РефератыИностранный языкAnAntiwar Movement In US Essay Research Paper

Antiwar Movement In US Essay Research Paper

Antiwar Movement In US Essay, Research Paper


The antiwar movement against Vietnam in the US from 1965-1971 was the most


significant movement of its kind in the nation’s history. The United States


first became directly involved in Vietnam in 1950 when President Harry Truman


started to underwrite the costs of France’s war against the Viet Minh. Later,


the presidencies of Dwight Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy increased the US’s


political, economic, and military commitments steadily throughout the fifties


and early sixties in the Indochina region. Prominent senators had already begun


criticizing American involvement in Vietnam during the summer of1964, which led


to the mass antiwar movement that was to appear in the summer of 1965. This


antiwar movement had a great impact on policy and practically forced the US out


of Vietnam. Starting with teach-ins during the spring of 1965, the massive


antiwar efforts centered on the colleges, with the students playingleading


roles. These teach-ins were mass public demonstrations, usually held in the


spring and fall seasons. By 1968, protestersnumbered almost seven million with


more than half being white youths in the college. The teach-in movement was at


first, a gentle approach to the antiwar activity. Although, it faded when the


college students went home during the summer of 1965, other types of protest


that grew through 1971 soon replaced it. All of these movements captured the


attention of the White House, especially when 25,000 people marched on


Washington Avenue. And at times these movements attracted the interestof all the


big decision-makers and their advisors. The teach-ins began at the University of


Michigan on March 24, 1965, and spread to other campuses, including Wisconsin on


April 1. These protests at some of America’s finest universities captured public


attention. The Demonstrations were one form of attempting to go beyond mere


words and research and reason, and to put direct pressure on those who were


conducting policy in apparent disdain for the will expressed by the voters.


Within the US government, some saw these teach-ins as an important development


that might slow down on further escalation in Vietnam. Although several hundred


colleges experienced teach-ins, most campuses were untouched by this


circumstance. Nevertheless, the teach-ins did concern the administration and


contributed to President Johnson’s decision to present a major Vietnam address


at Johns Hopkins University on April 7, 1965. The address tried to respond to


the teach-ins campus protest activity. The Johns Hopkins speech was the first


major example of the impact of antiwar. Johnson was trying to stabilize public


opinion while the campuses were bothering the government. In 1965, the US


started strategically bombing parts of Northern Vietnam, catalyzing the antiwar


movement public opinion ofwhat was going on in Indochina. These bombings spawned


the antiwar movement and sustained it, especially as the North Vietnamese leader


Ho Chi Minh refused to listen to American demands. The antiwar movement would


have emerged alone by the bombings, and the growing cost of American lives


coming home in body bags only intensified public opposition to the war. This


movement against the Northern bombings, and domestic critics in general, played


a role in the decision to announce a bombing pause from May 12 to the 17, of


1965. Antiwar activists carried on through the pause with their own programs,


and the scattered teach-ins had become more of a problem for President Johnson


when their organizers joined in an unofficial group, the Inter-University


Committee for a Public Hearing on Vietnam. This new committee began planning a


nationwide teach-in to be conducted on television and radio, of which would be a


debate between protesters and administrators of the government. The antiwar


movement, through the national teach-in, contributed to the resignations of many


government officials, including the resignation of McGeorge Bundy inearly 1966.


This well-publicized debate made the antiwar effort more respectable. As


supporters of the war found themselves more popular, they were driven


increasingly to rely on equating their position with"support for our boys


in Vietnam.". The antiwar movement spread directly among the combat troops


in Vietnam, who began to wear peace symbols and flash peace signs and movement


salutes. Some units even organized their own demonstrations to link up with the


movement at home. For example, to join the November 1969 antiwarMobilization, a


unit boycotted its Thanksgiving Day dinner. One problem of the antiwar movement


was the difficulty of finding ways to move beyond protest and symbolic acts to


deeds that would actually impede the war. Unlike college students and other


civilians, the troops in Vietnam had no such problem. Individual acts of


rebellion, raging from desertion to killing officers who ordered


search-and-destroy missions, merged into mutinies and large-scale resistance.


Between the late summer of 1965 and the fall of 1966, the American military


effort in Vietnam accelerated from President Johnson’s decisions. The number of


air sorties over Northern Vietnam now increased again, from 25,000 in 1965 to


79,000 in 1966. The antiwar movement grew slowly during this period and so did


the number of critics in Congress and the media. A ban on picketing the White


House was recommended. Instead, President Johnson and later Nixon combated the


picketers through a variety of legal and illegal harassment, including limiting


their numbers in certain venues and demanding letter-perfect permits for every


activity.The picketers were a constant battle, which the presidents could never


claim total victory. By 1967, US military authority was breaking apart. Not only


was it the worst year for President Johnson’s term, but also one of the most


turbulent years in all of American history. The war in Southeast Asia and the


war at home in the streets and the campuses dominated the headlines and the


attention of the White House. To make matters worse, 1967 witnessed more urban


riots; the most deadly of which took place in Detroit. It was also the year of


the hippies, the drugs, and a wholesale assault on morality and values; and all


of these singular happenings were magnified by the media.The antiwar effort was


crippling Johnson’s presidency and paralyzing the nation. Now the war was


becoming more unpopular at home. By the middle of 1967, many Americans began


telling that the original involvement in Vietnam had been a costly mistake. And


for Johnson, only a little more than a quarter of the population approved of his


handling the war in 1968. Many of those fed up at home were the hawks. The hawks


were the group of people that supported the war. They wanted to remove the


shackles from the generals and continue the bombings over Vietnam. However,


Johnson’s critics among the doves were far more troubling. The doves were


usually blue-collar workers and wanted to end Vietnam immediately. In the first


place, they were far more vocal and visible than the hawks, appearing at large,


well-organized demonstrations. Even more disconcerting were the continuing


defections from the media and the Democratic Party. The antiwar movement that


began as a small trickle had now became a flood. The most important antiwar


event of 1967 was the March on the Pentagon in October, which was turning point


for the Johnson administration. With public support for Johnson’s conduct of the


war fading, the president fought back by overselling modest gains that his


military commanders claimed to be making. This overselling of the war’s progress


played a major role in creating the domestic crisis produced by the Tet


Offensive in early 1968, sparked from the protesters’ actions. Although these


marcherswere unable to levitate the besieged Pentagon, their activities


ultimately contributed to the redirection of the American policy inVietnam by


1968-and the destruction of the presidency of Lyndon Johnson. Johnson finally


realized-the energized antiwar forces spelled the beginning of the end for


American involvement in the war. Thus, the administration dug in for a long and


dramatic time of protests, uncivil di

sobedience, and numerous arrests. The size


of these demonstration crowds often varied but there were no disagreements about


the major events of protest. They began with peaceful series of speeches and


musical presentations. Then many of the participants tried to march the various


government grounds, most importantly taking place at the Lincoln Memorial. For


most Americans, the events were symbolized by television images of dirty-mouthed


hippies taunting the brave, clean-cut American soldiers who confronted the


unruly demonstrators. Americans were soon shocked to learn about the communists’


massive Tet Offensive on January 31, 1968. The offensive demonstrated that


Johnson had been making the progress in Vietnam seem much greater than it really


was; the war was apparently endless. Critics of the administration policy on the


campuses and Capitol Hill had been right after all. For the first time, the


state of public opinion was the crucial factor in decision making on the war.


Johnson withdrew his candidacy for reelection in March of 1968, and he was


offering the communists generous terms to open peace talks. In the meantime, as


the war continued to take its bloody toll, the nation prepared to elect a new


president. The antiwar movement had inadvertently helped Richard Nixon win the


election. As Johnson’s unhappy term of office came to an end, antiwar critics


and the Vietnamese people prepared to do battle with their new adversary. The


new president expressed more outward signs from hawks not the doves, now that


Johnson now out of office. Like many of his advisors, Nixon was bothered with


the antiwar movement since he was convinced that it prolonged the war. He could


not understandhow the current generation of young people could include both


brave young marines and hippies and draft-card burners. Richard Nixon assumed


the presidency with a secret plan to end the war. Although most doves did not


believe in the new president to do so, they were prepared to give him time to


execute the plan. Nixon had a plan to end the war. He wanted to increase the


pressure on the communists, issue then a deadline to be conciliatory, and to


keep this entire secret from the American public. Thus, the number of casualties


increased in the late winter and spring as the bombings of Northern Vietnam


continued once again. It did not take long for the antiwar critics and


organization to take up where it had left off with Lyndon Johnson. They got


readyfor another campaign of petitioning and demonstrating with the center of it


all involving the middle-class. The deadline for the communists past, and the


failure to follow with his strategy was the rejuvenation of the antiwar movement


centered on the very successful demonstrations in October of 1969. Nixon now


feared that the public, led by a confident antiwar movement, would demand a much


quicker withdrawal from Vietnam than he had planned. With that deadline


approached, Henry Kissinger, the most important Vietnam policymaker asked a


group of Quakers to give Nixon six months, if the war is not over then,


"You can come back and tear down the White House.". In May 1970, Nixon


gambled that he could buy time for Vietnamization through an attack on Cambodian


sanctuaries to destroy communist command-and-supply buildings, while containing


the protest that he knew his action would provoke. His gamble failed, when


poorly trained National Guardsmen killed four students at Kent State University,


on May 4. This made the expected protests much worse than anyone in Washington


could have foreseen. The wave of demonstrations on hundreds of college campuses


paralyzed America’s higher-education system. The Kent State tragedy ignited a


nationwide campus disaster.Between May 4 and May 8, campuses experienced an


average of 100 demonstrations a day, 350 campus strikes, 536 colleges shut down,


and 73 colleges reported significant violence in their protests. On that


weekend, 100,000 people gathered to protest in Washington. By May 12, over 150


colleges were on strike. Many of Nixon’s activities during the second week of


May revolved around the Kent State crisis. On May 6, he met with thedelegation


of the university. But with the storm of people on the outside of the White


House, the government never completely stopped. Despite Nixon’s claims that the


media did not portray his serious intentions accurately, his own records reveal


almost no discussion of Vietnam, Cambodia, or Kent State at the time. On


December 15, Nixon announced his intention to withdraw an additional fifty


thousand troops in 1970. Even the president’s faith in that position was


shattered after the unprecedented nationwide protests against his invasion of


Cambodia in the spring of 1970. As the Nixon administration tried to piece


together in the weeks after the crisis, a dramatic decline in antiwar occurred


once the colleges closed. The nationwide response to the Cambodian invasion and


the Kent State killings was the last movement by the people, which had such an


impact like the summer of 1970. Nixon began to plan a new and even more vigorous


offensive against the movement. However, Nixon and his aides still felt


undersized during the summer of 1970-from the media, movement, and Congress. For


whatever reasons, campus demonstrations and general antiwar activity declined


after the spring of 1970. The number andsize of marches and protests declined as


reported by the mass media. For Nixon, the nation was full with marches,


strikes, boycotts, and other forms of activism during the last two years of his


administration. Some protesting still lingered, and in the late summer on August


7, 1970, when a young researcher at the University of Wisconsin was killed when


the building in which he was working was fire bombed. But the Dove rallies were


poorly attended; the movement was winding down. It was not just that the


movement was doing poorly, as Nixon himself was doing much better, becoming a


popular Democratic spokesperson. On September 16, he appeared to cheering crowds


at Kansas State University. The antiwar movement figured indirectly in the


outcome of Vietnam. After Saigon fell, the Watergate affair crippled


Nixon’spresidency and dominated his political life until his resignation in


August 1974. During this period, he was far too weak to contest with Congress


over a renewal of American military involvement in Vietnam. As the crisis in


Southern Vietnam now deepened in the middle of 1974, the new president, Gerald


Ford, wanted to increase military aide to the faltering Saigon regime. Congress


refused his requests to what it saw as pouring more money and lives away.


Continuing in 1974 to 1975, the public with the movement, led by Congress and


the media, all influenced the arguments presented to more financial and


militarycommitments in Vietnam. The struggle of the American minds was over, for


there would be no more Vietnams in the near future. Among the most convincing


theories of the movement were that it exerted pressures directly on Johnson and


Nixon it contributed to the end of their policies. The movement exerted


pressures indirectly by turning the public against the war. It encouraged the


Northern Vietnamese to fight on long enough to the point that Americans demanded


a withdrawal from Southeast Asia; it influenced American political and military


strategy; and, slowed the growth of the hawks. It is now clear that the antiwar


movement and antiwar criticism in the media and Congress had a significant


impact on Vietnam. It’s key points being the mass demonstrations by the college


students across the country and the general public opposition to the war effort


inVietnam. At times, some of their activities, as displayed by the media, may


have produced a patriotic backlash. Overall, the movement eroded support for


Johnson and Nixon, especially by the informed public. Through constant


dissident, experts in the movement, the media, and the campuses helped to


destroy the knee-jerk notion that "they in Washington have created."


Thus, from the beginning of the US involvement in Indochina’s affairs, the


antiwar movement in the US from 1965-1971 was the most significant movement of


its kind in the nation’s history.

Сохранить в соц. сетях:
Обсуждение:
comments powered by Disqus

Название реферата: Antiwar Movement In US Essay Research Paper

Слов:2836
Символов:19447
Размер:37.98 Кб.