Nixon’s policies towards Vietnam, in the years 1968 to 1972, were a total failure. Assess the validity of this view.
Level
A Level
Year Examined
2019
Topic
The Cold War, c1945-1991
👑Complete Model Essay
Nixon’s policies towards Vietnam, in the years 1968 to 1972, were a total failure. Assess the validity of this view.
Nixon's Policies in Vietnam: A Total Failure?
Richard Nixon's presidency, marked by the ongoing Vietnam War, saw a shift in US policy away from direct military intervention towards a strategy of "peace with honor." This essay will argue that, while Nixon achieved some success in extricating the US from the quagmire of Vietnam, his policies from 1968 to 1972 ultimately failed to achieve their broader objectives and left a legacy of instability in Southeast Asia.
Arguments for Total Failure
A key pillar of Nixon's Vietnam strategy was Vietnamisation - the process of equipping and training South Vietnamese forces (ARVN) to take over the fight. Proponents of the "total failure" view argue that this policy was fundamentally flawed. The ARVN, plagued by low morale, corruption, and political appointments, never evolved into an effective fighting force. Instead, Vietnamisation deepened South Vietnam's reliance on the US, as evidenced by the continued need for American airpower and logistical support.
Nixon's expansion of the war into Cambodia and Laos further exemplifies this failure. Aiming to disrupt the Ho Chi Minh trail, the US conducted bombing campaigns and launched ground incursions. These actions, concealed from the American public, destabilized both countries. In Cambodia, they strengthened the Khmer Rouge, ultimately paving the way for their genocidal regime. This contradicted Nixon's promise of de-escalation and demonstrated a willingness to escalate the conflict to achieve his objectives.
Furthermore, Nixon's diplomatic efforts, particularly his détente with China, failed to deliver a decisive breakthrough in the peace process. While rapprochement with China aimed to pressure North Vietnam, Hanoi proved resilient. Kissinger's negotiations yielded no significant concessions, and the war continued unabated.
Challenging the Notion of Total Failure
However, labeling Nixon's policies a "total failure" requires acknowledging some successes. Vietnamisation, however flawed, facilitated the withdrawal of US troops. By 1972, only 47,000 American soldiers remained in Vietnam, a significant reduction from the peak of over 500,000. This allowed Nixon to appease domestic anti-war sentiment and claim progress towards ending American involvement.
Furthermore, while the expansion of the war into Cambodia and Laos remains controversial, it did disrupt the Ho Chi Minh trail. The North Vietnamese and Vietcong suffered logistical setbacks, and the ARVN, with US support, successfully resisted the 1972 Easter Offensive. These events, while not decisive victories, demonstrated the ARVN's growing capabilities and bought time for the South Vietnamese government.
Finally, Nixon's negotiation strategy, though ultimately unsuccessful in achieving a lasting peace, did secure some concessions. The Paris Peace Accords, signed in 1973, included a ceasefire and the release of American prisoners of war. While the agreement proved fragile, it allowed Nixon to claim he had achieved "peace with honor", albeit a short-lived one.
Conclusion
Nixon's policies in Vietnam present a complex and nuanced picture. While he extricated the US from direct military involvement and made some progress in strengthening the South Vietnamese government, his actions ultimately failed to achieve a lasting peace. Vietnamisation proved inadequate, the expansion of the war into Cambodia and Laos had disastrous consequences, and his diplomatic efforts yielded limited results. The fall of Saigon in 1975, just two years after the Paris Peace Accords, stands as a stark reminder of the limitations of Nixon's policies and the ultimate failure to achieve "peace with honor" in Vietnam.
Note: History Study Pack Required
Score Big with Perfectly Structured History Essays!
Prepare effortlessly for your A/AS/O-Level exams with our comprehensive...
History Study Pack.
✅ 1200+ Model Essays: Master your essay writing with expertly crafted answers to past paper questions.
✅ Exam Boards Covered: Tailored materials for AQA, Cambridge, and OCR exams.
🍃 Free Essay Plan
Nixon’s Vietnam Policy: Total Failure?
This essay will assess the validity of the view that Nixon’s policies towards Vietnam, in the years 1968 to 1972, were a total failure. It will examine arguments for and against this view, ultimately concluding that while Nixon did achieve some successes, his policies ultimately failed to secure ‘peace with honour’ as he had promised.
Arguments for Nixon’s Failure
1. Vietnamisation: This policy, aimed at equipping and training the South Vietnamese Army (ARVN) to take over the war effort, ultimately failed. The ARVN suffered from low morale, corruption, and dependence on US resources. Their effectiveness was questionable, as evidenced by their inability to withstand the North Vietnamese offensive of 1972.
2. Cambodia and Laos: Nixon’s attempts to disrupt the Ho Chi Minh trail by attacking Cambodia and Laos backfired. These actions destabilized these countries, strengthening the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia and increasing US involvement in Southeast Asia at a time when Nixon was promising withdrawal.
3. Détente with China: Nixon’s efforts to use China as leverage in the peace process yielded minimal results. Kissinger failed to secure significant concessions from North Vietnam, undermining the effectiveness of this strategy.
Arguments Against Nixon’s Failure
1. Troop Withdrawal: Vietnamisation allowed Nixon to significantly reduce US troop numbers, demonstrating a tangible achievement. By June 1972, only 47,000 US troops remained in Vietnam.
2. ARVN Successes: The ARVN, despite limitations, received substantial resources and achieved some military successes, including resisting the Spring Offensive of 1972.
3. Weakening the NVA: Attacks on Cambodia and Laos did disrupt Vietcong operations, leading to significant captures of weapons and supplies.
4. Peace Treaty Negotiations: Nixon secured a key concession in the peace negotiations: Thieu's continued leadership in South Vietnam. This was a vital step towards a final agreement.
Conclusion
While Nixon did achieve some successes, including reducing US troop presence and securing Thieu’s position, his overall aim of ‘peace with honour’ remained elusive. Vietnamisation ultimately failed, and his attempts to disrupt the North Vietnamese supply lines destabilized neighboring countries and ultimately led to the Khmer Rouge’s rise to power. Nixon's actions in Vietnam, while aimed at achieving a successful exit, ultimately contributed to the fall of South Vietnam and the escalation of conflict in the region, making it difficult to argue that his policies were anything but a failure.
Extracts from Mark Schemes
Nixon's Vietnam Policy: Failure or Pragmatic Retreat?
The assertion that Nixon's Vietnam policies from 1968 to 1972 were a "total failure" is a debatable one, carrying weight in its simplicity, but lacking nuance. While the war ultimately ended in American withdrawal and North Vietnamese victory, labeling Nixon's approach a complete failure ignores its complexities and, arguably, its successes within a limited framework.
Nixon's "Vietnamization" policy aimed to gradually withdraw US troops while empowering South Vietnamese forces to take over the fighting. This, in theory, should have allowed the US to extricate themselves from the quagmire while maintaining a semblance of stability. However, the policy faced several shortcomings. The South Vietnamese military was demonstrably weaker than their Northern counterparts, reliant on American logistics and airpower. This culminated in the devastating Easter Offensive of 1972, when North Vietnamese forces breached South Vietnamese defenses, highlighting the fragile nature of the "Vietnamized" army.
Yet, Vietnamization did achieve some initial success. Troop withdrawals allowed for a reduction in American casualties, satisfying domestic anti-war sentiment and contributing to Nixon's re-election in 1972. The policy also demonstrated a shift in American strategy, moving away from direct military engagement and towards a more cautious, strategic approach.
Furthermore, Nixon's diplomacy, particularly his clandestine overtures to China and the Soviet Union, played a crucial role in pressuring North Vietnam to negotiate. The opening to China, a key North Vietnamese ally, significantly weakened their support base and bolstered the US's bargaining position. This, coupled with Nixon's "madman" theory – the strategic use of unpredictability to intimidate adversaries – contributed to the Paris Peace Accords of 1973, ending direct US involvement in the war.
However, the accords ultimately proved fragile and ineffective. North Vietnam, emboldened by the US withdrawal and the perceived weakness of the South Vietnamese, violated the agreement and launched a full-scale offensive in 1975. The fall of Saigon in April 1975 signified the end of the war, a victory for the North and a crushing defeat for the US.
In conclusion, while Nixon's policies facilitated a withdrawal from the Vietnam War and offered a semblance of peace for a short time, they ultimately failed to achieve their ultimate goal of preserving a non-communist South Vietnam. The war's aftermath, marked by the communist takeover, a refugee crisis, and the lingering social and political ramifications, serves as a stark reminder of the enduring legacy of American involvement in Vietnam.
Therefore, labeling Nixon's Vietnam policy a "total failure" is an oversimplification. It was a complex strategy with some short-term successes, but ultimately failed to prevent the collapse of South Vietnam and the tragic loss of life. It is crucial to acknowledge the limitations of the policy and its lasting impact, while recognizing the nuanced realities of a conflict that remains a haunting chapter in American history.