1973
Paris Peace Agreements in the heart of the people of Paris
Commemorating
the 40th anniversary of the Peace Agreements, the people of Paris is
recalling historical moments. The year 2013 is an important and
symbolic date in the history of France and Vietnam1). The Peace
Agreements are signed on January 27, 1973 at the Avenue Kléber,
75016 Paris, to end the Vietnam War. They have been concluded
between the United States of America and the Democratic Republic of
Vietnam (North Vietnam), the Republic of Vietnam (South Vietnam) and
GRP (Provisional Revolutionary Government of the Republic of South
Vietnam formed by the National Front of Liberation2)). Its key elements were that all parties would initiate a cease-fire in
place 24 hours after signing the agreement; U.S. forces and all
foreign troops would withdraw from South Vietnam no later than 60
days after signing the agreement. American prisoners would be
released simultaneously with the withdrawal of American and foreign
forces; and a National Council of National Reconciliation and Concord
would be created to organize and supervise free and democratic
elections to resolve the political future of the South.
The
signing took place in two ceremonies. In the morning, the
participants were the United States, North Vietnam, South Vietnam and
the GRP. Because the Saigon Government does not wish to involve
recognition of the GRP, all references to that government were
restricted to a second set of documents. That set was signed in the
afternoon, and by only the United States and North Vietnam.
To
bring to mind the testimony to this significant event forty years
ago, friends and progressive movements were standing in front of the
Avenue Kleber- 75016 Paris, to salute the two Vietnamese delegations
guided by Mr. Xuan Thuy (North) and Mme Nguyen Thi Binh (GRP). The
Avenue Kléber was full of people coming with flags and every one was
very happy for the people of Vietnam. It was a great moment to
express the world’s relief that the years of Vietnam war were
officially ending3). Specially, when Mme Nguyen Thi Binh was
getting out of the building, she was very applauded. Se
wore an
amber ao
dai with
embroidery on the bodice.
Undeniably, she was known “as the GRP Foreign Minister the most
important voice of Vietnam” at the Paris talks4).
Historical
archives is now given details of Mme Binh’s life and the very
beginning of her commitment in politics dating earlier than the year
1951. In 1951 she was jailed until 1954. She was released due to the
1954 Geneva Agreements. Recalling the period
from ’58 to ’59 the years of terror, absolute terror when the Diem5) machine went after all the former members of the Resistance. “I,
too, was on the blacklist since I was among the leaders of the
Movement of Struggle for the Implementation of the Geneva Accords”
(Geneva
Conference 1954).
In
South Vietnam, the years 1961-1971 were very difficult times for
people because of the application of National Law of Security6) and
also due to U.S. Air forces’ spraying of the Agent orange/dioxin
(chemical defoliants). One of the most controversial aspects of the
U.S. military effort in Southeast Asia was the widespread use of
chemical defoliants between 1961 and 1971. They were
used to defoliate large parts of the countryside. These
chemicals continue to change the landscape, cause diseases and birth
defects, and poison the food chain. Indeed, it is still
The last ghost of the Vietnam War.
Presently,
I do
agree with Janet Gardner and Pham Quoc Thai that the
last ghost of the war
between
Vietnam and the United State of America still remains the impact of
Agent orange/dioxin in human health and environment in Vietnam. The
Last Ghost of War, the most recent
documentary in Vietnam trilogy tackles the ongoing controversy and
legacy of Agent Orange from the standpoint of Vietnamese victims
seeking justice in U.S. courts. A comparatively recent development,
possible only after the lifting of the U.S. trade embargo and the
partial resolution of American veterans’ claims, the lawsuit
exposes the challenged positions of the chemical companies that
manufactured the herbicide. The film, through outstanding expert
witnesses and a journalistic tone, builds a case that wins the
viewer’s sympathy and support.
The
second Vietnamese notable person, appeared to be Mr. Vo Van Sung
(former first and last Ambassador of Democratic Republic of Vietnam
in Paris). As I have
translated his book
The campaing of Hochiminh in the heart of Paris8), it is known that the Thieu administration was still reliable on
U.S. air support and advisors after 1973 cessez le feu because Mr.
Thieu refused to sign it. Consequently, putting pressure on US
negotiators to achieve the Paris Agreements, North Vietnam and GRP
required that South Vietnam’s President Thieu must be removed before
the fighting could stop (a demand that they had been making since the
beginning of peace talks in 1969). By making this concession, the
North Vietnamese leaders would succeed in getting the U.S. to leave
South Vietnam.
Besides,
in Retrospect:
The tragedy and lessons of Vietnam,
Robert S. McNamara had underlined “We
of the Kennedy and Johnson administrations who participated in the
decisions on Vietnam acted according to what we thought were the
principles and traditions of this nation. We made our decisions in
light of those values. Yet we were wrong, terribly wrong. We owe it
to future generations to explain why”.
However,
to explain why and how Vietnam came to total victory, Mr. Vo Van
Sung had described that the
Hochiminh campaign
had three fronts of struggles, the political, military and diplomacy
ones. With the diplomatic front, the people of Paris had had a
passion for what happened in Paris. Even the picture of the two
rectangular tables is forecast in newspapers and televisions.
Delegates were carefully sited alongside the main table to symbolize
the separation of the four delegations into two warring sides at the
start of the conference in 1969. Canada, Hungary, Indonesia and
Poland were contributing troops to an international commission that
is to supervise the cease-fire.
In
the morning ceremony, all four parties signed identical agreements,
except for one protocol, or annexed document, in which the United
States agreed to remove the mines it had planted in the waters of
North Vietnam. The preamble on the four-party documents mentioned no
government by name and referred only to the “parties
participating in the Paris conference on Vietnam.”
For the
American side, Mr. Rogers and his Washington-based aides flew back
to U.S. immediately after the ceremony. Mr. Sullivan remained in Paris
to receive the list of American prisoners from Hanoi and to hold
further technical meetings on the many unsettled details of
arrangements to be carried out.
As
regards people of Paris, there were also the members of Parti
Communíste Français (PCF) who afforded the logistics help to the
two delegations of North Vietnam and GRP. The two towns as Choisy-le-Roi and Verrières- le-Buissons have housed the Vietnamese delegates
and all technical helps from 1969 to 1973.
Recollections
quoted in this testimony have been made possible with the
identification of actors mentioned by Mr. Vo Van Sung’s book and
solidarity with logistics help from the PCF and the encouragement of
all French and Vietnamese intellectuals and scientists in different progressive
movements9). Actually, many of them are collaborating with Vietnam,
especially in the framework of bilateral decentralized cooperation.
Together
we have supported the fight versus the American
invaders
for national salvation until Vietnam reunification in 1976.
Nguyen
Dac Nhu-Mai
Notes
1) At
the meeting with Vietnamese intellectuals in France on January 20,
2013, Mr. Duong Chi Dung, Ambassador of Vietnam in France has said
“To celebrate the fortieth anniversary of our diplomatic
relations, French and Vietnamese governments have agreed to be held
one cross- year between France and Vietnam, highlighting all aspects
of the political, economic and cultural relations, including the
holding of the 9th conference on bilateral decentralized cooperation
in Brest in June 2013. We also expect many high-level bilateral
visits in both directions as regards several economic events will be
held in 2013 and hopefully President François Hollande’s visit to
Vietnam. Both countries will target key growth sectors of the
bilateral relationship and go to events that enable companies of the
two countries to increase their market share in areas where they are
most efficient “.
A
cultural event report: The Embassy of Vietnam and the City of Paris
will organize together the Têt Festival of the Year of the Snake, on
February 08, 2013.
2)
Nguyen Dac Nhu-Mai : Impact of National Liberation Front in South
Vietnam (1960-1975) in
The 3rd Corean International Forum, Seoul, 2011, p.75-82.
3)
Flora Lewis: Vietnam Peace Pacts Signed; America’s Longest War Halts
The
accord was effective at 7 P.M. Eastern standard time.. Secretary of
State William P. Rogers wrote his name 62 times on the documents. The
official title of the text was “Agreement on Ending the War and
Restoring Peace in Vietnam.” But the cold, almost gloomy
atmosphere at two separate signing ceremonies reflected the
uncertainties of whether peace is now assured. The conflict, which
has raged in one way or another for over a quarter of a century, had
been inconclusive, without clear victory or defeat for either side.
New York Times, January 28, 1973 in
http://www.mishalov.com/Vietnam_peacepact.html
(consultation on January 15, 2013)
4)
Madame Nguyen Thi Binh was the Foreign Minister of the National
Liberation Front, and a representative at the Paris peace talks. Then
she was the Minister of Education of the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam, and later served for ten years as Vice President of the
country. When joining the Viet Minh, she was caught and spent three
years in the prison of Chi Hoà. Mme. Binh has described her
political involvement in the Provisional Revolutionary Government and
the peace negotiations in Paris in an interview in the years 1981..
5) The
Diem’s machine killing and putting people into jail. Mme Binh had to
move to the countryside. “But
in the countryside, everywhere, repression was carried out. People
were terrorized by those criminal measures. You have certainly heard
of the guillotines being taken from place to place. There was panic
and terror among the population at that time. So it was difficult for
us to live among the population at that time. We had to go into the
forests and stayed there. But at that period we also sought to carry
on political education, to explain to the people that Diem’s policy
was a policy dictated by the Americans that it revealed weakness and
not strength. We explained. We were also already preparing the
formation of the Front. We had seen the French trample on the Geneva
Accords. We had seen the very obvious arrival of the Americans. So we
were already explaining to the population that the real enemy was the
Americans. We were explaining, but under very difficult conditions
because people were afraid of being terrorized….We went on with our
activities here and there until the end of December of ’60. At that
point I was summoned to go back to the Headquarters of the Resistance
which was then located in Tay Ninh province. So, by the end of
December of ’60, I was called to Headquarters. The comrades told me I
had been appointed a member of the Central Committee of the NLF and
my task was to carry on activities at the international level. So in
’62 I began to go outside of the country and carry on activities in
the field of international relations”.
6)
Nguyen Dac Nhu-Mai: Implementation of the national Security Law in
Vietnam and Korea in the context of the Cold War and contemporary
geopolitics (La mise en oeuvre de la loi de sécurité nationake au
Vietnam et en Corée dans le contexte de la guerre froide et de la
géopolitique contemporaine). Corean International
Conference, Paris 19 June 2012, in
The Front, July 2012 p.70-77
7)
Võ Văn Sung : The campaign of Ho Chi Minh in the heart of Paris,
Editions of the People’s Army, Hanoi 2005 (Chiến dịch Hồ Chí
Minh giữa lòng Paris. Nhà Xuất Bản Quân Đội Nhân Dân,
2005.) translation by Nguyen Dac Nhu Mai.
8)
from the Preface, Times Books, New York, 1995
9)
Progressive movements as the ones gathered in
55Bandung55 Conference in Indonesia, Bandung and Jakarta,
October-November 2010 ” 55
years after the 1955 Bandung Asian-African Conference and 20 years
after the end of the Cold War, in the context of Globalisation, the
world is still characterised by wars, domination by the powerful,
exploitation of the weak. In addition, Globalisation has posed two
challenges for the sustainability of our planet: the degradation of
Environment and the growth of Cities. People cannot escape from these
two global challenges, but face them in their own localities. The
actors for a sustainable future are therefore supposed to answer the
“Global Challenges” with “Local Responses”. The responses
from Africa and Asia deserve special attention. On the one hand,
despite the continuous process of globalisation following the
expansion of capitalism, colonialism and imperialism started from
Europe,
Africa and Asia have not been uprooted by Western Civilisation and
are therefore thought to be the source and pool of bio- and cultural
diversity needed for the sustainability of our planet. On
the other hand, Africa and Asia are particularly affected by the
degradation of Environment and the growth of Cities. The planet is in
the midst of a 6th great extinction of life forms faster than the
previous ones and the climate change largely provoked by the
“developed North” will be especially harmful to the “developing
South”. As for Citification, the urban population worldwide grew
over 10-fold during the 20th century alone, and UN has projected in
2012 that “Africa and Asia together will account for 86 per cent of
all growth in the world’s urban population over the next four
decades.” So, what are the “Local Responses” from Africa and
Asia to these “Global Challenges”?
29 authors from 16 countries of Africa, Asia, America and Europe try
to answer the question. Albinus Mkota Pastory Makalle (Tanzania)
Benny Teh Cheng Guan, Ibrahim Abu Bakar (Malaysia) Carina America,
Martina Jordaan (South Africa) Darwis Khudori (Indonesia/France)
Deden Rukmana (Indonesia/USA) Dokun Oyeshola, Favour Temitope Jiboye,
Martin Uadiale, Meshach Ofuafor, Rasheed Olaniyi, Toju Ogbe (Nigeria)
Eka Swadiansa, Invani Lela Herliana (Indonesia) Eric O. Okuku, James
G. Kairo, Judith A. Okello (Kenya) John Walsh (UK/Thailand) Kaarina
Kailo (Finland) Kong Linghong, Zhu Rong (China) Nguyen
Dac Nhu-Mai (Vietnam) Oscar
Gakuo Mwangi (Lesotho) Roland Lin Chih-Hung (Taiwan/France) Sagarika
Suri,
Swati
Janu (India) Yukio Kamino (Japan)” in
http://www.bandungspirit.org/spip.php?article67.
(consultation January 15, 2013)
