Last Sunday marked the 25th anniversary of the end of the Vietnam War. There have been countless studies and endless research done on the war over the past two-and-a-half decades, but most of it has been undertaken from a US perspective, marginalizing Vietnamese viewpoints of the war.
During the Cold War, Vietnam was portrayed as a battleground of famine, terrorism and killings in films like The Deer Hunter and Apocalypse Now. With the end of the Cold War and the opening up of Vietnam, the popular view of the country has changed. It is now seen as an exotic and dangerous destination. The media in Taiwan has also begun to use an "Oriental gaze" in its reports on Vietnam. These reports are also from a US standpoint, regardless of whether they are retrospectively for or against the war. If we examine Vietnam's post-war development, however, it becomes clear that the "exotic gaze" is merely an apology and rationalization for global US hegemony.
The US lost 58,000 soldiers during the Vietnam War. Their loss created a rift in American society, but what about the effect of the war on the Vietnamese? Accurate data is unavailable, but the Encyclopedia Britannica estimates that about 2.1 million Vietnamese lost their lives during the war, including about 1 million civilians (the Vietnamese government claims that the civilian death toll is as high as 2 million). A loss of this magnitude would be catastrophic for any developing country. In addition to war casualties, Vietnam is still suffering from the devastating and lingering effects of the war. The loss of nearly 1 million young men resulted in a serious gender imbalance in society, and the country has been forced to shoulder the burden of a large number of orphans and widows. Over the past 25 years, Vietnam's government has allocated huge sums for these victims of the war.
Another problem from the war stems from the huge amount of Agent Orange that the US sprayed on Vietnam's forests during the war. The Vietcong fought from the jungles and used the Ho Chi Min Trail, which passed through thickly vegetated areas, to resupply its troops. To aid in troop detection, the US dumped large amounts of a defoliation agent that contained dioxin on the jungles and forests in the highlands of central Vietnam. The chemical agent dropped on Vietnam takes several decades to breakdown, and causes cancer to those exposed and birth defects among subsequent generations.
A survey conducted by the Vietnam government of the the children of soldiers now living in northern Vietnam who had served in central Vietnam when Agent Orange was being dropped shows that nearly 70 percent of their birth defects were likely linked to Agent Orange. And this study was conducted on a sample of the population now living in an area relatively unaffected by the spraying of Agent Orange. It is almost certain that the plight of the people living in the central highlands is much worse. Yet the US government to this day refuses to admit that there is any correlation between the birth defects found in the central highlands and the Agent Orange the US military sprayed on Vietnam during the war, even though there are ample cases of US military veterans that have been harmed by the agent. If the US were to admit to this connection, it would have to pay a huge amount of money to Vietnam's victims. This remains one of the unresolved issues between the US and Vietnam.
Another factor is the US embargo on Vietnam. The US has enacted a complete economic embargo on Vietnam since its military retreated from Saigon. In 1986, the government began to institute economic reforms and open markets to help rebuild its economy ravaged by war and a socialist system. In the 90s, Vietnam's policy towards foreign investors was the most open of Southeast Asian nations and the country actively tried to gain entry into ASEAN. Vietnam hoped to upgrade its national economy by increasing its links with the international system. But the US waited until 1994 before lifting its embargo against Vietnam and even though the US established diplomatic relations with Vietnam in 1995, it is still unwilling to grant Vietnam normal trading status. Negotiations over the issue have dragged on for years, and there is speculation every year about when the US will finally normalize economic relations with Vietnam. The US continues to request special economic concessions and refuses to admit the destructive effects of Agent Orange, leaving the fate of trade and economic links between the two countries up in the air. In the interest of a small portion of the electorate who are vehemently opposed to normalizing relations with Vietnam, including servicemen who served in Vietnam and Vietnamese immigrants, the US government willingly sacrifices the economic interests of 80 million Vietnamese.
Relations between Taiwan and Vietnam have always been fairly close. This was the case before the Vietnam War and since then Taiwan has become Vietnam's largest foreign investor. Moreover, brides from Vietnam can be seen in many places in Taiwan. However, the overwhelming power of US cultural hegemony means that the Taiwan's understanding of Vietnam is filtered through Western-tinted glasses. When will we gaze on Vietnam with our own eyes?
Wang Hong-zen is an assistant professor of future studies at Tamkang University.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath