|
WSWS : Book
Reviews
An account of American terrorism in Vietnam
By Patrick Martin
6 June 2000
Use
this version to print
The Secret War Against Hanoi: Kennedy's and Johnson's Use of
Spies, Saboteurs, and Covert Warriors in North Vietnam, by
Richard H. Shultz, Jr., 1999, HarperCollins Books, New York
At a time when acts of military aggression perpetrated or planned
by the US government are typically justified in the name of fighting
"international terrorism," a book has appeared which
documents America's role as the organizer of the biggest campaign
of terrorism and sabotage since World War II.
The Secret War Against Hanoi is a detailed examination
of the covert warfare carried out by the Central Intelligence
Agency and the Pentagon in North Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia during
the Vietnam War. The author, Richard Shultz, a professor of international
politics at the Fletcher School and former instructor at the US
Military Academy, was given unprecedented access to the classified
files of the Pentagon's Studies and Observation Group (SOG), which
directed the terrorist campaign during the most intense period
of US intervention in Vietnam, from 1963 to 1972.
It is hardly Shultz's intention to expose the war in Vietnam
as a criminal and terroristic enterprise. He espouses a conventional
pro-military, anticommunist outlook and argues the traditional
complaint of the right wing during the Vietnam War: that excessive
restraint and oversight by civilian authorities, especially in
the Johnson White House, hamstrung the war effort, in this case
the covert side of operations. Nonetheless, despite this political
standpoint, Shultz has assembled a mass of factual material which
documents the type and range of US operations in the North, as
well as in Laos and Cambodia, and demonstrates both the ferocity
and ultimate futility of these efforts.
The covert warfare against North Vietnam began with the assumption
of the presidency by John F. Kennedy in January 1961. Kennedy,
his brother Robert, the Attorney General, and such key aides as
Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, National Security Adviser
McGeorge Bundy, Walt Rostow, William Bundy and Roger Hilsman were
all enthusiastic supporters of counterinsurgency. They viewed
"unconventional warfare" as the appropriate tactic for
combating the upsurge of guerrilla struggles for national independence,
which they identified, in the prism of the Cold War, as part of
the global struggle against communism.
The covert war in North Vietnam was not a "rogue"
operation, but one directed and even set into motion by the White
House. One of Kennedy's first directives to the CIA after he took
office was to demand that the agency initiate covert operations
in North Vietnam, to "give Ho Chi Minh a taste of his own
medicine." CIA officials, who had attempted without success
to develop an agent network in the North in the period following
the French defeat at Dien Bien Phu in 1954, were extremely skeptical
about the prospects.
One CIA veteran, Herbert Weisshart, provided six reasons why
North Vietnam "was the most difficult target against which
to run psywar and other cover operations." These included
the lack of any incipient or developed resistance force; the aftermath
of the victory over French colonialism in 1954, including popular
support for "the Hanoi regime's effort to build a progressive
and economically sound nation"; exceptionally strong controls
over personal movements; closed borders, with no outward flow
of Catholics or minority tribesmen who could be recruited; little
non-communist travel or commerce into North Vietnam; and the nature
of the South Vietnamese regime, which "in the early 1960s
offered little in the way of an attractive alternative to the
NVN target audience."
Kennedy ignored such cautionary signals from within the national
security apparatus. The new administration viewed the question
of covert warfare in Vietnam largely within the framework of the
experience of World War II, equating Stalinism with Nazism and
believing that a resistance movement in North Vietnam would spring
up along the lines of the resistance in France or Italy (which,
ironically, was largely dominated by the Stalinists). One top
State Department policy-maker, Roger Hilsman, had actually served
in the World War II OSS (forerunner of the CIA), organizing anti-Japanese
guerrilla units in Burma.
For three years, the CIA undertook a relatively limited campaign
of activities against North Vietnam, inserting a total of 250
agents, all South Vietnamese, who were to engage in espionage,
sabotage and selective assassinations. They were intended to conduct
psychological warfare and distribute anticommunist propaganda.
The effort was an admitted failure. By 1963, the agency considered
that only four teams and one single agent were still functioning,
about 15 percent of those sent into the North.
Impatient with the pace of the counterinsurgency campaign,
the Kennedy administration decided in the summer of 1963 to turn
over responsibility for operations against North Vietnam to the
Pentagon. The CIA was instructed to hand over its agents and projects
to a new Pentagon unit, given the deliberately opaque title of
"Studies and Observations Group" (SOG), which was to
employ military personnel to plan and carry out a more ambitious
program of covert warfare.
SOG conducted four major operations: further agent penetration
of the North; naval bombardment and the landing of sabotage teams
on the northern coast; psychological warfare against the civilian
population of the north; and military actions in Laos, and later
Cambodia, aimed at monitoring and disrupting Vietnamese operations
along the Ho Chi Minh Trail, the principal supply route for the
National Liberation Front in the South.
Agent penetration of the North involved the insertion of another
250 South Vietnamese in the course of five years, from 1963 through
1967. These efforts continued to prove largely futile, and by
late 1967, SOG commanders believed that only seven teams and a
single agent were functioning, a tiny return for a large investment.
But the reality was even worse.
Robert Kingston, the incoming chief of OP 34, the unit responsible
for infiltration, ordered a thorough reassessment of the operations,
conducted in early 1968. CIA and Defense Intelligence Agency counterintelligence
specialists evaluated all case officer reports and related materials
and concluded that every team which was thought to be functioning
inside North Vietnam was actually under North Vietnamese control.
Every one of the 500 agents sent by the CIA and the Pentagon during
a seven-year period had been captured or turned into double agents.
"It was a complete double cross," Shultz writes, "a
seven-year spoof that had seen nearly 500 agents inserted into
NVN but none brought back out ..."
Gulf of Tonkin incident
The maritime operations mounted by SOG consisted of raids on
the North Vietnamese coast by small vessels supplied by the United
States and operated by South Vietnamese personnel; occasional
landings on the coast to carry out sabotage of ports, communications
and industrial facilities; and the kidnapping of Vietnamese fishermen,
who were taken to an indoctrination camp, propagandized, and then
returned to the North.
These operations had no significant impact on the military
course of the war, but did provide the pretext for the passage
of the Gulf of Tonkin resolution in August 1964, which the Johnson
administration cited as its legal authority for the massive escalation
of the US military involvement in Vietnam, without a declaration
of war. Congress passed the resolution after reported attacks
by Vietnamese PT boats on the USS Maddox, a destroyer which
the Navy claimed was on routine patrol in international waters
in the Gulf of Tonkin.
There are conflicting reports about the attacks on the Maddox,
at least one of which was imagined by the sailors on the ship.
There is no disputing what the Maddox was doing in the
Gulf of Tonkin. It was participating in two covert operations:
backing up a maritime raid on the North Vietnamese coastline,
and monitoring North Vietnamese air defenses which were being
probed by US warplanes in a type of action known as a "DeSoto
attack," practiced by the Pentagon everywhere on the perimeter
of the Soviet bloc during the Cold War.
In these operations, warplanes adopted a course for the Soviet
Union, China, North Vietnam, etc., triggering the activation of
the target country's air defense systems, which could then be
profiled for the planning of future military actions. (Many analysts
believe that the shoot-down of KAL Flight 007, the South Korean
jumbo jet which was destroyed by Soviet air defense fighters in
1983 after it penetrated Soviet airspace over Sakhalin Island,
was the byproduct of a DeSoto attack gone awry).
While the maritime operations were not a complete debacle,
given undisputed US control of the sea and air, they accomplished
little beyond inducing North Vietnam to strengthen its coastal
defenses. After 1965 these defenses had become so well organized
that South Vietnamese crew members were increasingly unwilling
to go ashore and confined their actions to firing from a distance.
SOG maritime attacks on North Vietnam were also linked to psychological
warfare. Hundreds of Vietnamese fishermen were captured in the
course of the US-directed raids, and taken to an offshore facility,
where they were recruited to a fictitious anticommunist guerrilla
force supposedly operating in the North, called the Sacred Sword
of the Patriots League (SSPL). The purpose of this activity was
to deceive the North Vietnamese into believing that there was
an actual insurgency and induce them to divert resources into
combating it, thereby weakening their support for the NLF in the
South.
This preposterous effort was never effective. The North Vietnamese
were never fooled, and repeatedly exposed the phony operation.
Shultz cites an article in Hoc Tap, the theoretical magazine
of the Vietnamese Communist Party, which reported radio broadcasts
from the fake SSPL, through which the US government was seeking
to convince the North Vietnamese population that "This movement,
which exists only in their imagination, has succeeded in organizing
bases against the people's government in a number of provinces
and cities of North Vietnam."
Like most US covert operations, the purpose of secrecy was
not to conceal the operation from the "enemy," who was
well aware of it, but from the American people, while the Johnson
administration denounced North Vietnamese reports of US terrorist
attacks as "communist propaganda."
The Ho Chi Minh Trail
The fourth and most developed of the counterinsurgency campaigns
were the operations mounted by SOG against the Ho Chi Minh Trail.
Some of these were purely terroristicplacing posters on
trees along the trail attacking Ho Chi Minh or making obscene
comments about Asian women, with mines planted in the ground underneath
to blow up anyone who tried to rip down the posters.
Others were quasi-military, as SOG sent teams into Laos to
try to spot convoys of trucks or troop concentrations and target
them for aerial attack. But again, as in the maritime operations,
the actual effect was to compel the Vietnamese to strengthen their
military security along the trail, develop the road system into
a whole network with many alternate routes, and improve their
ability to detect and strike back at SOG infiltrators. As a result,
US casualties on these operations steadily increased, reaching
a level of 50 percent per mission in 1969.
So powerful were the defensive positions along the Ho Chi Minh
Trail, thanks at least in part to SOG probing, that when, in early
1971, the South Vietnamese army sent its best units storming into
Laos in an effort to smash up the trail, they were pulverized
by North Vietnamese artillery and routed.
Shultz refers only once in passing to the 1998 exposure of
Operation Tailwind, in a CNN broadcast which provided substantial
evidence that SOG employed nerve gas in at least one attack on
a North Vietnamese base in Laos where US defectors were allegedly
hiding. CNN retracted the broadcast under pressure from the Pentagon
and right-wing veterans' groups, and fired the producers. Shultz
makes no attempt to factually refute the allegations in the CNN
report, only citing the supposed timidity of the Johnson and Nixon
White House in relation to special operations to suggest that
use of nerve gas would never have been authorized in Washington.
While Shultz denounces the Tailwind exposé, he reports
one aspect of the SOG campaign against the Ho Chi Minh Trail that
underscores the Cold War mentality of the entire US military intervention
in Vietnam. This is the case of Captain Larry Thorne, SOG operations
officer for the raids into Laos, who was killed in action there.
Thorne was born in Finland in 1919, entered the Finnish army
in 1938 and fought in the 1939-40 war against the Soviet Union.
He subsequently conducted guerrilla warfare against the Soviet
forces after the Finnish regime allied itself with Nazi Germany
and reentered the war. As Shultz tells it, "In September
1944, Finland surrendered to the Soviet Union. Thorne didn't.
He joined the Germans, attended their school for guerrilla warfare,
and then fought with their marines until the war ended.
"The Soviets wanted to get their hands on Thorne and forced
the Finnish government to arrest him as a wartime German collaborator.
They planned to take him to Moscow to be tried for war crimes.
Thorne had other plans. He escaped, made his way to the United
States, and with the help of Wild Bill Donovan became a citizen.
The wartime head of the OSS knew of Thorne's commando exploits..."
Thorne joined the US army and his expertise in guerrilla warfare
led him into the Special Forces Group, where he was commissioned
a first lieutenant, eventually rising to the rank of captain and
commanding a Special Forces team in Vietnam, before joining SOG.
The story of Larry Thorne says a great deal about the real
nature of the US war in Vietnam, which combined anticommunism,
anti-Asian racism, and barbarism toward the Vietnamese population.
There are definite parallels between the US-directed slaughter
in Vietnam and the Nazi atrocities on the Eastern Front. But Shultz
recounts the career of this Nazi collaborator turned American
Green Beret as though it were a tale of epic heroism.
The political perspective of Shultz's book can be summed up
in one sentence towards the end, where he laments: "Throughout
its existence, SOG fought two formidable enemiesNorth Vietnam's
leadership in Hanoi, and America's leadership in Washington."
He repeatedly criticizes Lyndon Johnson for pulling back from
the commitment to counterinsurgency initially made by John F.
Kennedy. The Johnson White House and State Departmentabove
all special envoy Averill Harriman, a particular bete noir
rejected proposals from SOG commanders to initiate guerrilla
warfare in North Vietnam.
According to Shultz, the CIA was obsessed with the "lessons
of Hungary," when the Eisenhower administration decided against
any direct intervention during the 1956 anti-Stalinist uprising,
in part out of concern over a possible nuclear confrontation with
the USSR. Both the CIA and the State Department opposed any operation
whose goal would be the overthrow of North Vietnam, for fear this
would produce a Korea-style military intervention by China. As
a result, the covert war, like the war as a whole, was deprived
of any strategic rationale.
It is significant, in its own way, that the Pentagon has tacitly
sponsored such a volume, giving the author access to secret files
and allowing him to interview former SOG personnel who would normally
be sworn to silence. The book thus becomes part of the effort
by the military brass to overcome the long-term effects of the
Vietnam debacle and advance its claims against civilian authority.
But the real lessons of Vietnam are underscored by Shultz's
admission, throughout the book, that every level of the US secret
warfare command in Vietnam was saturated with the conviction that
"our" Vietnamese could not be trusted and that agents
of the North Vietnamese or the National Liberation Front had penetrated
the South Vietnamese intelligence and command structure.
Shultz interviewed one leader of the maritime operations against
North Vietnam, who declared that he never involved his South Vietnamese
counterparts in the planning of operations and did not inform
them of the timing or target. Asked why not, he replied, "I
would not trust anybody but an American, and when the Vietnamese
were getting ready to go [on a mission] they went into isolation
under American scrutiny."
In addition to the colossal debacle of the agent insertions
in the North, many of the cross-border raids into Laos and Cambodia
were compromised by NLF and North Vietnamese intelligence. Shultz
was told of one such case by General John Singlaub, who commanded
SOG for two years. Singlaub said that a North Vietnamese colonel
penetrated the office of the prime minister of South Vietnam,
Gen. Nguyen Cao Ky, and intercepted information which Singlaub
had provided to General Cao Van Vien, chairman of South Vietnam's
Joint General Staff, which Vien had shared with Ky.
According to Singlaub: "Somehow they had communications
that allowed them to be able to alert Hanoi on short notice. I
can understand how they got word to North Vietnam for an operation
that's going to take place a week later, but my gosh, some of
these things were pulled off in less than forty-eight hours."
Even 30 years after the fact, this US officer and fanatical
anticommunist (Singlaub played a major role in arming and financing
the Nicaraguan contras in the 1980s) marvels at the persistence
and resourcefulness of his Vietnamese opponents, without any comprehension
of the revolutionary determination which was the source of their
superiority over the better armed and equipped South Vietnamese
forces.
Despite the author's focus on military details, especially
the conflicts within the US command structure, the most important
single conclusion from this study is political, not military:
the American intervention foundered on the inability of the US
government or any of its military or intelligence agencies to
understand, let alone successfully counter, the revolutionary
impulses that motivated the Vietnamese people.
See Also:
McCain in Vietnam: the ugly
face of American imperialism
[3 May 2000]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |