While the rest of America watched the Rose Bowl, Christopher Hitchens and I happily whiled away the New Year's afternoon talking about books, politics, and history. Bliss. (I love football, but I love my old friend Christopher more.)
For Ricochet readers--he had indeed read our string on Vietnam--Hitch went to some pains to fill me in on his own attitudes to the Vietnam War, his thinking at various stages in his life, and his present judgement on the war. "There's no need to euphemize Ho," Hitch said. "He was a Stalinist." But Ho Chi Minh was also the leader of a mature liberation movement--one that had been struggling to free Vietnam from the French for decades--and the right of Vietnam to achieve its independence "trumped" Ho's participation in the Communist movement.
What should the United States have done? It ought to have tried to "Tito-ize" Ho--that is, to permit him to take power in Vietnam, just as Tito had taken power in Yugoslavia, and then to persuade Ho to break with the Soviets, just as, again, Tito had done.
Who made the mistake of instead going to war against Ho? JFK? Eisenhower. "The mistake belongs to Truman." Truman, Hitch insisted, knowingly permitted the French to use American aid to pay for their failing military effort in Vietnam--in effect, Truman permitted the French to divert their share of the Marshall Plan from France itself to redoubts and encampments in Indochina.
FDR, Hitch explained, provided a glimpse of what might have been, writing a memo to Secretary of State Cordell Hull in which FDR instructed Hull to dress down the British ambassador, Lord Halifax. Halifax had been fishing for American support in reviving the British empire after the war, and FDR wanted Hull to let Halifax know that the United States should have nothing to do with European colonialism, supporting independence for colonies--particularly in Asia. At one point Hitch started to get up to find the memo--"I know which book it's in"--but then, tired (we talked the better part of five hours) passed on to other subjects.
No sooner had I returned home, though, than I found this email in my in box:
Dear Peter,
Would you ask your Ricochet readers, in my name, to look up FDR's memorandum to Cordell Hull of 24 January 1944? Or perhaps look it up yourself and put it on the site? It's quite easily found if you type in Franklin Roosevelt/ Cordell Hull/ Indochina. I'm too tired to type it out in full, but it is relatively brief. Brevity notwithstanding, it is admirably terse and unambivalent. I wish I could have seen the face of that old brute Halifax when FDR told him off. I had meant to include it in my original letter but was overcome by the need to finish something and get it off to you on the day I felt equal to the job.
I'd only add that, no matter what view one takes of the eventual outcome (i.e. our current excellent relations with a unified "Communist" Vietnam especially vis-a-vis China), and in view of the horrors that intervened between that time and this, the expedient of at least trying to Tito-ize Ho Chi Minh in 1945 ought to have been attempted, and might in a real world have actually yielded success. The 1945 shame of helping to restore a Vichy policy in Vietnam, and with the help of Imperial Japanese troops at that, was a victory for the Halifax mentality at its worst. All subsequent efforts were irredeemably tainted by what Darwin called in another context "the ineffaceable stamp of the lowly origin" of our Indochina policy.
As always
Fraternally,
Christopher
I'm not certain I can endorse the suggestion that the United States could have Tito-ized Ho--I want to do more reading before reaching a conclusion--but I do most certainly endorse Hitch. I'd be grateful if a member of Ricochet could find and post the document to which Hitch refers (I myself have family obligations for the next couple of days). And I delightedly pass along the news that Hitch, who returns to Washington tomorrow, has happily agreed to join us soon on a Ricochet podcast.
- Comment (11)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments :
May '10
Re: New Year's Day With Christopher Hitchens, or, Can Anyone Find that FDR Memo to Cordell Hull?
I believe this is the Cordell Hull memo. It might be too short or incomplete. I see why Christopher wanted to see his face.
I thought it was a strange statement to call the Vietnam war lost in 1954. Now the history goes back to 1944. I need to do some more reading on this too. A small request, please share what sources you use to reach a conclusion. This is one of the posts that has stuck with me and I have the itch to get to the bottom of. It is now a far more complex question than simply containment which was our chief criticism a few weeks ago. Thanks for asking him to come on the podcast too.
Jul '10
Re: New Year's Day With Christopher Hitchens, or, Can Anyone Find that FDR Memo to Cordell Hull?
Robert Bennett: I believe this is the Cordell Hull memo. It might be too short or incomplete. I see why Christopher wanted to see his face.
I thought it was a strange statement to call the Vietnam war lost in 1954. Now the history goes back to 1944. I need to do some more reading on this too. A small request, please share what sources you use to reach a conclusion. This is one of the posts that has stuck with me and I have the itch to get to the bottom of. It is now a far more complex question than simply containment which was our chief criticism a few weeks ago. Thanks for asking him to come on the podcast too. · Jan 1 at 10:15pm
That memo and other related material is also found in the Pentagon Papers.
Edited on Jan 1, 2011 at 10:25pmMay '10
Re: New Year's Day With Christopher Hitchens, or, Can Anyone Find that FDR Memo to Cordell Hull?
Hitchens' engagement is welcome. I'm glad I dug up that Hoover video.
I'm skeptical though of FDR's record as an anti-imperialist. He desired to see an end to British imperialism but was more than willing to propitiate Stalin by granting him concessions regarding the expansion/revanchism of the Soviet Union as a means towards cooperation in eradicating the Nazi threat. FDR's assessment of Stalin's character was as breathtakingly awry as his decision to corral Japanese Americans into internment camps. In response to ambassador William Christian Bullitt's concern over Soviet imperialism in Eastern Europe, FDR said the following:
"I just have a hunch that Stalin is not that kind of a man. ... I think that if I give him everything I possibly can and ask for nothing from him in return, noblesse oblige, he won't try to annex anything and will work with me for a world of democracy and peace."
This mentality ranks with that of Chamberlain's opinion on Nazi imperialism; both were spectacular in their impropriety. And if one wishes to compare imperialisms, I think its evident that British imperialism was far less detrimental to its recipients than Soviet imperialism.
May '10
Re: New Year's Day With Christopher Hitchens, or, Can Anyone Find that FDR Memo to Cordell Hull?
As far as poetry goes, I would recommend listening to Hitchens' recital of Dulce et Decorum est at Emory University. Begin listening at 10:40.
Edited on Jan 2, 2011 at 3:15amJun '10
Re: New Year's Day With Christopher Hitchens, or, Can Anyone Find that FDR Memo to Cordell Hull?
Truman's policy toward French Indochina should be viewed in the larger context of containing the spread of communism worldwide. It's easy to say in hindsight that we might have done this or that differently with regard to Vietnam, but look at what Truman faced in 1950. Eastern Europe and China had already fallen to the communists, South Korea was under invasion, and new insurgencies were popping up all over the map. It seemed only Truman and Churchill understood the threat for what it was, and the latter was out of power. Truman had the resolve to draw a line in the sand, and the good sense not to make a deal with the devil.
May '10
Re: New Year's Day With Christopher Hitchens, or, Can Anyone Find that FDR Memo to Cordell Hull?
There is a good concise argument for reading the Great Books argued after that little poem. I couldn't agree more. He can be extremely classical when he tries to be.
Oct '10
Re: New Year's Day With Christopher Hitchens, or, Can Anyone Find that FDR Memo to Cordell Hull?
Hitchens on the podcast? Yeah. And Yay!
May '10
Re: New Year's Day With Christopher Hitchens, or, Can Anyone Find that FDR Memo to Cordell Hull?
I agree with Paules that Tito-ization is 20/20 hindsight--like a Monday morning quarterback advocating a Hail Mary pass on the first play from scrimmage in yesterday's loss, because, you know, our traditional play-calling proved so unsuccessful.It would have been perceived as acquiescence, weakness, desperation, lack of resolve--precisely the wrong message to send at the onset of the Cold War.
It also implies a cynicism which is so anti-Hitchens in other contexts, such as his previous and admirable revulsion at trying to work with or turn one of "our SOB's," such as Marcos, or Pinochet, or even Saddam.
Again with Hitchens, there's so often a hint of a right-vs-left double standard, which is so frustrating, even infuriating, because one so wants to embrace him without reservation.
Jun '10
Re: New Year's Day With Christopher Hitchens, or, Can Anyone Find that FDR Memo to Cordell Hull?
I will add that it's never a good idea to compromise with evil. Ronald Reagan would eventually give the Truman policy its acid test by confronting the Soviet Union directly. Reagan knew through study and much thinking that the flaw in communist theory was its immorality. He knew the rotten system would eventually fall of its own accord, he just didn't know when. History has proved him correct.
Would that our current president understood this as well. We should compromise not one iota with Iran, Venezuela, or North Korea. When you have a rabid dog on your property, you shoot it. And the whole neighborhood is better off for someone having taken decisive action. Oddly, the press might actually back a strike against Iran given that a Democrat controls the White House. It would be ironic to see Democratic partisans turn against their own president over the issue of war, but a cynical Barack Obama might see it as an opportunity to get the upper hand before the 2012 election.
Re: New Year's Day With Christopher Hitchens, or, Can Anyone Find that FDR Memo to Cordell Hull?
Michael Labeit: Hitchens' engagement is welcome. I'm glad I dug up that Hoover video.
· Jan 2 at 1:36am
Michael, I'm glad you did, too.
Aug '10
Re: New Year's Day With Christopher Hitchens, or, Can Anyone Find that FDR Memo to Cordell Hull?
On the one hand, I think that Hitchens does a pretty decent job of arguing against the charge of 20/20 hindsight by brining up the FDR memo.
On the other hand, I see a parallel between Truman allowing France to use its Marshall Plan funding in Indochina and the current war in Afghanistan. The countries that have done the heavy lifting in Afghanistan would REALLY LOVE IT if the rest of the NATO countries would dig in and spend a little more of their own blood and treasure on the enterprise. In the same way, I can imagine Truman thinking to himself, "it's not ideal, but if France is willing to do a little of the work while we're busy putting out fires elsewhere in the world, am I really going to divert the resources necessary to stop them?"