logo
Five decades after the Fall of Saigon: Wounds of war and hard lessons for the world

Five decades after the Fall of Saigon: Wounds of war and hard lessons for the world

First Post03-05-2025

The Vietnam War's aftermath still impacts the US, Vietnam, and the wider world, and despite the hard lessons, violent conflicts continue to erupt—many unnecessary, some partly justified, but all costly read more
Vietnamese troops march during a parade to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the fall of Saigon, in Ho Chi Minh city, Vietnam, April 30, 2025. REUTERS/Minh Nguyen
At 7:53 am on April 30, 1975, a Marine Corps CH-46E Sea Knight helicopter evacuated the last Marine security guards from the roof of the US Embassy in Saigon. Master Sergeant Juan Valdez was the last Marine to board. Valdez had previously served a long tour of duty in Vietnam from 1965 to 1975.
A CIA officer helps evacuees up a ladder onto an Air America helicopter at 22 Gia Long Street on April 29, 1975. Image: Wikimedia Commons
Later that day, around 10:00 am, Saigon fell to the communist armies of North Vietnam—just two years after the Paris Peace Accords and the withdrawal of American forces from South Vietnam.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Operation Frequent Wind
This final evacuation flight was part of Operation Frequent Wind—arguably the world's largest helicopter evacuation—which airlifted 1,373 Americans and 5,595 Vietnamese and third-country nationals out of Saigon on April 29 and 30, 1975.
The evacuation marked the final retreat of the US from Saigon, 20 years after the arrival of the first US advisors in South Vietnam and nearly three years after the last US combat troops had exited the country.
This final, chaotic, and terrifying scene represented a deeply humiliating moment for the US—a nation that had never previously lost a war.
Story in This Piece
This article traces the history of the Vietnam War, the damage it inflicted on the perception of US invincibility, and the massive loss of life on both sides. It concludes with reflections relevant to today's ongoing conflicts in Europe (Russia–Ukraine war), the Middle East (Israel–Hamas war), and across Africa.
A War Reporter Reports
Among the foreign journalists who witnessed the collapse of Saigon was Loren Jenkins, a Newsweek reporter at the time (later with NPR's foreign desk), who documented the final hours of the US presence in Vietnam. In a recent NPR interview, Jenkins stated:
'It was a stupid war. Never should have been waged. It was vicious, nasty to everybody—to the Americans who were sent to fight it and to the poor Vietnamese who were bombed.'
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Futility of Invasion
As Jenkins rightly noted, it was an unwanted and futile war with no true victors. It became a permanent stain on the image of the world's greatest superpower. Though America considered Operation Frequent Wind a logistical success, it was, in essence, a colossal failure. The chaotic evacuation—with people scrambling for flights to safety—evoked haunting parallels to the Kabul airport crisis in August 2021, following the Taliban's rapid takeover of Afghanistan.
In both Saigon (April 30, 1975) and Kabul (August 15, 2021), many eligible evacuees were left behind.
But the clearest lesson from the disordered evacuation was the fundamental futility of America's initial involvement in Vietnam.
Vietnam Celebrates
Wednesday, April 30, marked fifty years since America's ignominious final retreat in what the world remembers as the 'Fall of Saigon' and what Vietnam celebrates as the end of the 'American War'. The anniversary was marked in Ho Chi Minh City (formerly Saigon), now a thriving metropolis of nine million, with a grand parade featuring soldiers, dancers, and leaders' speeches praising what the country's communist leadership called 'the triumph of justice'.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
From Friends to Foes
After World War II, many Vietnamese admired the US for helping to repel the Japanese. Even Ho Chi Minh, the nationalist and communist revolutionary, initially leaned pro-American. But through the tenures of five US presidents, that relationship soured, eventually culminating in a brutal war between the two nations.
Prelude to the War
Why did the war begin at all?
Vietnam was thousands of miles from American shores, and many Americans couldn't even locate it on a map. Yet, driven by fears over the spread of communism, the US got involved. In 1947, President Harry S Truman declared that American foreign policy would assist any country whose stability was threatened by communism. Soon after, fearing Vietnam would follow a similar path, Truman sent military advisors, transport planes, and jeeps as part of a multimillion-dollar aid package.
That marked the beginning of America's deepening involvement in Vietnam.
The War Begins
In 1954, the French suffered a catastrophic defeat at Dien Bien Phu, ending their colonial rule in Vietnam. President Eisenhower, Truman's successor, was initially hesitant about involvement, especially after the Korean War. He noted in his diary, 'I am convinced no military victory is possible in that kind of theatre.' Yet, he persisted due to his belief in the 'domino theory'—that if one country fell to communism, its neighbours would follow.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Vietnam was partitioned: Ho Chi Minh controlled the North, while US-backed Ngo Dinh Diem ruled the South. Eisenhower strongly supported the authoritarian Diem, and before the end of his presidency, open conflict broke out between Diem's forces and the Viet Cong—South Vietnamese communist insurgents supported by the North. Both sides engaged in brutal tactics, including torture and political assassinations.
Thus, the Vietnam War escalated, and the US was drawn deeper into the conflict.
Escalation
Until President Kennedy's assassination, US involvement remained relatively limited. But that changed drastically in August 1964, when the Gulf of Tonkin incident prompted Congress to grant President Lyndon B Johnson sweeping war powers.
With the South Vietnamese government on the brink of collapse, Johnson deployed US combat troops in early 1965 and launched a relentless bombing campaign—Operation Rolling Thunder—that would continue for years. The draft call surged, and by 1967, nearly 500,000 American troops were deployed in Vietnam. That same year, anti-war protests erupted across US cities.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
A Tale of Five Presidents
It's striking that five American presidents—Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon—oversaw the Vietnam War. Privately, each expressed doubts about the war's purpose and viability. Yet none wanted to be remembered as the one who 'lost Vietnam to the communists'.
Collateral Damage
The Vietnam War ended in early 1973, after nearly eight years of combat and the deaths of almost 60,000 American soldiers. It also claimed the lives of over three million Vietnamese civilians and soldiers. Beyond the human toll, America suffered a staggering loss of credibility, capped by the humiliating images of evacuation from the US Embassy rooftop.
Unwarranted
Fifty years later, public opinion still reflects the war's unpopularity. A recent Emerson College Polling/Nexstar Media poll found the Vietnam War to be the least-supported major American conflict of the past century. Among Vietnam veterans, 46 per cent said it wasn't justified, while 41 per cent believed it was. Among the general public, 44 per cent said it wasn't justified, 29 per cent said it was, and about 27 per cent were unsure.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
The Stubborn Wound
While Americans mourn the fall of Saigon, few believe staying longer would have changed the outcome. The Vietnam War lasted nearly 15 years, cost $140 billion, and claimed 58,220 American lives—yet ended in defeat. As The New York Times observed on the 50th anniversary, 'The Vietnam War became a stubborn wound in American life.'
Vietnam Today
While the war remains a lingering wound in America, Vietnam has rebuilt. Despite losing over three million people, the country has moved on. With a 6 per cent GDP growth rate and nearly $5,000 per capita income, Vietnam is now a top-10 US trading partner, with $49 billion in two-way trade—though the US faces a $23 billion trade deficit.
Fifty years after unification, Vietnam remains a one-party communist state, yet it is relatively prosperous. Ironically, Vietnam is again being courted—by both America and China. But it cannot choose just one; it needs both.
Time to Learn the Hard Lessons
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
War has been part of human civilisation since the beginning. But it inflicts immense suffering on nations and innocent civilians. Every year, Vietnam remembers its dead and celebrates how it defeated the French, the Americans, and ultimately the South Vietnamese.
For America, the fall of Saigon triggered a period of soul-searching that redefined how the nation viewed its global role. Still, that reflection did not stop America from entering more wars—some overt, some covert.
The Vietnam War's aftermath still impacts the US, Vietnam, and the wider world. And despite the hard lessons, violent conflicts continue to erupt—many unnecessary, some partly justified, but all costly.
Make no mistake: in today's world, where conflict is widespread, humanity remains the ultimate loser. The only winners are the arms manufacturers. It is time to reject war and embrace peace and harmony.
The author is a multi-disciplinary thought leader with Action Bias and an India based impact consultant. He is a keen watcher of changing national and international scenarios. He works as President Advisory Services of Consulting Company BARSYL. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Eid al-Adha 2025: Worshippers gather for prayer to honour Islam's holy festival
Eid al-Adha 2025: Worshippers gather for prayer to honour Islam's holy festival

Mint

time13 hours ago

  • Mint

Eid al-Adha 2025: Worshippers gather for prayer to honour Islam's holy festival

Eid al-Adha 2025: Worshippers gather for prayer to honour Islam's holy festival| In Photos 6 Photos . Updated: 07 Jun 2025, 10:40 AM IST Share Via Eid al-Adha, the second major festival in Islam, is observed on the 10th day of Dhul Hijjah. The occasion honours Prophet Ibrahim's faith and the spirit of sacrifice in Islam. 1/6Fireworks illuminate the sky above Katara Cultural Village in Doha, Qatar, as celebrations begin for the first day of Eid al-Adha, the Festival of Sacrifice, on June 6, 2025. (AFP) 2/6Worshippers gather at Delhi's historic Jama Masjid to offer Eid al-Adha prayers in the old city area on June 7, 2025. (REUTERS) 3/6Muslims exit the Jama Masjid after offering Eid al-Adha prayers in the old quarters of Delhi, India, on June 7, 2025. (REUTERS) 4/6Myanmar Muslims perform ablution at a mosque in Yangon before offering Eid al-Adha prayers on Saturday, June 7, 2025. (AP) 5/6Muslims gather to offer Eid al-Adha prayers in Rawalpindi, Pakistan, on Saturday, June 7, 2025. (AP)

Israeli military recovers bodies of two hostages taken by Hamas
Israeli military recovers bodies of two hostages taken by Hamas

Hindustan Times

time2 days ago

  • Hindustan Times

Israeli military recovers bodies of two hostages taken by Hamas

The Israeli military has found the bodies of two hostages who were being held by Hamas, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Thursday, reported Reuters. According to Israeli forces, bodies were recovered during a special mission in Khan Younis, a city located in the southern Gaza Strip. 'Following the recovery of two bodies, 56 hostages are still held by Hamas, with fewer than half believed to be alive,' the Israeli army said, based on their latest estimates. Netanyahu added that the victims were identified as Judi Weinstein-Haggai and her husband, Gad Haggai. The war between Israel and Hamas began after a deadly attack on October 7, 2023. On that day, gunmen led by Hamas killed 1,200 people in Israel and took 251 others as hostages, according to Israeli figures. Since then, the fighting has led to heavy losses. Health officials in Gaza say more than 54,000 Palestinians have been killed during the conflict.

‘Breaking the Engagement' Review: The China-U.S. Divorce
‘Breaking the Engagement' Review: The China-U.S. Divorce

Hindustan Times

time2 days ago

  • Hindustan Times

‘Breaking the Engagement' Review: The China-U.S. Divorce

'There is no realistic prospect or false nirvana of returning to an amicable and cooperative bilateral relationship,' David Shambaugh writes in 'Breaking the Engagement: How China Won and Lost America.' Few American scholars have a better understanding of China than Mr. Shambaugh. So when the George Washington University professor tells us that the official U.S. strategy of engagement with Beijing is dead—'D-E-A-D'—we had better pay attention. This isn't only a question of state policy. The American people have had enough of China, too. Mr. Shambaugh points to a recent Pew survey, which found that eight out of 10 Americans hold 'unfavorable' views of China, with 42% describing it as an 'enemy.' Only 6% see it as a 'partner.' Certainly, Secretary of State Marco Rubio's announcement that the U.S. would revoke the visas of many Chinese students who are already in this country—and make it much harder for future Chinese students to enroll at American universities—lays bare the fact that the U.S.-China relationship is at a nadir. It would not be overly shrill to say that in many of these cases we're educating the enemy. Mr. Shambaugh, who describes himself as a 'disillusioned former engager,' would agree. (His disillusion, it should be noted, began when the Chinese government banned him from Beijing's many universities and think tanks after he published a long essay in this newspaper in 2015, titled 'The Coming Chinese Crackup.' It took a personal slight to make the scales fall from his eyes, but fall they did.) A China-hawk ever since, Mr. Shambaugh sets out to explain how Washington and Beijing have reached the lowest ebb in their relations since Richard Nixon's 'breakthrough' in 1972. The Sino-American relationship, while always demanding vigilance, has rarely been so nakedly hostile. Mr. Shambaugh's book covers a 75-year period, from 1949—when the Chinese Communists took control of the country—to the second election of Donald Trump in 2024. Although the relationship fluctuated during that time between 'amity' and 'enmity,' as the author puts it, the American desire for engagement was not merely constant but 'axiomatic.' This policy of nonhostility was bipartisan in the U.S. Congress, even as some Democrats chafed at a glossing over by Washington of Chinese human-rights abuses and some Republicans 'questioned the long-term wisdom' of strengthening China through trade and transfers of technology. The roots of America's decadeslong policy of engagement with China lie, says Mr. Shambaugh, in its two-centuries-old 'missionary complex' to change China. America not only sought to trade with China starting in the late 18th century but to 'mold and shape it' in other ways: 'religiously, intellectually, socially, economically, and politically.' The fluctuations in bilateral relations have resulted from the dialectic between 'American paternalism vs. Chinese nationalism.' To put matters at their plainest: We like the Chinese when they're inclined to be more like us, 'conforming to American expectations of liberal development.' But one man can make a tectonic difference. American paternalism prevailed—whether genuinely or as a result of the Chinese faking conformity to extract material advantage—until 2012-13 and the ascent to power of Xi Jinping, the most hardline nationalist leader China has had since Mao Zedong. Until then, China had needed America in what was still a unipolar world, so Beijing was largely vested in playing down discord. The 1989 Tiananmen massacre and the 2008-09 financial crisis—which sparked Chinese disillusion with American economic management—were rare blips in the pre-Xi age, when China was led by less Manichean men: Deng Xiaoping, Jiang Zemin, Hu Jintao. Mr. Trump, too, has played a decisive role in altering the course of this relationship. His election in 2016 saw growing American hostility toward China grafted atop Mr. Xi's mercantilist, irredentist jingoism. This hard line on China, Mr. Shambaugh observes, was continued by the Biden administration, albeit with differences in nuance and rhetoric. With the second Trump administration, we have Mr. Rubio driving important elements of America's China policy. 'He may be,' writes Mr. Shambaugh—whose book went to press before Mr. Rubio's elevation at State in January—'the single most knowledgeable Member of Congress about China,' who has been 'outspoken and unafraid to take the Xi Jinping regime to task for a variety of its malign actions.' Given our loss of global predominance and primacy—as well as Mr. Xi's drive to make China the global hegemon—the best we can hope for, Mr. Shambaugh concludes, is 'competitive coexistence' with China. The U.S. should expose China to the world at every opportunity. 'The Chinese government's own negative behavior is one of America's greatest assets in its contest with China, and it must be taken advantage of.' We must also retain our global strut and confidence, Mr. Shambaugh says, and not overestimate China, a country with 'multiple systemic weaknesses.' These include an aging population, a stark gender imbalance, a rigid one-party system, widespread repression, massive income inequality, capital flight, a nonconvertible currency, industrial overcapacity and a vindictive control-freak at the helm. No one has the slightest idea what will happen when Mr. Xi dies. Mr. Shambaugh's most radical suggestion is his call to 'consider resurrecting and applying the 'Trading With the Enemy Act,' ' which would take American companies to task for conducting business with China in ways that harm our 'national interest.' The American corporate sector needs to 'understand that some—much—of what it does in China is strengthening an existing rival and a potential adversary.' This is a controversial idea. It's also audacious. We may not stop the Chinese juggernaut in its tracks. But there's no reason to actively help it run us over. Mr. Varadarajan, a Journal contributor, is a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and at NYU Law School's Classical Liberal Institute. Get 360° coverage—from daily headlines to 100 year archives.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store