Vietnam Generation Volume 1 Number 1 The Future of the Past: Revisionism and Article 1 Vietnam 1-1989 The uturF e of the Past: Revisionism and Vietnam Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.lasalle.edu/vietnamgeneration Part of the American Studies Commons Recommended Citation (1989) "The uturF e of the Past: Revisionism and Vietnam," Vietnam Generation: Vol. 1 : No. 1 , Article 1. Available at: http://digitalcommons.lasalle.edu/vietnamgeneration/vol1/iss1/1 This Complete Volume is brought to you for free and open access by La Salle University Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Vietnam Generation by an authorized editor of La Salle University Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Vietnam Generation V o I u m e 1 W in t e r 1989 NuvibER 1 2 iNTROdUGTiON Kaii Tal. Editor 4 The A m eric a n BoMbARdMENT of K a m puc h ea , 1969-1975 Ben Kiernan, University of Wollongong. Australia 42 iNflATioNARy I m p a c t o f t He V ietn a m W a r Tom Riddell. Smith College 61 I n Cold Blood: TH e V ietn a m W a r iN T e x t books David Berman. University of Pittsburgh 81 Tw o Quiet A m e r ic a n s: B R iTis h L it e r a t u r e iNTO A m eric a n PRopAqANdA Mariam Darce Frenier. University of Minnesota at Morris 94 F iR S T Blood REdRAWN Don Kunz, University of Rhode Island 115 A HuNdREd HAppy S p a r r o w s : A n A m eric a n V e te r a n R e tu r n s t o Vietn a m Larry Lee Rottman,Southwest Missouri State University 141 DispuTiNq t He W r e c Ka q e: IdEoloqicAl STRUqqlE AT t He VIETNAM VETERANS MEMORiAl Harry Haines. Trinity College 157 O n t He Co v er o f t He R o lllN q S to n e : TowARd a TH e o r y o f Cu I t u r a I TH e r a p y Kali Tal iNTROdlJCTiON K aLi T aL I am proud to introduce the first issue of Vietnam Generation: A Journal of Recent History and Contemporary Issues. We have put together a very fine collection of articles, representing disciplines as diverse as economics, literature, education, sociology, history, film, and popularculture. Each article also representsan individual response to the highly charged term 'revisionism'. Ben Kiernan's article, "The American Bombardment of Kampuchea, 1969-1973', is an example of classic revisionist scholarship — the revision of historical narrative based on new or reinterpreted information. Tom Riddell's article, "The Inflationary Impact of the Vietnam W ar', also deals with revisionism in the classic sense: Riddell challenges the revisionist scholarship of economists Walker and Vatter, and charges that their reinterpretations of the past are ill-founded. David Berman's article. "In Cold Blood: Vietnam in Textbooks' takes a historiographical approach toward revision, and examines the way in which historical narratives are rewritten over time. Mariam Frenier, in "Two Quiet Americans: Turning British Literature into American Propaganda', and Don Kunz, in “First Blood Redrawn,' examine the revision of popular concepts of history through the mediums of literature and film. Larry Rottmann, in "One Hundred Happy Sparrows: An American Veteran Returns to Vietnam', explores the personal revision process as he describes his emotional journey. Harry Haines, in “Disputing the Wreckage: IdeologicalStruggleatthe Vietnam Veterans Memorial', demonstrates how the process of of personal revision intersects with the generation of public history at the site of the Vietnam Memorial in Washington, DC. My own article, "On the Cover of the Rolling Stone: Toward a Theory of Cultural Therapy', deals with the cause and effect of the revisionist impulse, and suggests a new approach to the problem. Despite the high calibre of the individual articles represented in this collection, it is apparent that articles on a number of topics are conspicuously absent. Included here are no papers devoted to the topics of race or gender and the Vietnam War, no papers which deal with Vietnamese perceptions of the American presence in Vietnam, no papers on the POW-MIA obsession, and no papers on the subject of these subjects are absent that they are inconseguential. What is missing is often at least as important as what is included. Introduction 3 There is only one article by a woman in this issue. There are no articles by Vietnamese scholars; in fact, there are no articles by non­ white men. This imbalance cries outforan explanation. It is not enough merely to say that no papers were submitted by men or women of color. It is not enough to say that only three papers were submitted by white women scholars, and that we accepted one of them for publi­ cation. We cannot excuse ourselves for failing to include these perspectives by saying that we would have been open to publishing the m if they had been submitted. Vietnam Generation is intended to provide a forum for Viet­ nam War, Vietnam era. and Vietnam generation scholars. If our field, at this point in time, is so narrow that it does not include the work of scholars of color, or of women, then we must broaden our topic area until it does include this work. We are devoting one issue this first year to an exploration of race issues and Vietnam, and another issue to a study on gender and war. But even this is not enough. We are committed to make a sincere and consistent effort to incorporate questions of race and gender into every issue of Vietnam Generation. In the future we will not simply wait forthese articles to come to us in the mail; we will make a direct effort to solicit them. And if. at tim es, we fail to present these alternative views, we will always try to be honest about what we have not published, careful to point out the missing articles in our table of contents. The A m erican BoMbARdMENT of K a m puc Nea, 1969-197? B en KiERNAN On March 18,1969, the United States Air Force began its secret B-52 bombardment of rural Cambodia'. Exactly one year later, that country's ruler. Prince Norodom Sihanouk, was overthrown and the Vietnam War, combined with a new civil war, to tear the nation apart for the next five years. The United States bombing of the countryside continued (now publicly) and increased from 1970 to August 1973. when Congress imposed a halt. Nearly half of the US bombing tonnage was dropped in the last six months. The total was 540,000 tons. Rural Cambodia was destroyed, and 'Democratic Kampuchea' rose in its ashes. The emergent Communist Party of Kampuchea (CPK) regime, led by Pol Pot, had profited greatly from the U.S. bombing. It used the widespread devastation and massacre of civilians as propaganda for recruitment purposes, and as an excuse for its brutal, radical policies and its purge of moderate Khmer communists. This is evident not only from contemporary press accounts, but also from post-1978 interviews with dozens of peasant survivors of the bombing who were unable to testify to their experiences during the Pol Pot period, and from U.S. Government documents newly declassified under the Freedom of Information Act. By October 1972 the US and Hanoi had reached agreement on terms for a ceasefire and American withdrawal from Vietnam. Washington had dropped its demand for a North Vietnamese withdrawal from the south, and Hanoi had dropped its demand for Nguyen Van Thieu's removal. Both demands had previously been preconditions for a settlement. Henry Kissinger, of course, still insisted on Hanoi securing, from Pol Pot's CPK 'Center', agreement to a settlement in Kampuchea as well. But it would have been clearto him that this would be impossible, despite his own stated threat to achieve it by concentrating US air power in Kampuchea2. The antagonism of the CPK Center (the Party's national leadership — Pol Pot, Nuon Chea. and leng Sary) to Hanoi made it very unlikely that the CPK would coordinate its strategy with that of Vietnam. Further, a ceasefire in Kampuchea would have prevented the Center consolidating what it called its “ mastery over the revolutionary group(s) in every way", which was far from complete. American Bombardment 5 Sihanoukists. moderates, and pro-Vietnamese communists still predominated in the rural areas. As CPK Southwest Zone documents had explained in 1971, “We want to and must get a tight grasp, fitter into every corner'3 of the diverse revolutionary movement in the Kampuchean countryside. A negotiated peace, or even an early victory, would not serve this aim. In Vietnam,Thieu was also proving recalcitrant. It was apparently to appease him that Nixon ordered the “Christmas Bombing' of Hanoi and Haiphong in December 1972. Within a month, the Paris Agreement on Ending the War and Restoring Peace in Vietnam had been signed by all parties to the conflict there. It was to apply from January 27,1973 (and its terms were little different from those agreed in October)4. The USA began withdrawing its troops from Vietnam. However, it saw Kampuchea as an integral part of the conflict, and as fighting continued the US soon switched the rest of its air arm there. Washington portrayed this bombardment as an attempt to force the Khmer insurgents, now on the threshold of complete military victory, to negotiate with Lon Nol's pro-American government in Phnom Penh.