What Should the US have learned from the French Defeat in the First Vietnam War?

What SHOULD the United States Have Learned?

            There are a few important things that the United States should have learned politically and militarily from the French loss to the Vietminh in the first Vietnam War from 1946 to 1954.

            Let us start with what historians call the decisive battle of the war.¹ Dien Bien Phu was said to have been lost by the French within the first two days of the battle.² This particular battle was fought in early 1954 when the Vietminh began receiving military assistance from both China and the Soviet Union. Going into the battle the Vietminh hopelessly outnumbered the 12,000 French soldiers with 50,000 main troops, another 50,000 support forces, 200,000 workers, an estimated 25,000 Chinese workers, not to mention the trucks, artillery, supplies, food, ammunition, etc. that had been supplied by all three constituents.³ This is clue one for the United States: Vietnam had powerful allies in which they could obtain military assistance. Moss mentions something that still resonates with me, “General Navarre’s two fatal strategic errors were his underestimation of Vietminh capabilities—and his over estimation of French capabilities during the impending showdown battle.”⁴ This is clue two for the United States: Do NOT underestimate the enemy and do NOT overestimate yourself. With the Geneva Conference marked for May of 1954, General Giap wanted to make this battle a statement. He wanted to completely crush the French at Dien Bien Phu so that when they went to the conference that would have much better leverage on the table.⁵ Clue three for the United States: The Vietminh were skilled at political maneuvers. They knew how to manipulate certain political situations to achieve their goals. During this battle it was not only life or death for the Vietminh, but for their country as well. They fought like champions securing point after point until the French had nowhere to run. When one door closed, they did not just open another one, they made their own. Clue four for the United States:  The Vietminh were skilled at military maneuvers and were able to adapt and change plans at the drop of a hat.  The Vietminh were smart. Lastly, I would like to talk about casualties for the battle of Dien Bien Phu. French soldiers went away with 7,500 dead or wounded and the Vietminh sustained an estimated 23,000 casualties.⁶ The Vietminh were willing to literally throw as many men as necessary at the job to get it done with a result in their favor. THIS is clue five for the United States: You are fighting a bloodthirsty enemy with nothing to lose and everything to gain, Beware.

            Dien Bien Phu really offers a small scale insight to the whole of the first Vietnam War. Above we have five clues that the United States should have picked up on for the future Vietnam War. There is one other important thing to mention when it comes to what the US should have learned from the French defeat at Vietnam. Clue six for the United States: There is a reason public opinion for the war went down in France to an almost nonexistent level. Common sense would dictate that there might be a reason people have a low public opinion of those specific War reasons and that opinion might not be contained solely in France. Another thing that plays into this clue is that during this time the media was ready and roaring to go. With the readily available wartime information from journalists, stories, pictures, and more the people at home got primary and secondary accounts of the brutal battles that were going on overseas. In early wars like the American Revolution, the War of 1812, and the Civil War you did not get the full story 100% of the time, and you  did not  get the full coverage like you do now. This is an important factor for public opinion of a war.

            Now is a good time to mention some of Americas other faults when it came to thoughts going into the second Vietnam War. America had this picture of what it wanted for Vietnam even though we had NO real stakes in the matter. We sided with France, who lost, so that is the end right? Wrong. We were bigger, stronger, more technically savvy, and smarter than the French. We had more drive, determination, and a better military prowess than the French, or so LBJ thought.⁷ We were going into this war to finish what the French had started, but instead of expanding our empire, we wanted to stop the spread of communism (or at least, that is what FDR said). The Vietminh strategy had not changed one bit from the previous Vietnam War, they planned on using patience, guerrilla warfare, and political tactics that wore down the enemy and undermined their will to fight. ⁸ These points will also play a crucial part in the second Vietnam War.

            There are a few main things the United States should have learned from the French loss in the First Vietnam War. Firstly, Vietnam had powerful allies. Secondly, the French underestimated the Vietminh and overestimated themselves; a problem the United States also struggled with. Thirdly, The Vietminh were skilled in political maneuvers. Fourthly, the Vietminh were skilled in military maneuvers with an out of the box thinking. Fifthly, the Vietminh were willing to sacrifice whatever it took to win their independence (A feeling the United States should be familiar with). Lastly, Public opinion plays a crucial part in modern day wars. In my opinion the United States did not pay close enough head to the mistakes of the French, so justly, they were doomed to repeat them.