What's new

Chinese Support for North Vietnam during the Vietnam War: The Decisive Edge

In Defense of Socialism, 1990–1991

After the collapse of
socialist regimes in Eastern Europe, the VCP chief and defense minister
sought an ideological alliance with China.

As Party Chief Nguyen Van Linh explained to the Chinese ambassador to Vietnam on
June 5, 1990, the situation was marked by the West’s offensive to eliminate socialism
and concurrently the difficulties of the Soviet Union in defending socialism.

In
this situation, Linh concluded,“China should raise high the banner of
socialism and stick to Marxism-Leninism.”22 Linh and Defense Minister Le
Duc Anh hoped that China would take the leadership of the world’s
socialist forces; they indicated to the ambassador that they were ready
to meet Chinese leaders to discuss solidarity between the two states to
fight imperialism.

.
.

On September 2 that year,
Vietnam’s Independence Day, the party and government chiefs did not stay
in Hanoi to celebrate the 45th birthday of their state but instead flew
to Chengdu, China, for a secret summit with Chinese leaders, the first
since the mid-1970s.

The Vietnamese understood that their acceptance
of the time, place, and participants was a sign of deference to China.

.
.

Participants
included Vietnam’s elder statesman Pham Van Dong but not China’s
paramount leader Deng Xiaoping; Foreign Minister Thach was excluded.
During the meeting, the Vietnamese also let the Chinese dictate the
terms of negotiation;this should be seen against the background of a
decade-long hostility between the two countries.

The Vietnamese
had urgent reasons for taking this approach. At the time, the
counterweight of the Soviet Union was no longer available and Vietnam
was still isolated, regionally and globally. In China, Vietnam faced a
disproportionately powerful neighbor, and in order to prevent Chinese
aggression, Hanoi had to pay deference to Beijing. It appeared to be the
calculation of Pham Van
Dong and, to some extent, Prime Minister Do Muoi.

Yet, as discussed above, General Secretary Nguyen Van Linh had different concerns and priorities.
His
primary intention at Chengdu was to discuss how to protect socialism
from the West, led by the United States. Although the Chinese refused to
play the solidarity game, Linh and his successors over the next decade
kept trying to reestablish the Sino-Vietnamese relationship on an
ideological basis.

www.yale.edu/seas/Vuving.doc · DOC file
 
This facts ? written by Chinese, by liars, big jok :argh:

check the link,all of them are from third party foreign resources,which one was written by Chinese?and which piece of imformation is not true?can you point that out?
 
Chinese are true friends to people they call friends. they dont let their freinds down like others do
you make me laugh when you say ''Chinese are true friends to people they call friends''
with Vietnam, China invaded Vietnamese islands and lands, support Khmer Rouge murderers to attack Vietnam...
now, china bully small neighbors in Asean with expansionist of ''nine that line'' in (SCS) East sea.
with Brother, they will not do it.
 
over 4000 Chinese PLA soldier were killed helping Vietnam fighting against France and US,1446 of them were buried in 40 PLA cemeteries in Vietnam,let's call on the government to bring back our fallen heros,we should not make them rest on unfriendly land.

One of the Chinese PLA fallen soldiers cemeteries in Vietnam.

¿¹ÃÀÔ®Ô½¡ª¡ªÔ½ÄÏÁéɽԮԽ¿¹ÃÀÁÒÊ¿¹«Ä¹AÇø - ÒÕÔ·ÂÛ̳ - ÂÛ̳
Did we request those idiot loser to fight for us ??or your leader tried to sent them to spy VN and the result was : they Did help CHina alot during 1979 war .

And this untrusted China link, do you have France-US link about PLA troop in VN ??

Most of them served in Logistics Detachment squad, not died in battle field
 
Military History Online - Chinese Support for North Vietnam during the Vietnam War: The Decisive Edge

by Bob Seals

“Best turn it into a bigger war…I’m afraid you really ought to send more troops to the South…Don’t be afraid of U.S. intervention, at most it’s no worse than having another Korean War. The Chinese army is prepared, and if America takes the risk of attacking North Vietnam, the Chinese army will march in at once. Our troops want a war now.”[1]
-- Mao speaking to the North Vietnamese in 1964

So why did the powerful modern nations of France and the United States lose two wars in Vietnam to a third rate military power like North Vietnam? This is the logical question that many historians have asked and attempted to answer since the Second Vietnam War ended in April 1975 with the fall of Saigon to North Vietnamese tanks.
There is nothing mysterious about why France and the US 'lost' in Viet Nam. Those who repeatedly said historians 'attempted' to come up with an answer either does not know much about the relationships between politics and the military or know but does not care. And if they do not care, it is because they wish to perpetuate some kind of quasi-mythological status to the North Vietnamese Army over facts and logic.

The most fundamental fact about the relationship between the politics of a war and the military that engages in said war is: Political goals determine military objectives.

Everything else is subservient to that fact.

For France, it was not that difficult to see why she lost and it was a true loss. France tried to reclaim not just Viet Nam but Indochina, which comprised of Viet Nam, Laos, and Cambodia. Of the three, the only advantage Viet Nam has over the other two was that Viet Nam was a coastal territory. Else all three were equally rich in resources for exploitation. France tried to reclaim the entire region immediately at the end of WW II where the French military, like every other military, needed rest. But if the political goal was to reclaim territory, then the military must oblige, no matter how tired or how thin it was. In short, the French military was simply not up to the task at that time. In battles, the NVA led by Võ Nguyên Giáp actually lost most engagements against numerically inferior French forces. Part was because of superior technology, part was because Giáp overestimated himself as a military commander when he was not.

For the US, by the time the US military was tasked to the war, the political goal was already set: Partition. Here is where so many 'historians', real or fake, conveniently glossed over. The US/SVN alliance was fighting to maintain partition ala Korea but the China/NVN was fighting for a diametrically different goal: All of Viet Nam. So if we go by the tried and true dictum that political goals determine military objectives, the Vietnam War was sort of destined to be in North Viet Nam's favor from the start. Militarily speaking, the US overwhelmed the NVA. The US violated North Vietnam's airspace at will and bombed that leadership to the point where they plead for respite via negotiations, which everyone knew was farcical to the core. Even after the US military largely withdrew under the 'Vietnamization' of the war, the NVA lost the major battle called 'The Easter Offensive' where the South Vietnamese did all the ground battles and defeated the NVA. It was only after the US Congress decided to stop all funding for the USAF's participation in Viet Nam did South Viet Nam collapsed.

Between fighting for partition and fighting for the whole, the only way for the US/SVN alliance to maintain partition like Korea is if China stopped supporting North Viet Nam. But since the Korean peninsula has a strong US military presence because of a successful partition, China cannot afford to have another successful partition with an assured US military presence in her southern flank. Viet Nam had to be unified under communism at any cost and most of that cost would be borned by the North Vietnamese. Against this political goal and its military objectives, the side that was fighting for the political goal of partition would soon be wearied and that was exactly what happened in the US domestically. Korea was a successful partition but that cost was deemed too high by the American public. The US military did not lost in any sense of the word, especially when the NVA was defeated by the ARVN after the US military was largely gone from the country, but when the US political leadership decided to abandon its political goal of partition, the US military had no choice but to follow.

The Vietnam War reinforced that dictum: Political goals determine military objectives.

Even Hitler with his superior military wanted negotiations. After all, if one side can present to the other that so and so military objectives were achieved what better way to convince that other side of the hopelessness of the situation?
 
Did we request those idiot loser to fight for us ??or your leader tried to sent them to spy VN and the result was : they Did help CHina alot during 1979 war .

And this untrusted China link, do you have France-US link about PLA troop in VN ??

Most of them served in Logistics Detachment squad, not died in battle field

Ho Chi Ming went to Beijing and begged Premier Zhou En-Lai to take his little delegation to Geneva where China, Russia and the West discussed the Vietnam issue in 1954.

---------- Post added at 05:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:28 PM ----------

201104181139518609.jpg


images


haixiachina7daa628bb0c6c52c7738afbffdcd3d95.jpg
 
Did we request those idiot loser to fight for us ??or your leader tried to sent them to spy VN and the result was : they Did help CHina alot during 1979 war .

And this untrusted China link, do you have France-US link about PLA troop in VN ??

Most of them served in Logistics Detachment squad, not died in battle field

you are a diagrace to human kind those army personels send to vietnam wether they are in the front line or not they are there risking their life to help you pathetic disgraceful country and you called them idiot looser. now i know why americans called you guys Rats, judging by your post calling you guys rats is an insult to rat.
 
Wait a minute! Stop it guys before we go any futher!

Did Vietnam ever denial any help from China during Vietnam war?
Did China ever statement to Chinese people any help was trade off Paracels Islands in 1974 by occupied it?
With help from China and will exspecting something in return from Vietnam by U shape all China wants?
In trade of the secured US could harm China from N. Korea and S. China what China could be any better China does help Vietnam?
What and why Chinese member brought this article here for?

Don't call that "HELP" will make me sick from what China does to Vietnam.Help was alot of meaning and base on the scenerio from time to time and specially for that time.

Like this moment, China "HELP" Pakistan to against India, and later on China will get something from Pak and Chinese people still think oh the a FREE HELP from China? Is that realy help from China? You name it!
 
Back
Top Bottom