Ernest Gruening, Wayne Morse and the Senate Debate Over United States Participation in Vietnam 1965-1969 and Its Affect on U.S
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ERNEST GRUENING, WAYNE MORSE AND THE SENATE DEBATE OVER UNITED STATES PARTICIPATION IN VIETNAM 1965-1969 AND ITS AFFECT ON U.S. FOREIGN POLICY A. Dwayne Beggs A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS December 2005 Committee: Dr. Gary R. Hess, Advisor Dr. Walter E. Grunden ii ABSTRACT Dr. Gary R. Hess, Advisor On 2 August 1964, while patrolling in the Gulf of Tonkin, the U.S.S. Maddox was attacked by the North Vietnamese Navy. Then on 4 August both the U.S.S. Maddox and the U.S.S. C. Turner Joy were also allegedly attacked. These events were used by President Johnson to secure authority from the United States Senate, by a vote of 88-2, to take actions he deemed necessary to protect United States military personnel, national security interests, and United States allies. In this thesis, the Gulf of Tonkin incidents will be summarized and the ensuing Senate debates analyzed with a specific focus on the dissenting position of Senators Ernest Gruening (Democrat-Alaska) and Wayne Morse (Democrat-Oregon), the only members of Congress to vote against the resolution. There has been much written about the Gulf of Tonkin incident and the Congressional debate; however, there has been little focus on the continued arguments of these two senators from 1964-1968. This continuing debate over Vietnam deeply divided the Senate into three main groups who each held distinct opinions on the support they should give Johnson in relation to the issue. One group compromised of Hawks believed that the president should be given full support in taking whatever action he deemed necessary, even if it led to war. A strong response after all would discourage other enemies from attacking the United States. A second group believed that the president needed to be supported at this time, especially since the United States had been attacked. They also held the view that the United States foreign policy needed to be re-evaluated once the conflict was resolved. How far could the United States extend itself before it became spread too thin and thus ineffective? The third group did not believe that the United States should be involved in Vietnam at all. While the iii Senate finally ruled to support the president's request for the resolution and continued to fund the war once it had become Americanized, it was those who opposed the resolution and were overruled who made the most valid argument. iv Dedication This work is dedicated to a very special man in my life. My father Reverend Alvin Beggs. I am the first member of my immediate family to attain a degree beyond the high school level. When I made the announcement in the spring of 1982 that I desired the go to college to prepare for the ministry my father was ecstatic. The entire time I was in school my father sacrificed his own desires to see that I had insurance and gasoline for my car. He also made sure that I had any textbook that I needed as well as making sure that I had spending money in my pocket. Pop, as I call him, also made a few trips to see the business manager of the college and worked out deals to keep me in school. Beyond providing for me materially, my father gave me the precious gift of his unconditional love and support. On many occasions my dad would say to me “I believe in you, you can make it.” Pop also reminded me many times that he loved me and he was proud of me for who I was, not what I was able to achieve. If it had not been for my father I would not have been able to pursue a bachelor’s degree nor would I have had the opportunity to work toward obtaining a history degree from Bowling Green State University. I am now 40 years old and my Pop still whispers in my ear, "You can do it, son". I love you, pop, and dedicate this work to you. v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Although this particular project has not been as involved as either a dissertation or a book, for me personally it has been an enormous undertaking that I would not have been able to complete on my own. Therefore I wish to express my gratitude to the many people who have assisted me as I worked on this project. I first want to express my thanks to Dr. Gary Hess who has both inspired me to be the best historian I can be and who served as the chairman of my thesis committee. I also want to thank Dr. Walter Grunden who challenged me (and continues to challenge me) to become the best writer that I possibly could become and who made Asian studies both enlightening and enjoyable. In addition to these gentlemen I would like to extend my thanks to Carol Singer, historical research librarian, at the Jerome library on the campus of Bowling Green State University. She has been invaluable as we searched the stacks and the internet for needed material. Tina Amos and Dee Dee Wentland the secretaries of the history department have provided much encouragement and support. I really have appreciated them and look forward to working with them in the future. Finally, I want to thank my wonderful family; my wife, Susan, and my children, Brent and Brigette Ann. They have all sacrificed time with me as I spent many hours reading over Congressional records and other relevant material. Susan read every page of my thesis and served as both proof reader and critic. I owe them all so much. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1 CHAPTER I. BACKGROUND TO 1964 CRISIS............................................................... 7 CHAPTER II. THE DISSENTERS: ERNEST GRUENING AND WAYNE MORSE....... 28 CHAPTER III. GRUENING AND MORSE CHALLENGE THE GULF OF TONKIN RESOLUTION ...................................................................................................... 53 CHAPTER IV. ERNEST GRUENING, WAYNE MORSE AND THE SENATE DEBATE OVER VITENAM 1965-1968............................................................................................... 79 CONCLUSION...................................................................................................................... 113 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................ 116 1 INTRODUCTION Beginning almost immediately after the conclusion of World War II, the Cold War held the United States and the Soviet Union in its grip. This Cold War was not a literal battle, but was a tension that existed between the two countries which developed into an intense competition because each country believed the goal of the other was to consume and take over the other country. During 1950-60, the civil war taking place in Vietnam became a pawn of the Cold War because the United States did not want to see Communism, hence the Soviet Union and China, advanced through the acquisition of Vietnam and subsequently all of Southeast Asia. At the same time, the United States did not want to provoke the Communist forces of either the Soviet Union or China into starting a hot war. On the home front, Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy were concerned about American sentiment regarding Vietnam because of the earlier loss of China to Communism. Many Americans, especially conservative Republicans, believed that this loss had occurred because of President Truman’s apathy in responding to China’s displaced president, Chiang Kai-Shek’s, plea for military assistance. As a result America became involved in Vietnam by providing economic aid first to the French and then to the South Vietnamese government. Eventually becoming more deeply involved, the United States provided the South Vietnamese with military advisors. All this was done to prevent the spread of Communism into South Vietnam and the rest of Southeast Asia. American presidents from Eisenhower through Johnson, as well as their administrations, were never able to grasp that what was taking place in Vietnam was a revolution and not the beginning of Communist expansion throughout Southeast Asia. The Viet Minh and the North Vietnamese were fighting for their freedom and independence. Since early in the first century 2 the Vietnamese people had been subjected to sporadic periods of colonialism. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, they had come under the heavy hand of Western Imperialism. Ho Chi Minh, the leader of the Vietnamese Communists, and those who followed him were determined not to become puppets of the Communists, as the Americans feared. They wanted to rule their country and would fight to the death in order to have that opportunity. Although the United States claimed that all countries should have the right of self determination and that decolonization should take place around the world, it did not seem to be interested in decolonization for Vietnam. The desire of America to keep the Soviet Union in check and hold on to Vietnam led to armed conflict between the Americans and the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese. The Vietnam War became substantially Americanized when President Johnson presented misleading information to Congress implying that while in the Gulf of Tonkin, the United States Navy had been attacked by the North Vietnamese without provocation. Upon receiving this information, Congress overwhelmingly approved the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution authorizing the president to use force in order to protect the United States military and any member or protocol country of the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization. This resolution would be used by Johnson to escalate American involvement into full scale war. The vast majority of the print media supported the position taken by the government while other print media chose to question the Gulf of Tonkin incident and the government’s subsequent reaction to it. This thesis will summarize the Gulf of Tonkin incidents and analyze the ensuing Congressional debate, focusing on the dissenting position of Senators Ernest Gruening (Democrat-Alaska) and Wayne Morse (Democrat-Oregon), the only members of Congress to vote against the resolution.