It is a common misconception that the end of the Second World War provided peace for the entire world, and that the Cold War was an entirely non-violent conflict. However, this view is incredibly Eurocentric, as we forget that there was violence in other parts of the world that were encompassed in the realm of the Cold War, and the First Indochina War can be viewed as a starting point.
Firstly, the causes of the war must be discussed in order to fully understand its consequences, and I would argue that the overarching cause of the First Indochina War would simply be the opposition to the return of French rule and the desire for independence. At the Potsdam Conference 1945, it was agreed that Indochina (an area of land encompassing parts of modern-day Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia) would be included under British rule, but they were eventually overrun by the French who were not prepared to abandon their interests in Vietnam. This created a significant clash in interests – the French wanted to re-establish full colonial rule over Vietnam while Hanoi (the Capital of Vietnam) was keen to ratify their independence. As we have seen with multiple other wars and conflicts, clashing interests are prone to turn violent, and this is exactly what happened in November 1946 when the French naval vessels attacked Haiphong and caused numerous civilian casualties. The national independence force, known as the Viet Minh and led by Ho Chi Minh (who was to later become the leader of Vietnam) did not abandon their goals, and employed guerrilla tactics to fight back. The French were subsequently defeated by the Viet Minh.
One of the key questions that arise with the First Indochina War is why the French were so brutally defeated. I believe that there is no outstanding factor that can definitively answer this question, but rather the combination of different factors together. Firstly, the French seemed to ignore one of the main reasons for the cause of the war, which was the desire for independence from the Vietnamese. They fought as if Vietnam were already theirs, without considering that Vietnam had a strong incentive to create a strong opposition. Additionally, the Viet Minh were heavily aided by China starting in 1949 (due to the start of the communist regime in China), which greatly helped them improve their guerrilla warfare. However, I would argue that while this factor was definitely significant in the result of the First Indochina War, its significance was limited due to the fact that President Eisenhower stepped in to aid the French due to his long-lasting fear of the ‘domino effect’ (a fear of the spread of communism). However, the key battle that decided the fate of the conflict was the Battle of Dien Bien Phu in late 1953. This battle revealed that the French forces were no match for the Viet Minh, especially as the Viet Minh now had the overwhelming support of the Vietnamese people. They cut off all the roads to Dien Bien Phu, and it slowly became obvious that the French had entered this battle with too much confidence, and the French government sought an agreement with Vietnam in the 1954 Geneva Conference.
The 1954 Geneva Conference proposed a change that would later become one of the long-term causes of the Vietnam War. Due to the fragmented state of the remains of the French Empire in Vietnam, the country was split into two – the Democratic Republic of Vietnam and the State of Vietnam, as well as establishing the Kingdom of Cambodia and the Kingdom of Laos. Not too long after in 1954, the tricolore was lowered for the last time at the monument Hanoi Citadel, symbolising the end to Vietnam’s colonial rule once and for all. However, on a more international scale, people were already starting to realise that South Vietnam seemed to be more like a remnant of the French Empire, while North Vietnam adopted radical communist ideologies. Thus, the end of one brutal war was simply the start of another disastrous conflict.
Graham Greene’s The Quiet American is an example of the media’s response to the end of the First Indochina War and French decolonisation in Vietnam. I believe that it is important that we delve into literature that discusses matters such as these, as otherwise we end up studying conflict without realising the violence and cruelty that was encompassed within it. We cannot detach the study of conflict with the sensitivity we need when approaching it, and I found this particularly pertinent when looking at the First Indochina War.
Comments