See More on Facebook

Analysis, Politics

Is Afghanistan another ‘Vietnam’ scenario for the US

Dawn takes a closer look at the comparisons between Vietnam and the US involvement in Afghanistan.


Written by

Updated: August 6, 2018

While the US suffered badly in Vietnam, to the extent that the war proved to be a nightmare for the US and still haunts the nation’s memories because of the trauma it caused, it is not a bed of roses in Afghanistan either.

To brush up the memories as to how and when the US got involved in Vietnam: in 1945 the Viet Minh, a national independence coalition under the leadership of H Chí Minh began an insurgency against the French rule (France had colonised Vietnam in the mid-19th century). Hostilities escalated and in January 1950, the People’s Republic of China and the Soviet Union recognised Viet Minh’s Democratic Republic of Vietnam, based in Hanoi in the north, as the legitimate government. The following month, the United States and Great Britain recognised the French-backed State of Vietnam in Saigon, led by former Emperor Bo i, as the legitimate Vietnamese government. The US government viewed its involvement in the war as a way to prevent a communist takeover of South Vietnam.

During World War II, as an ally the US provided financial and military assistance to the French forces fighting in Vietnam. From the spring of 1950, their involvement increased from just assisting French troops to providing direct military assistance. Eventually, the US began sending out increased military assistance at a constant rate and the US forces became involved in ground combat operations in 1965. At their peak, they numbered more than 500,000 and were also engaged in a sustained aerial bombing campaign.

The year 2018 marks 50 years of a turning point in the US war in Vietnam. Are there any turning points to be seen in Afghanistan?

In 1968 came a turning point for the Vietnam War. It was the year when, despite having more than half-a-million of its forces on the ground and massive fire power, the US agreed to launch peace talks in Paris. This step was taken after failing to defeat the National Liberation Front of South Vietnam, also known as the Viet Cong (a mass political organisation in South Vietnam that fought against the US and the South Vietnamese governments during the war).

At the beginning of 1968, the Viet Cong, in coordination with the North Vietnamese Army, launched the famous Tt offensive and occupied Hue, a South Vietnamese town. The Tt offensive was a campaign of surprise attacks against the forces of the South Vietnamese Army of the Republic of Vietnam, the US armed forces and their allies throughout South Vietnam. The name of the offensive comes from the Tt holiday, the Vietnamese New Year, when the first major attack took place.

The American embassy in Saigon was attacked during that offensive, as a result of which the US was forced to stop bombing North Vietnam for some time and to start the Paris peace talks with the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese government. It was this chain of reverses for the US military in Vietnam in 1968 which compelled Washington to accentuate its efforts for a safe exit from the conflict zone.

American soldiers encamped in the Vietnamese jungle | History Key US

From 1965, when the US directly entered the Vietnam War, till 1975 when it withdrew, it lost more than 58,000 personnel and 10,000 warplanes and helicopters, yet failed to defeat what they called the ‘communist menace’ in Indo-China. Never before in the annals of military history had a major power faced such devastating physical and material losses outside of the world wars as witnessed during the Vietnam War.

In 2018, the situation in Afghanistan is no better for the US. Similar to the Vietnam War, in Afghanistan too, the US is sinking deeper into a quagmire with little chance for a safe exit. Afghanistan, too, is a constant source of financial drain of resources for the US with no better results to ensure its success on military grounds. According to a Foreign Policy magazine report of May 2018, the US Department of Defence gives a pessimistic account of American military engagements in Afghanistan in terms of the prospects of winning a war in the volatile country.

More than four decades have passed yet the term ‘Vietnam syndrome’ is still used to refer to the psychological nightmare for the Americans.

However, while comparing Vietnam and Afghanistan one has to look into certain factors which led to the US failure in Vietnam, and the resistance against the US in both countries.

There are three major reasons that contributed to the US failure in Vietnam. First, the high morale and courage of the resistance forces in Vietnam against foreign intervention. Although it was asymmetrical warfare in which the US had a clear military edge vis-à-vis the Viet Cong and North Vietnam, it was nationalistic zeal and patriotism that enabled anti-American forces to launch an effective national liberation movement by inflicting maximum damage on American troops and their South Vietnamese allies in active guerrilla warfare.

Confronting back to back debacles in June 1968, Washington replaced General William Westmoreland, the US military commander in Vietnam, with General Creighton Adams. But the change in command only had a marginal impact on ground. During 1968, the surge in American causalities and the intensification of guerrilla warfare by the Viet Cong led to widespread popular demonstrations throughout the US.

An American soldier with M79 grenade launcher helping civilians take cover from a Viet Cong sniper in a canal near Bao Trai | Imgur.com

Second, the anti-Vietnam War demonstrations got an impetus during 1968 and spread worldwide, particularly in Europe and Asia. American bombing in various North Vietnamese cities and towns enraged people causing an outbreak of popular demonstrations demanding the withdrawal of the American military from Vietnam. Images of the March 16, 1968 massacre by American troops in the village of My Lai, in which several hundred civilians, including 56 babies were killed, was a turning point in the worldwide perception of the Vietnam War as global condemnation of that massacre put Washington in an embarrassing position and triggered anti-American sentiments all over the world.

Third, the US had lost popular support in Vietnam and its puppet regime in Saigon was unable to sustain its hold on power without American military presence.

To a large extent, the three reasons which prompted American withdrawal from Vietnam are absent in Afghanistan, although an argument could be made about some similarities in the third case.

From the beginning of 1968, the US had begun to experience failures in Vietnam despite the surge of American forces to 540,000 by December 1968. On January 16, 1968 the North Vietnamese government made it clear that it would not participate in peace talks unless the US stops bombing on its soil. Consequently, in order to create favourable environment for peace talks scheduled to be held in Paris, Washington announced on March 31 that partial bombing would be halted over North Vietnam. Earlier on March 1, the US Defence Secretary Robert McNamara was replaced by Clark Clifford.

In 2018, the Trump administration does not feel that it will lose in Afghanistan nor are there any popular demonstrations in the US or around the world against American military engagements in Afghanistan.

Afghan Northern Alliance fighters in 2001. Almost two decades later, the war continues | David Guttenfelder/AP

The two case studies of the Vietnam and Afghanistan wars are different but in some respects also carry a degree of semblance. In the case of Vietnam, the duration of American military intervention was 10 years and the maximum number of US forces in South Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos were more than half a million.

In Afghanistan, the American military engagements have been underway since October 2001 when the Taliban regime was toppled following the events of 9/11. Yet the total number of American forces in Afghanistan has never crossed the 100,000 mark and that too was part of the ‘surge’ policy during President Obama’s administration in 2010. Physical casualties and injuries of the US forces in Afghanistan have not exceeded 10,000 and it has lost not more than 100 fighter planes and helicopters in that country. But the material cost of the US in Afghanistan has exceeded its cost in the Vietnam War because of the duration of the war in Afghanistan which is now almost two decades old. The art of war in Afghanistan is more sophisticated because of technological factors, thus reducing American physical losses and injuries in that tribal country.

In 1968 the Nixon administration had reached the conclusion that it cannot win the Vietnam War and that what it should strive for was an ‘honourable’ exit from a war which was not only causing enormous physical and material losses but also worldwide condemnation. Unlike Nixon, President Donald Trump, while unveiling his Afghan policy in August 2017, resolved to win the war in Afghanistan.

The most interesting contrast in the Vietnam and Afghan wars is in the nature of the armed struggle. While in Vietnam the guerrilla warfare led by the Viet Cong was quite effective, this is not the case in Afghanistan. Although the Taliban — the main resistance group against the US military’s presence in Afghanistan — claim to have gained control over half of Afghanistan, they have not been able to cause significant losses to the US forces or to the US-backed regime in Kabul.

Black smoke rises from the Intercontinental Hotel after an attack in Kabul, Afghanistan, on Jan 21, 2018

Furthermore, the National Liberation Movement in Vietnam was not attacking its own people except those who were affiliated with the pro-American government in Saigon. Throughout the course of the Vietnam War, there were no suicide attacks claiming the lives of non-combatants. But in Afghanistan, thousands of innocent people have been killed so far as a result of suicide attacks launched by the Taliban. A popular movement against foreign occupation will not target its own people as was the case in Vietnam and which is not the case as far as Afghanistan is concerned.

The Viet Cong and their North Vietnamese allies were getting overt military support from communist China and the Soviet Union, but this is not the case with the Taliban as they rely only on drug money and snatching weapons from the forces of the pro-American Kabul regime in order to sustain their armed struggle. Reports of Taliban getting military support from Iran or Pakistan are unsubstantiated and any assistance is certainly not overt.

Motivation, nationalism, courage and patriotic feelings formed the core of the struggle of the Viet Cong and North Vietnam against the foreign occupation of their country, which is lacking in Afghanistan. During the Soviet military intervention in Afghanistan (December 1979 to February 1989), resistance against the Soviet forces and their supported Kabul regime included all segments of society regardless of ethnic or sectarian divide. Today, the bulk of resistance against the US forces in Afghanistan is concentrated in Pakhtun-dominated south and eastern provinces, whereas Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazaras, constituting around half of the Afghan population, are largely not a part of the Pakhtun-led Taliban groups.

In Vietnam, the national liberation movement was ideologically driven with nationalistic zeal which is not the case with the Taliban whose main focus is to re-establish an order which was in practice while they were in power from 1996 till 2001. That order was termed as anti-women, anti-minorities and based on their literalist interpretation of Islamic Sharia. Even today, 17 years after the dismantling of that regime, many Afghans resent the ruthless Taliban rule.

Revisiting the Vietnam War also brings into the picture the shattering of the myth of American invincibility because, after 10 years of military involvement, the US had to leave Vietnam without winning the war.

In Afghanistan, unlike Vietnam, there is no possibility of American withdrawal in the near future because of the absence of a united national liberation movement led by the majority of Afghans. There is little likelihood that Washington is seriously pursuing an exit strategy in the future and plans to remain in Afghanistan for strategic, security, political and economic reasons.

It means that, unlike Vietnam, in Afghanistan, the resistance movement lacks proper strategy, motivation, popular support and unity. This tends to provide enormous space to foreign powers to maintain their foothold in the war-ravaged country.

Afghanistan is certainly different than Vietnam as far as the US and the world is concerned. Vietnam is certainly better off today, 43 years after the end of the war, because of massive economic growth and development, whereas Afghanistan remains poor, underdeveloped, in under a perpetual state of violence and armed conflict since the outbreak of the Saur Revolution in April 1978. That was that coup d’état led by the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan against the rule of President Mohammed Daoud Khan in which Daoud Khan and most of his family were killed. That ‘revolution’ resulted in the creation of a government with Nur Muhammad Taraki as president, and was the precursor to the 1979 intervention by the Soviets. All revolutions are not the same.

Moonis Ahmar is Meritorious Professor of International Relations at the University of Karachi Email: amoonis@hotmail.com



Enjoyed this story? Share it.


Dawn
About the Author: Dawn is Pakistan's oldest and most widely read English-language newspaper.

Eastern Briefings

All you need to know about Asia


Our Eastern Briefings Newsletter presents curated stories from 22 Asian newspapers from South, Southeast and Northeast Asia.

Sign up and stay updated with the latest news.



By providing us with your email address, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.

View Today's Newsletter Here

Analysis, Politics

Beijing slams unrest and backs HK govt’s use of lawful means to tackle it

Protests have shut down Hong Kong for the past several days before a government crackdown. Beijing yesterday condemned the unrest that broke out in Hong Kong over the city’s extradition Bill as an organised riot, and said it supported the local government’s use of lawful means to resolve the situation. Asked if the central government supported the use of rubber bullets and tear gas on protesters on Wednesday, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said that mainstream public opinion in Hong Kong was against any act that undermines the city’s prosperity and stability. “Any civilised and lawful society will not tolerate the destruction of peace and tranquillity,” he said. “The Chinese central government strongly condemns all types of violence and supports the Hong Kong government to handle the matter according to the law.” Chinese state media


By The Straits Times
June 14, 2019

Analysis, Politics

Taiwan expresses support, solidarity with Hong Kong

Taiwan advocacy groups call for retaliation against Hong Kong extradition bill. Dozens of civic groups in Taiwan called on the government on June 11 to adopt concrete regulations in response to Hong Kong’s controversial extradition bill, suggesting tighter controls on investments from Hong Kong and visits by its civil servants, for example. In a statement issued ahead of the expected second reading of the bill Wednesday, the groups urged the Taiwan government to submit a countermeasure proposal to the Legislative Yuan during its extraordinary session on June 17. The Taiwan government should also issue a statement, asking the Hong Kong government to halt its review of the bill, which could put the personal freedom of Taiwanese nationals at risk, as it would allow the Hong Kong government to send suspects to China for trial, the groups said. Despite fierce opposition by an est


By ANN Members
June 13, 2019

Analysis, Politics

China blames ‘lawlessness’ for Hong Kong

Lawlessness undermining rule of law in Hong Kong, says China Daily editorial. The government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region has explained many times the proposed amendments to Hong Kong’s fugitive law are meant to better protect Hong Kong society by plugging the loopholes in the existing laws in order to enhance the rule of law. Rather than pushing through a bill against the wishes of Hong Kong society as some have tried to portray, the government has made changes to the proposed bill more than once in response to concerns expressed in the community. As a result, most of the members of Legislative Council of the special administrative region, who are accountable to their voters, now support the amendments. Nor is it a hasty or unnecessary move. Indeed the need for an extradition agreement with the mainland was acknowledged by government officials and legal experts ahead of H


By China Daily
June 13, 2019

Analysis, Politics

Hong Kong protests turn violent

At least 72 people taken to hospital during clashes with police. At least 72 people were injured and taken to hospital during clashes between police and protesters on Wednesday (June 12) over a contentious extradition Bill, said Hong Kong authorities. By night time, police officers were still in a stand-off with protesters on Queensway, not far from Admiralty Station, even though most of the protestors had dispersed following the use of tear gas and rubber bullets. Earlier, police fired rubber bullets at protesters after they declared a “riot” as – for the second time in days – clashes broke out between police and protesters demonstrating against the controversial extradition Bill.


By The Straits Times
June 13, 2019

Analysis, Politics

Nepal Prime Minister’s speech in UK is filled with irony

Nepal’s prime minister celebrated democratic freedoms in his UK speech but it contradicts what he’s doing at home. While Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli’s Monday speech at the Oxford Union in the United Kingdom valorised the importance of freedoms, rights and democracy, back home, his government has been criticised for what many see as an authoritarian turn, stifling freedom of speech and steadily encroaching on human rights. In his speech at the Oxford Union, Oli said that as someone who had spent over five decades fighting for democratic rights, and as a result, been imprisoned for 14 years, including four years in solitary confinement, he knew “how important access to education and freedom of speech are for people and society to grow, deve


By The Kathmandu Post
June 12, 2019

Analysis, Politics

Hong Kong leader defiant despite protest over extradition bill.

Hong Kong leader Carrie Lam says extradition Bill has to be passed as opponents call for fresh protests. A day after what organisers touted as an unprecedented protest with a record one million people taking to the streets to protest against proposed changes to an extradition Bill, Chief Executive Carrie Lam has shown no signs of backing down even as opponents called for fresh protests. Mrs Lam told the media late in the morning on Monday (June 10) that the proposed amendments to the Bill that will go through a second reading on Wednesday (June 12), “will help to uphold justice”. She noted that the intense discussions over the last four months since the idea was mooted in early February “is quite unprecedented”.


By The Straits Times
June 11, 2019