The American Antiwar Movement

The Vietnam War divided the American people more than any other event since the American Civil War (1861–65). In the early years of U.S. involvement, most people supported the government's policies. But as the war dragged on and more American soldiers were killed or wounded, increasing numbers of Americans began to oppose the war. During the late 1960s and early 1970s, the antiwar movement gained strength and people opposed to the war became more vocal in their protests.

"Opposition began among pacifists [individuals who believe that disputes can be solved peacefully] in the political fringe . . . but then spread to students, academics, artists, intellectuals, clergy, civil rights activists, writers, politicians, journalists, and entertainers," Randy Roberts and James S. Olson explain in the Encyclopedia of the Vietnam War. "Some demanded an end to the war because they felt it was immoral, others because it was poorly conceived and unwinnable, and still others because the United States refused to employ the full range of its military power to achieve a military victory. By the early 1970s, opposition to the Vietnam War was endemic [native] to American political culture, affecting almost every segment of American society."

During the Vietnam War, disagreements arose among the various groups involved in the antiwar movement. Some groups favored radical and violent forms of protest, while others felt that nonviolent resistance was the best option. These disagreements reduced the movement's effectiveness as well as its popularity among the American people. As the United States gradually reduced its military presence in Vietnam in the mid–1970s, the antiwar movement faded away. But there is little doubt that it had a lasting impact on American society.

Scattered voices protest early U.S. involvement

During the Eisenhower and Kennedy administrations of the 1950s and early 1960s, most American citizens supported the government's decision to provide economic aid and military advisors to South Vietnam. The American people worried about the spread of communism around the world. For this reason, they believed that the U.S. government was attempting to prevent South Vietnam from coming under the control of Communist-led forces from North Vietnam. But U.S. military involvement in Vietnam grew steadily in the early 1960s, and so did the number of people who spoke out against it.

When the United States first became involved in Vietnam, the people who opposed the government's policies primarily represented traditional pacifist groups. These groups—which tended to oppose all war on moral or religious grounds—included members of the Quaker religion (also known as the Society of Friends), the Fellowship of Reconciliation (FOR), and the War Resisters League (WRL). These groups spoke out against the Vietnam War in the early 1960s, just as they had spoken out against World War II (1939–45) and the Korean War (1950–53). They protested against the growing numbers of American military advisors being sent to Vietnam, and they asked the U.S. government to try to negotiate a settlement between North and South Vietnam.

Most leaders within the U.S. government favored taking a strong stand against communism. They believed that America's future depended on supporting democratic principles and governments around the world. But there were a few key government officials who questioned the wisdom of becoming involved in a war in Vietnam. Some officials believed that the revolution taking place in Vietnam was a struggle for independence after many years of foreign rule. They knew that the leader of North Vietnam, Ho Chi Minh (1890–1969), held Communist beliefs. But they thought he was unlikely to align himself with other Communist governments, like the Soviet Union, after fighting so long for Vietnamese independence. Other American officials felt uncomfortable supporting the South Vietnamese government because its leader, President Ngo Dinh Diem (1901–1963), was not willing to make democratic reforms.

One of the earliest opponents of U.S. involvement was George Ball, who served as undersecretary of state in the Kennedy administration. When President Kennedy (1917–1963; president 1960–1963) decided to send an 8,000-man task force to South Vietnam in 1961, Ball warned that the United States might be drawn into a war it could never win. "Once large numbers of U.S. troops are committed to direct combat, they will begin to take heavy casualties in a war they are ill-equipped to fight in a noncooperative if not downright hostile countryside," Ball wrote in a memo. "Once we suffer large casualties, we will have started a [nearly] irreversible process. Our involvement will be so great that we cannot—without national humiliation—stop short of achieving our complete objectives. Of the two possibilities I think humiliation would be more likely than the achievement of our objectives—even after we have paid terrible costs."

In addition to pacifist groups and a few government advisors, some members of the media criticized early U.S. involvement in Vietnam. Government leaders depended on the press to give the American people its official view of the conflict. But a few reporters who covered Vietnam in the early 1960s—such as David Halberstam of the New York Times, Neil Sheehan of United Press International, Peter Arnett of Associated Press, and Stanley Karnow of Time—presented a less positive view of the situation. They noted that Diem's government was corrupt and unpopular, and warned that Communist guerillas (guerrillas are small groups of fighters who launch surprise attacks) known as the Viet Cong (VC) controlled large areas of the South Vietnamese countryside.

Opposition grows after U.S. sends combat troops

After President Kennedy was assassinated, Lyndon B. Johnson (1908–1973; president 1963–1969) became president of the United States in November 1963. In early 1965, Johnson increased U.S. involvement in Vietnam by starting bombing raids and sending combat troops. Before this time, Americans had acted only as military advisors to the South Vietnamese forces.

At first, most American citizens supported the president's decision to expand the U.S. role in Vietnam. They expected that the American troops, with their superior weapons and training, would quickly drive the Viet Cong forces out of South Vietnam. But before long, people started to feel the effects of the war. More than 180,000 American troops had been sent to Vietnam by the end of 1965, and Johnson planned to send 160,000 more in 1966. As more American troops saw combat, more reports of casualties (dead and wounded soldiers) came back to the United States. Young men across the country began to worry that they might be selected for military service in the draft.

Opposition to the war started to grow after Johnson sent American troops to Vietnam. One of the traditional pacifist groups, the WRL, organized the first nationwide demonstration against the war. A group of religious leaders formed a new organization, called Clergy and Laity Concerned About Vietnam (CALCAV), that opposed the war on moral grounds. More than thirty other antiwar organizations formed during 1965, as more and more Americans began to disagree with Johnson's policies. Many of these antiwar groups joined together under the National Coordinating Committee to End the War in Vietnam.

The involvement of the United States in the Vietnam War became particularly unpopular on college campuses. One factor in the campus unrest was that college students were the right age to be drafted into the military. In addition, college professors and other well-educated Americans tended to follow politics more closely than other segments of society. These factors led both professors and students to question the government's policies. In March 1965, a group of faculty at the University of Michigan organized a "teach-in" about the Vietnam War. With 3,500 students in attendance, they discussed the causes of the war and the effects of U.S. policies. Before long, antiwar teach-ins were occurring on a number of other college campuses.

One of the most prominent antiwar groups was Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). This group, which was largely composed of college students, had been active in seeking equal rights and opportunities for African Americans during the civil rights movement. Once President Johnson sent combat troops into Vietnam, SDS changed its focus to protesting against the war. "We feel that the war is immoral at its root, that it is fought alongside a regime with no claim to represent its people, and that it is foreclosing the hope of making America a decent and truly democratic society," declared the SDS mission statement. In April 1965, SDS held a rally in Washington, D.C., that attracted 20,000 protesters.

Opposition to the war also grew within the civil rights movement. Many black leaders had initially supported the U.S. government's decision to send troops to Vietnam. Some black leaders were reluctant to criticize President Johnson because they believed he supported their call for civil rights. But before long, many civil rights leaders began to change their minds about Vietnam. They noticed that the war drew government attention and resources away from programs designed to reduce discrimination and poverty. They also grew concerned about the high number of African American casualties in the war. Black men were more likely to be drafted than whites, and they were more likely to be assigned to dangerous combat duty. As a result, black soldiers accounted for twenty-five percent of Americans killed in Vietnam in 1965 and 1966, even though they made up only thirteen to fourteen percent of all U.S. forces.

Civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. (1929–1968) began speaking out against the war in July 1965. As it became clear that the African American community was bearing more than its share of the losses in Vietnam, several civil rights groups joined the antiwar movement. In 1966, heavyweight boxing champion Muhammad Ali (1942–) announced that he would refuse to serve in the army if he was drafted. He followed up on this promise by ignoring his draft notice the following year. Although Ali was stripped of his title and his boxing license, he became a prominent symbol of resistance to the war.

March on the Pentagon

The size of U.S. forces stationed in Vietnam continued to grow in 1966 and 1967, eventually reaching more than 500,000 troops. But these forces did not seem to be gaining much ground against the Viet Cong. Disturbed by the evergrowing number of American soldiers killed and wounded, some government leaders began questioning U.S. policy. Several prominent Republican members of Congress—including Senator George Aiken (1892–1984) of Vermont, Senator Clifford Case (1904–1982) of New Jersey, and Senator Mark Hatfield (1922–) of Oregon—spoke out against the war. Of course, President Johnson, a Democrat, expected to receive criticism from members of the opposing political party. But then several prominent Democrats began to express their doubts about the war as well. Democratic leaders who withdrew their support from the president included Senator Mike Mansfield (1903–) of Montana, Senator Robert Kennedy (1925–1968) of New York, and Senator Eugene McCarthy (1916–) of Minnesota.

A majority of American citizens also began to question the country's involvement in Vietnam during this time. Public opinion polls showed that support for Johnson's policies had dropped from 61 percent in 1965 to 50 percent in 1966, and then continued falling to 44 percent in 1967. This dissatisfac tion could be seen at the antiwar rallies and protests, which became more frequent and involved larger numbers of people.In April 1967, for example, 130,000 people attended the Spring Mobilization antiwar demonstration in New York City, and another 70,000 participated in related events in San Francisco.

As the antiwar movement gained strength, the media increased its coverage of protests and other events. As a result, the movement became more visible and influential. One of the largest antiwar demonstrations took place in Washington, D.C., in October 1967. More than 100,000 people marched through the streets of the city and listened to speeches and protest songs near the Washington Monument. Later, many of these demonstrators marched across a bridge to Arlington, Virginia, where they continued their protest at the Pentagon, an enormous building that served as the headquarters for the U.S. Department of Defense.

This demonstration, known as the March on the Pentagon, became a huge media event. U.S. Army troops were called out to prevent protesters from entering the building, and news crews took pictures of hippies (usually refers to young people who oppose conventional standards and customs) placing flowers in the barrels of the soldiers' guns. Many well-known singers, writers, poets, and artists showed up and performed for the cameras. Although the protests began peacefully, they grew more confrontational over time. As night fell, some protesters got into a riot with police and were arrested.

The March on the Pentagon showed the world that opposition to the Vietnam War was growing in the United States. Afterward, some people expressed concern that such large-scale protests might encourage the Viet Cong and put American troops in danger. President Johnson even asked the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to investigate some of the protest leaders. He felt that the antiwar movement would lose public support if he could link some of its leaders to communism.

Trouble within the movement

Despite its growing size and influence, however, the antiwar movement still struggled to find a unified voice during these years. After all, the movement was made up of many different groups with different protest goals. This situation sometimes created tension within the antiwar movement. For example, civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. urged anti-war demonstrators to use nonviolent forms of protest. But more militant black leaders, like Stokely Carmichael (1941–1998) of the Student National Coordinating Committee (SNCC), argued that violence was acceptable and even necessary to achieve their goals.

By the late 1960s, polls showed that the majority of Americans opposed the U.S. military involvement in Vietnam. But even among people who were against the war, few could agree on what action the government should take. "Political diversity proved to be a double-edged sword," Tom Wells explains in The War Within: America's Battle over Vietnam. "Although it compounded the movement's numbers, it engendered [caused] fierce and enduring disputes among protesters that tore peace organizations apart. Often, participants at anti-war meetings could agree on little more than their opposition to U.S. intervention."

At this point, some radical antiwar groups began resorting to violent confrontation in order to stand out from the rest of the movement. Such groups engaged in riots, broke into or destroyed buildings, burned the American flag, or called for the overthrow of the U.S. government. Some people even displayed the North Vietnamese flag and expressed their support for the Viet Cong. The behavior of the radical members of the antiwar movement disgusted and frightened many Americans, including some who opposed the war. In fact, some experts claim that more people might have protested against the war except that they did not want to be associated with this sort of behavior. "The fringe of the antiwar movement engaging in violence attracted more attention than the hundreds of thousands of ordinary people who occasionally marched, went to vigils, or wrote members of Congress," Robert D. Schulzinger writes in A Time for War. "The tumult [chaos] within the antiwar movement turned away as many people as it recruited."

Democratic presidential convention of 1968

The same type of debate that took place within the anti-war movement also occurred within the Democratic Party. Some Democratic leaders pushed President Johnson to commit more troops and win the war in Vietnam. But many others wanted him to withdraw troops and negotiate a settlement. Senator Eugene McCarthy, a prominent Democrat who opposed Johnson's policies, announced his intention to run against Johnson in hopes of becoming the Democratic candidate for president in 1968. Throughout this political turmoil, Johnson and his advisors continued to tell the American people that his strategy was working. They claimed that the American bombing of North Vietnam, along with the U.S. troop movements in South Vietnam, was slowly but surely defeating the Viet Cong.

In January 1968, however, North Vietnamese forces launched a major offensive attack into the South. This military action became known as the Tet Offensive (see Chapter 7, "The Tet Offensive (1968)"). American and South Vietnamese forces managed to turn back the attack, and the Viet Cong suffered significant losses. But the size and strength of the attack stunned the American people. Many had believed the president when he assured them that North Vietnam was losing the war. After the Tet Offensive, they lost faith in Johnson's leadership and worried that the war might continue for many more years. People on all sides of the issue started to become weary of the war. As a result, antiwar protests grew larger and more violent. In one incident, members of SDS seized several campus buildings at Columbia University in New York City and pressured the school to stop doing military research.

As public opinion toward Johnson became increasingly negative after the Tet Offensive, Senator Robert F. Kennedy announced that he would seek the Democratic nomination for president as well. With so many of his former supporters lining up against him, President Johnson decided not to run for re-election. At this point, Vice President Hubert Humphrey (1911–1978) also joined the race.

The Democratic Party formally nominated Humphrey for president at a convention in Chicago during the summer of 1968 (Kennedy had appeared likely to receive the nomination, but he was assassinated shortly before the convention). Inside the convention hall, the Democrats struggled to agree on the Vietnam policy they would present in their campaign. Meanwhile, the streets of Chicago outside the convention hall became the site of a raucous antiwar protest. Well-known antiwar activists from a wide variety of groups showed up to add their voices to the demonstrations, including Tom Hayden (1939–) of SDS, David Dellinger (1915–) of the National Mobilization to End the War in Vietnam (MOBE), Bobby Seale (1936–) of the Black Panthers, and Jerry Rubin (1938–1994) and Abbie Hoffman (1936–1989) of the Youth International Party (YIPPIE).

Chicago Mayor Richard Daley (1902–1976) sent his police force to control the protesters, and the situation quickly turned into a riot. Scenes of fights between antiwar activists and police officers dominated television newscasts and overshadowed the convention. Some people claimed that the police used excessive force against the protesters. More than one thousand protesters and two hundred police officers were injured in the fighting. A year later, seven of the main organizers of the protest—known as the Chicago Seven—were put on trial for conspiracy to cause a riot. But the antiwar activists refused to cooperate. Instead, they used their appearance in court as an opportunity to present their political views. They even draped a Viet Cong flag over the table where they sat. Although several of the protesters were convicted, the decision was later overturned.

Nixon and Vietnamization

The controversy surrounding the Democratic convention made many voters wonder whether the Democrats could lead the country out of the situation in Vietnam. These doubts helped Republican candidate Richard M. Nixon (1913–1994; president 1969–1974) defeat Humphrey in the 1968 election to become president of the United States. One of Nixon's main campaign promises was to find a way to end the war.

Upon taking office in January 1969, Nixon announced a new policy he called Vietnamization. He explained that Johnson had "Americanized" the war by sending U.S. combat troops to Vietnam. Now, Nixon planned to return responsibility for fighting the war to South Vietnam. He promised to withdraw U.S. troops gradually, while also building up the South Vietnamese army and government. In this way, the United States could end its military involvement without allowing the country to fall to communism.

Many Americans were pleased that Nixon seemed committed to ending the war. But most people in the antiwar movement felt that he was not moving quickly enough. After all, more than 7,000 American soldiers died between the time he took office and August 1969, when he removed the first U.S. troops from Vietnam. Antiwar rallies and demonstrations continued, as protesters tried to force the president to move faster. In October 1969, an activist named Sam Brown organized the first Moratorium Day demonstrations. Various antiwar groups encouraged their members to take a day off from work or school in order to protest the war. Millions of people participated in Moratorium Day events across the United States. In Vietnam, thousands of American soldiers wore black arm bands to show their support for ending the war.

On November 3, Nixon responded to the widespread protests with what became known as his Silent Majority speech. In this speech, Nixon claimed that the antiwar activists were a "vocal minority" within American society. He also criticized the protesters for behaving in ways that embarrassed the United States. He said that the antiwar demonstrations made it more difficult for him to put policies in place to end the war. Nixon then appealed to the "silent majority" of patriotic Americans who did not participate in antiwar protests. He asked these people to support his efforts to forge a "just and lasting peace" in Vietnam. He said that he wanted to withdraw the American troops from Vietnam, but he wanted to do it in a way that would preserve the honor of the United States. He claimed that an immediate withdrawal would lead to "a collapse of confidence in American leadership, not only in Asia but throughout the world."

Kent State tragedy

At first, Nixon's speech seemed to have the opposite effect than he intended. Instead of calming protests and increasing support for his policies, it appeared to make the antiwar movement more vocal than ever. In fact, a second Moratorium Day took place on November 15 and attracted even more participants than the first one. Then, in April 1970, Nixon ordered U.S. troops to invade Cambodia, the Asian nation on Vietnam's western border. He claimed that the Viet Cong had established bases and supply stations in Cambodia, and that fighting in Cambodia was the only way to defeat the Communists. But many Americans saw Nixon's decision to invade Cambodia as an escalation of the war. They felt that the president had gone back on his promise to end the war and bring the troops home.

The antiwar movement reacted to the invasion of Cambodia by launching protests across the country. Many of these antiwar demonstrations took place on college campuses, including the campus of Kent State University in Ohio. Beginning on May 1, hundreds of Kent State students gathered to protest the invasion of Cambodia. Some of the demonstrations turned violent. On May 2, the protesters burned down a campus building that had been used for military training of the Reserve Officers Training Corps (ROTC). In response, Ohio Governor James Rhodes called out the National Guard to restore order. But the demonstrations continued, resulting in several angry confrontations between students and guardsmen. During one of these confrontations on May 4, members of the National Guard fired their guns into a crowd of demonstrators, killing four students and injuring nine others.

Many Americans were shocked and outraged at the tragedy that had taken place on the Kent State campus. Angry demonstrations against the killing of the students broke out on many other college campuses. In fact, many colleges decided to close for the year and send students home early in order to prevent violent protests. But some people had grown so tired of the unrest in American society—and felt so much resentment toward the antiwar movement—that they claimed the Kent State protesters had gotten what they deserved.

The protests over the invasion of Cambodia and the events at Kent State marked the strongest point of the antiwar movement. Over the next few years, the movement gradually lost members and became less visible. Part of the reason for the decline was disagreements between the various antiwar groups. Some groups, like SDS, became more radical and violent in their protests, which reduced support for the overall movement among average American citizens. But the main reason for the decline in the antiwar movement was that Nixon eventually followed through with his Vietnamization plan. The number of U.S. troops in Vietnam dropped from 475,000 in 1969 to 335,000 in 1970, and fell to 157,000 by the end of 1971. Many people began to believe that the war was finally coming to an end.

United States ends involvement

As President Nixon continued withdrawing U.S. troops from Vietnam, the number of American soldiers killed in combat also declined. In 1969, 9,400 Americans lost their lives in Vietnam. But this number fell to 1,400 in 1971 and 300 in 1972. These statistics gave the American people hope that the president's plan was working. At this point, a strong majority of U.S. citizens wanted the war to end, although many still wanted it to happen in a way that would preserve American dignity.

With another presidential election coming in 1972, Nixon tried to negotiate a peace treaty with North Vietnam. His Democratic opponent, Senator George McGovern (1922–) of South Dakota, promised to withdraw all American troops immediately if he became president. In March 1972, North Vietnam launched another offensive attack into South Vietnam, which became known as the Easter Offensive. In response, Nixon ordered large-scale strategic bombing of the North. After losing 100,000 troops in these conflicts, North Vietnam returned to the negotiating table in the fall. The two sides reached a tentative agreement to end the war in October 1972.

In November, Nixon was re-elected as president. Voters appreciated the fact that he had ended U.S. involvement in Vietnam. In addition, many people had found McGovern's views to be too extreme. By early 1973, the North Vietnamese had returned American prisoners of war (POWs), and only 20,000 American troops remained in Vietnam as advisors to the South Vietnamese army. Despite the peace agreement, however, many government leaders remained concerned about the situation in Vietnam. They worried that the North would break the peace agreement and attack the South, and they believed that the South could not defend itself without American help. Since U.S. involvement had become so unpopular among the American people, some officials thought that Nixon might secretly try to provide assistance.

In July 1973, the U.S. Congress took steps to prevent Nixon from sending American troops back to Vietnam. They passed the War Powers Resolution, which required the president to ask permission of Congress before he committed any troops to combat. This congressional action made Nixon very angry. He felt that Congress was trying to take away some of his powers as president. But by the fall of that year, Nixon had other worries. Specifically, he was trapped in a scandal known as Watergate. Reporters discovered that Republican agents associated with Nixon's re-election campaign had broken into the Democratic Party headquarters, stolen documents, and set up wiretaps prior to the 1972 presidential election. As investigators pursued the case, it became clear that the president had learned about the burglary and then tried to prevent that information from becoming public. As a result of the scandal, Nixon lost the respect of the American people, and he resigned as president in August 1974.

By this time, North Vietnam was threatening to take over South Vietnam once again. President Gerald Ford (1913–; president 1974–1977) requested emergency aid for the South, but the U.S. Congress refused to provide it. As a result, North Vietnamese forces captured the South Vietnamese capital of Saigon on May 1, 1975. This event reunited the country under Communist rule and brought an end to the war. South Vietnam finally fell to communism, despite everything that the U.S. government had done for more than twenty years to prevent it. Yet most Americans seemed willing to accept the defeat. Few people wanted the United States to become involved in Vietnam again.

Impact of the antiwar movement

Ever since the end of the Vietnam War, people have debated about the effectiveness and long-term impact of the American antiwar movement. Many historians believe that the antiwar movement caused lasting changes in American society. According to Schulzinger, "The antiwar movement did not end the war in Vietnam, but it did alter, almost irrevocably, the perceptions of ordinary citizens of their society and their government It also altered the perceptions of leaders toward the public." The American people tended to view institutions differently after Vietnam, including universities, the military, the media, and the government. For example, the antiwar movement shed light on several instances when the president or other officials had misled the public. As a result, many people found it more difficult to trust the government.

Many people also believe that the antiwar movement had a strong effect on government policies, both during the Vietnam years and afterward. "The U.S. government took the antiwar movement quite seriously," Wells notes. "[Officials in the Johnson and Nixon administrations] considered the movement a nagging sign of domestic dissatisfaction with the war, a threat to their base of domestic support, a menace to American social stability, and a source of encouragement to the Vietnamese army." Both Johnson and Nixon watched news reports of protests and collected information about some of the most prominent antiwar activists. At times, the threat of public opposition may have convinced them to change their policies. "The movement kept Nixon at crucial junctures from ratcheting up the war," former antiwar activist Todd Gitlin writes in the foreword to The War Within. "It functioned as a veto force."

On the other hand, some historians believe that the antiwar movement was not as effective as it might have been. "Antiwar activists contributed to the growth of public disaffection with the war and helped give it focus, but they were unable to harness it," Charles DeBenedetti and Charles Chatfield write in An American Ordeal: The Antiwar Movement of the Vietnam Era. Disagreements within the antiwar movement reduced its effectiveness. So did the extreme protests and violence used by some radical members of the movement. "The war might have been somewhat more unpopular had the protest not existed [since] the Vietnam protest movement generated negative feelings among the American people," John Mueller is quoted as saying in the Historical Atlas of the Vietnam War. "Opposition to the war became associated with violent disruption, stink bombs, desecration [violation] of the flag, profanity, and contempt for American values."

Perhaps the biggest mistake of the antiwar movement was its treatment of American soldiers and veterans (see Chapter 10, "Coming Home: Vietnam Veterans in American Society"). Some protesters tended to blame U.S. soldiers for the tragic situation in Vietnam, instead of blaming the government leaders who had sent them there. In some instances, antiwar activists spit on returning veterans and called them baby-killers. "What I found in the antiwar movement," Stephen E. Ambrose writes in his introduction to Telltale Hearts: The Origins and Impact of the Vietnam Antiwar Movement, "was not an understanding that the Army had been given an impossible job to do by the civilian leadership, but rather a hatred for the Army and its personnel. This was a terrible thing." Not surprisingly, many soldiers and veterans felt great anger and resentment toward the antiwar movement because of this treatment.

Some historians have even claimed that the American antiwar movement prolonged the conflict in Vietnam. They contend that the vocal opposition limited the options of U.S. government leaders and made it more difficult for them to end the war. As President Johnson once said, "The weakest link in our armor is American public opinion." Some historians also argue that the unrest in the United States helped the Vietnamese Communists win. They claim that the widespread protests against American involvement convinced the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese that they just needed to hold on until the U.S. government was forced to withdraw.

But other historians see the antiwar movement as a prime example of democracy at work. Although there were problems within the movement and some protesters went too far, the fact that such large numbers of Americans were able to band together, express their opinions, and influence the government to end the war makes the Vietnam protests an important part of the nation's history.

Sources

DeBenedetti, Charles, and Charles Chatfield. An American Ordeal: TheAntiwar Movement of the Vietnam Era. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1990.

Garfinkle, Adam. Telltale Hearts: The Origins and Impact of the Vietnam Antiwar Movement. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1995.

Kutler, Stanley I., ed. Encyclopedia of the Vietnam War. New York: Scribner's,1996.

Levy, David W. The Debate over Vietnam. 2d ed. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1995.

Schulzinger, Robert D. A Time for War: The United States and Vietnam,1941–1975. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.

Summers, Harry G., Jr. Historical Atlas of the Vietnam War. Boston:Houghton Mifflin, 1995.

Wells, Tom. The War Within: America's Battle over Vietnam. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994.

Zaroulis, Nancy, and Gerald Sullivan. Who Spoke Up? American Protest against the War in Vietnam, 1963–1975. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1984.

Words to Know

Communism A political system in which the government controls all resources and means of producing wealth. By eliminating private property, this system is designed to create an equal society with no social classes. However, Communist governments in practice often limit personal freedom and individual rights.

North Vietnam The Geneva Accords of 1954, which ended the First Indochina War (1946–54), divided the nation of Vietnam into two sections. The northern section, which was led by a Communist government under Ho Chi Minh, was officially known as the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, but was usually called North Vietnam.

Silent Majority A term used by U.S. President Richard Nixon to describe the large number of American people he believed quietly supported his Vietnam War policies. In contrast, Nixon referred to the antiwar movement in the United States as a vocal minority.

South Vietnam Created under the Geneva Accords of 1954, the southern section of Vietnam was known as the Republic of South Vietnam. It was led by a U.S.supported government.

Viet Cong Vietnamese Communist guerilla fighters who worked with the North Vietnamese Army to conquer South Vietnam.

Vietnamization A policy proposed by U.S. President Richard Nixon that involved returning responsibility for the war to the South Vietnamese. It was intended to allow the United States to reduce its military involvement without allowing the country to fall to communism.

People to Know

Ho Chi Minh (1890–1969) Vietnamese Communist leader who led Viet Minh forces in opposing French rule and became the first president of North Vietnam in 1954. He also led the North during the Vietnam War until his death.

Lyndon B. Johnson (1908–1973) After serving as vice president under John Kennedy, he became the 36th president of the United States after Kennedy was assassinated in 1963. Johnson sent U.S. combat troops to Vietnam. Opposition to his policies convinced him not to seek re-election in 1968.

John F. Kennedy (1917–1963) Served as the 35th president of the United States from 1960 until he was assassinated in 1963.

Martin Luther King Jr. (1929–1968) African American leader of the civil rights movement who opposed the Vietnam War. Worked to link the civil rights and antiwar movements before he was assassinated in 1968.

Ngo Dinh Diem (1901–1963) Vietnamese political leader who became president of South Vietnam in 1954. He gradually lost the support of the United States and was killed following the overthrow of his government in 1963.

Richard M. Nixon (1913–1994) Elected as the 37th president of the United States in 1969, at the height of the Vietnam War. Resigned from office during the Watergate scandal in 1974.

Hawks vs. Doves

The terms "hawks" and "doves" were used to describe different government officials based on their views of the Vietnam War. In general, hawks supported the U.S. government's reasons for sending troops to Vietnam, and they were willing to take whatever steps were necessary to win the war. Prominent hawks included Secretary of State Dean Rusk (1909–1994) and National Security Advisor Walt Rostow (1916–).

In contrast, doves opposed U.S. military involvement. Some questioned the importance of Vietnam to U.S. interests, while others did not believe the United States could win the war. Doves pressured government leaders to end the bombing of North Vietnam, negotiate a settlement, and bring the American troops home. Some of the most prominent doves included Senator George McGovern (1922–) and Senator William Fulbright (1905–1995).

Conscientious Objectors

A conscientious objector (CO) is someone who is opposed to war for religious or moral reasons. During the height of the Vietnam War, when U.S. troops suffered large numbers of casualties (killed and wounded soldiers), many young men became desperate to avoid being drafted and sent into combat. But the United States had strict laws that required qualified men to report for military service when their names were selected in the draft. As a result, more and more American men tried to claim CO status in order to avoid being drafted into the U.S. military (sometimes the government makes conscientious objectors exempt from military service or allows them to serve in a non-combat capacity).

There were some legal ways to avoid or delay military service. For example, young men who had physical problems, were enrolled in college, worked in an industry that was vital to the war effort, were needed at home to support a family, or joined the National Guard might be allowed to defer or postpone their military service. Almost 600,000 young men who could not obtain legal deferments chose illegal ways to avoid military service during the Vietnam years. About 50,000 fled to Canada, while 20,000 others assumed false identities or went into hiding in the United States. Nearly 200,000 Americans were formally accused of draft law violations.

Avoiding military service was a high priority among members of the antiwar movement. Many protesters felt that they should not have to fight in Vietnam because they did not support the U.S. government's actions there. In fact, many antiwar activists encouraged other people to resist the draft. Some antiwar groups set up counseling centers to inform young men about their options if they were drafted.

Many people who opposed the war tried to avoid military service by claiming conscientious objector status. At first, government rules required people to prove that they opposed all war on specific religious grounds in order to receive a CO deferment. As opposition to the war grew, however, the rules became more liberal. Instead of specific religious grounds, COs were allowed to base their opposition to the Vietnam War on moral or ethical grounds. As a result, the number of people granted CO status rose from 6 out of every 100 draftees in 1966 to 25 out of every 100 in 1970. Overall, an estimated 170,000 Americans received conscientious objector deferments during the Vietnam War, although 300,000 others had their requests denied.

Veterans Join the Fight against the War

As the strength of the antiwar movement began to decline in the early 1970s, a powerful new voice emerged to challenge U.S. involvement in Vietnam. A group of former soldiers who had fought in Vietnam founded an antiwar group called Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) in 1967. They started out by protesting against the terrible conditions in Veterans Administration hospitals, where many wounded Vietnam veterans were treated. By 1970, VVAW had become one of the most respected and influential of the American antiwar groups.

Many veterans continued to support the war effort after they returned home to the United States. But many other soldiers questioned the U.S. government's policies upon returning home. In fact, some veterans became vocal opponents of the war. Since they had firsthand knowledge of the situation, their protests gained instant credibility in the eyes of antiwar activists and government officials alike. In fact, when VVAW members echoed the comments of other protesters, some people took the whole antiwar movement more seriously.

In February 1971, the VVAW organized an event called the Winter Soldier Investigation in Detroit, Michigan. At this point, the news was full of stories about atrocities (extremely brutal or cruel acts) committed by American soldiers in Vietnam. One of the most publicized incidents was the My Lai massacre, in which U.S. troops had entered a Vietnamese village in search of enemy forces and proceeded to murder hundreds of unarmed civilians, including elderly people, women, and children (see box titled "The My Lai Massacre" in Chapter 12, "Nixon's War (1969–1970)").

The U.S. government claimed that the My Lai massacre was an isolated incident. Military officials issued statements declaring that American troops never committed atrocities. But at the Winter Soldier Investigation, dozens of veterans showed up and said that atrocities were common. In fact, several of the veterans admitted that they had personally witnessed or participated in the killing of innocent civilians in Vietnam. These reports convinced many people that the American forces in Vietnam were out of control, and gave added strength to the antiwar movement.

In April 1971, VVAW members organized another protest in Washington, D.C. About 1,000 veterans held a memorial service at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in Arlington National Cemetery. But they were not allowed to lay wreaths on the graves of soldiers who had been killed in Vietnam. Angry at this turn of events, a number of veterans—some of them in wheelchairs due to wounds they received in Vietnam—went to the Capitol building and threw their military service medals on the steps.

One positive impact of the VVAW was to improve relations between veterans and antiwar protesters. Some antiwar activists tended to blame soldiers for the situation in Vietnam. But as more veterans began speaking out against the war, they were able to convince the protesters that they had a lot in common. As VVAW founder Jan Barry explains in The War Within, "When we would meet other people in the peace movement we constantly said to them, 'Stop screaming at the GIs! Talk to them. Listen to them. They might really agree with you.' That's exactly what happened."