EDITORIAL Liberation from the Vietnam tragedy
It would be comforting to mark the
25th anniversary of the end of the Vietnam War secure in the knowledge we have
understood its lessons.
Though we are less willing now to send our young into battle, we
are more willing to fight clean wars. The post-Vietnam battlefield
is sterile, characterized by military planners in air-conditioned rooms half a
world distant, choosing who lives and who dies.
NCR readers who remember the Vietnam War will also remember one of
its most prominent critics, the late Arkansas Sen. J. William Fulbright. It was
Fulbright who coined the phrase the arrogance of power. He warned
of the dire consequences of using military power recklessly. He spoke of the
responsibilities of a superpower before the phrase was popular. He warned
against the use of military might, arguing that it seldom produces its intended
objective. He said U.S. policy must grow out of our nations ideals and
must involve an understanding of local culture and history. Against such an
examination, he said, we would never have entered Vietnam.
His ideas were relevant then and are more so today at a time when
our nation stands as the remaining superpower.
Had we only understood Vietnamese history, society or culture we
would have seen things much differently. We might have learned that in the
1940s Ho Chi Minh so admired U.S. law and life that he patterned Vietnams
founding documents on the U.S. Constitution. Surely there was room for
negotiation.
Today, the CIA says it knew all along the folly of U.S. policy in
Vietnam -- and so advised U.S. policymakers. If true, where were the
resignations making the objections public? How many lives might have been
spared?
Times have changed. Without embarrassment, Washington tells us it
must act to protect U.S. interests abroad and willingly uses
military might to do so. The interests at stake are rarely today so idealistic
as the preservation of freedom or democracy or seeking justice. They are
defined instead as assuring access to economic markets and to local resources.
The wars of today rarely stand up to even the most relaxed moral measure. While
Americans have felt much uneasiness over our nations role in the Vietnam
War, it is increasingly clear that we have learned few of its lessons.
Curiously, the Vietnamese people seem willing to forgive and
accept us. Perhaps it is because as a small and poor nation, Vietnam recognizes
its dependence on other countries. Even in the midst of nationalistic fervor,
the Vietnamese know they cannot go forward alone. They want reconciliation and
they want U.S. friendship.
If only we understood our dependence on others, we might finally
find the courage to express regrets. Were we, as a nation, to offer words of
regret to the Vietnamese people, we would finally gain our own liberation from
the Vietnam tragedy. New doors would open. Communication would grow;
collaboration would follow. Reparation would no longer be out of the question.
It would be a true cleansing of the national soul. Short of these steps we
remain mired, even without fully knowing why.
The infection diagnosed by Fulbright needs to be cleansed and
healed. Answering Vietnams call to accountability provides a step in the
critical challenge to reclaim a foreign policy compatible with our
nations ideals.
From both a moral and practical perspective, our national
self interests must be viewed in the context of the broader
interests of the human family. Anything less constitutes betrayal of our ideals
and a concession to the murderous lessons of the 20th century.
National Catholic Reporter, April 28,
2000
|