949, East and South-East Asia became the second most important battleground in the global Cold War’ (Antony Best, Jussi Hanhimaki, Joseph A. Maiolo, Kirsten E. Schulze, 2008).
In this article, the new Asia born out of the Pacific War, the increasing pressure of the Cold War, and the profound influence of the reductionist logic accompanying it on Asia will be examined. This review focuses on two hot wars that have the potential to turn into global disaster, especially in Asia: the Korean and Vietnam wars. Focusing on the Korean and Vietnam wars in this work; Why did the United States fight the Korean War? Was the same rationale used to justify the Vietnam War? Were the assumptions and the wars justified? will answer the questions.
2. War Of Korean
The place where the 'cold war' broke out in Asia was not Vietnam but Korea. Korea; After the surrender of Japan in August 1945, it became one of the first places where the conflict between the US and the Soviet Union surfaced. These two superpowers withdrew their troops in 1948-1949 after establishing indigenous but dependent governments on Korean land they had taken from Japan. Thus, pro-Soviet North Korea and pro-American South Korea were formed, and the 38th latitude became the border between them. On August 15, 1945, the border dividing the regions was divided into two occupation zones on the 38th parallel. In 1948, it became two sovereign states in the occupied territories as a result of Cold War tensions. A socialist state was established under the totalitarian leadership of Kim Il-sung in the north and a capitalist state under the authoritarian leadership of Syngman Rhee in the south. ‘Some, such as Syngman Rhee, leaned towards a state-driven modernization akin to that pursued by the Guomindang in China, while others, such as Kim Il-Sung, proselytized communist solutions to Korea’s problems’ (Antony Best, Jussi Hanhimaki, Joseph A. Maiolo, Kirsten E. Schulze, 2008). The Korean people was wanted independence immediately. After the surrender of the Japanese, different groups have emerged across the political spectrum, ranging from the far right to the far left. The division of politics into such division was a direct result of Japan's colonial rule. If the Korean people were able to hold their own destiny in their own hands, a Center-Left coalition could have arisen out of this turmoil, but the presence of Russians and Americans made it impossible. As a result of Soviet and American policies, rival groups were formed under guardianship in the north and south. ‘In desperation the Americans in 1947 turned the problem over to the UN. The UN solution was for nationwide elections to take place under its auspices. However, the political representatives from the North rejected this idea on the grounds that the South would interfere with any free ballot. Thus the election that took place in May 1948 was restricted to the south, and as it turned out the ballot, as the north had predicted, was far from untainted’ (Antony Best, Jussi M. Hanhimaki, Joseph A. Maiolo, Kirsten E. Schulze, 2008). Syngman Rhee won the election and became the first president of the Republic of Korea (ROK) in July. The north front's reaction was when the Soviets handed control over to Kim Il-Sung and brought it to the head of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) in September.
‘In understanding the origins of the Korean War, it is useful to refer to these two new regimes by their proper names rather than as South Korea and North Korea, for both governments saw themselves as the rightful leaders of the whole country and not just the geographical area that they currently administered. Moreover, for each, the prime goal was the destruction of the other and the assumption of leadership over the whole of Korea’ (2008, p. 262). To achieve this goal, since 1948, the DPRK supported the anti-ROK uprisings in the south by providing weapons and officers. The struggle in the Korean peninsula in 1948-49 remained within local limits and no result was achieved. While the ROK managed to contain the uprisings against it, the DPRK in general resisted the provocations of war. ‘In 1950, the situation changed drastically. Realizing that guerrilla warfare in the South was insufficient to topple the ROK, Kim Il-Sung appealed to Stalin in January 1950 to approve a conventional attack over the 38th parallel’ (2008, p. 263). The Soviet leader previously refused such requests from Kim, but this time gave the green light, only if Mao agreed. Stalin's approval increased the tension in the region.
After receiving Mao's approval, on June 25, 1950, the DPRK launched its attack from the 38th parallel. The United Nations Security Council has approved that UN forces should aid Korea to end the North Korean occupation. ‘Twenty-one countries of the United Nations eventually contributed to the UN force, with the United States providing around 90% of the military personnel’ (Pembroke, 2018, s. 141). With American help, the ROK forces were able to prevent the DPRK attack and started a counterattack from August. On September 15, when Mac-Arthur's amphibious forces landed on Inchon and threatened to cut the North's supply lines, the DPRK's attack turned into defeat. ‘In these circumstances Washington decided to roll back communism in Korea, and on 1 October ROK forces moved into the North’ (2008, s. 263). The Soviet Union prepared for intervention in October 1950, and the People's Liberation Army (PLA) began infiltrating its forces beyond the Yalu River. The PLA launched a massive attack in late November, forcing UN / ROK forces to retreat behind the 38th parallel. The decision was made to withdraw and the war was limited to the Korean peninsula. The conflict continued for another two and a half years. In 1951, when it was realized that neither side would win a complete victory, ceasefire negotiations began, and in July 1953 a border agreement was agreed between the DPRK and the ROK.
3. War of Vietnam
Vietnam War is the war fought in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos regions between the Eastern Bloc countries North Vietnam, China and the Soviet Union, and the USA and the pro US anti-communist South Vietnam. It is also known as the Second Indochina War or American War. This is largely due to the heavy involvement of the United States in the war in the 1960s, but one fact that is overlooked is that this war was a Indochina war rather than an American war. ‘After all, before American intervention there was a war between the Vietnamese and their French colonial masters, and after the United States withdrew in 1973, war continued to ravage Indochina for the next two decades’( (2008, p. 295). Americans only followed in the footsteps of the Chinese, the French, and the Japanese who came before them. The symbol of this latest Vietnamese struggle for independence, Ho Chi Minh, was to the Americans just another communist leader, but to many Vietnamese Ho and his Viet Minh movement represented their historic hopes for self-determination (2008, p. 296). After the defeat of the Japanese on 2 September 1945, under the leadership of the nationalist and communist Ho Chi Minh, Vieh Minh declared independence from France and founded the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (DRV). In the late 1940s, French Indochina (Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia) was reconnected to the French empire with the consent of America. ‘To give the French administration a ‘local’ flavour, the Emperor Bao Dai, who had been close to the Japanese during the Second World War, was installed as a nominal head of state in 1949’ (2008, p. 296). Viet Minh, on the other hand, did not accept the return of this so-called president and the French, and started the national liberation war against them. By 1954, the Viet Minh had suffered heavy casualties on the French side, ready to take control of Vietnam. The 'domino theory', which argues that if a country falls into communism, will follow in all peripheral countries, was first proposed by the Eisenhower administration as a policy. Accordig to this theory, if Vietnam ‘fell’ under communist rule, neighbouring Laos and Cambodia would be under immediate risk, and that the other countries in South-East Asia would eventually follow. The combined effect of this threat and the already significant cost of the American investment ensured that the Eisenhower administration did not accept a unified Vietnam under the DRV’s rule, even after the French suffered a major military defeat at Dien Bien Phu in early May 1954 (2008, p. 297). July 1954 Geneva Accord brought a ceasefire that divided Vietnam into two parts, according to which the DRV would control the north of the 17th parallel, while Bao Dai's regime would rule the southern half of the country. The United States did not approve of the 1954 Geneva Accord. Rather than doing this, the United States began to support the establishment of an independent non-communist regime in southern Vietnam. ‘In 1955, however, the strongly anti-communist politician Ngo Dinh Diem pushed Emperor Bao aside to become president of the Government of the Republic of Vietnam (GVN), often referred to during that era as South Vietnam’( (Editors, 2009). ‘The Eisenhower administration not only supported Diem with financial aid and a growing cohort of military advisers but also established the South-East Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) in September 1954. The major purpose of SEATO –whose membership included the United States, France, Britain, Australia, New Zealand, Thailand, Pakistan and the Philippines – was to ‘contain’ the PRC and its efforts to support communist revolutionaries in Indochina. In short, by the mid1950s, the United States had extended the containment doctrine to South-East Asia’ (2008, p. 298).
The two events that broke out in the Gulf of Tonkin in August 1964 eventually provided the desired excuse for the entry of Vietnamese American land armies. Two American destroyers were fired from the North Vietnamese patrol boats. ‘Three days after the second incident, Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, authorizing the president to use all necessary measures to counter and prevent any further such military attacks, thus effectively giving Johnson a blank cheque to pursue a war in Vietnam’ (2008, p. 301).
4. The Role Of The US In The Wars In East Asia And The Pacific
The United States had a much greater influence in the development of Pacific Asia in the 20th century than any other state other than Asia. The frictions that turned into an east-west conflict between the Soviet Union, which adopted a communist regime, and the United States, which were at the capitalist level, became more evident with the end of the Second World War. The United States and the communist bloc competed fiercely in the region to create self-dependent administrations, establishing bilateral or multilateral alliance systems, and distributing large amounts of military and economic aid to gain or guarantee the allegiance of the parties. The outbreak of the Korean war further exacerbated the divide between the PRC and the United States. ‘The mixture of radical nationalism and Marxism that defined the CCP led it ceaselessly to denounce the imperialist intentions of the United States’ (2008, p. 265). In addition, the Korean war divided the continent into hostile alliance systems, causing it to polarize. The US turned into concerned approximately a domino effect, believing that if one Southeast Asian us of a fell to communism, the others might without problems follow. Thus, under the Kennedy and Johnson administrations, the US sent more troops to support South Vietnam in the midst of Viet Cong attacks. In August of 1964, the North Vietnamese attacked US warships withinside the Gulf of Tonkin, and the United States retaliated with the aid of using bombing North Vietnam and sending greater troops to be stationed there. On the communist side, the war brought the Soviet Union and the PRC closer and encouraged the PRC to provide military aid to Vietnam. In the Vietnam War, America again emphasized the communist nature of the Vietnamese revolution rather than the nationalist character. US generals thought they could easily defeat the Vietnamese communists, relying on their technological superiority and the experience of the war in Korea, another Southeast Asian country, they made the mistake of thinking Vietnam like Korea.
5. Conclusion
During the Cold War, the region, which had a great place in the world agenda with the Korean and Vietnam wars, became one of the regions that should be taken into consideration especially by the USA. In August 1945, the Americans suggested to the USSR that their forces should share the responsibility for the surrender of the Japanese to the Korean peninsula. The border separating the regions was pulled at the 38th parallel. The United States took the south, Russia was the north. The intention was then to try to implement the long-term plan made by the Great Powers for the political future of Korea. If we answer the question of why the United States fought in the Korean War, according to the stated plan, the United States would prepare for its eventual independence under the leadership of the guardian rule. The USA was in the position of a global actor waging the fight against communism on every continent and having a military presence all over the world as a result of its strategy to contain the Soviet Union. In fact, in the early 1950s, the majority of US State Department experts thought the Korean peninsula was not geopolitically important to the United States. The US considered that the way to restore China's reputation, which was shaken by the communist rule, was through a military victory in Korea. The US not only declared that its statements regarding Asia Pacific would support South Korea militarily; It announced that he would stand behind the Paris administration against the independence movement fighting against French colonialism in Vietnam. However, while the United States could not fully forget the Korean War during the period in question, it found itself in the middle of another conflict in the Asia Pacific, the Vietnam War. In Vietnam, which was no longer a French colony in 1945, with the Geneva treaty, a communist government was established under the leadership of Ho Chi Minh in the north and a capitalist government under the leadership of Diem in the south. Ultimately, when the peace agreement was signed between the US and the Vietnamese (North Vietnam, South Vietnam and Viet Kong) in January 1973, the US ended the war, which was seen as a defeat for itself. Was the logic used to justify the Vietnam War the same, were the assumptions and wars justified? We answer this questions at this point; The logic used by the USA in the Korean war to prevent communist progress was the same, but the United States intervened in the war in Vietnam to maintain its economic sovereignty in the third world. Consequently, because of the foreign policy based on global domination of the United States, the military-industrial structure, which has interests in increased military expenditures and supports the expansion of the system, has emerged.
Gül Sevda YILMAZ
Reference:
Antony Best, Jussi Hanhimaki, Joseph A. Maiolo, Kirsten E. Schulze. (2008). International History of
the Twentieth Century and Beyond. Routledge.
ÇELİK, M. (2019). SOĞUK SAVAŞ SONRASI ASYA PASİFİK BÖLGESİNDE ABD - ÇİN MÜCADELESİ.
Editors, H. (2009, October 29). Vietnam War. History
https://www.history.com/topics/vietnam-war/vietnam-war-history
M. Pembroke (2018), Korea: Where the American Century Began (s. 141). Hardie Grant Books.
TEKELİ, Melisa. Soğuk Savaş Yıllarında Doğu Asya. Academia:
https://www.academia.edu/10354167/So%C4%9Fuk_Sava%C5%9F_Y%C4%B1llar%C4%B1nda_Do%C4%9Fu_Asya
Yorumlar
Yorum Gönder