Pham and Nguyen are co-presidents of the Vietnamese Student
Union.
By Kim Le Pham and Andrian
Nguyen
As David Horowitz wrote in a paid advertisement in the Daily
Bruin (“An Open Letter to “˜Anti-War’
Demonstrators: Think Twice Before You Bring the War Home,”
Sept. 27), there is little doubt about the consequences of South
Vietnam’s loss to Communist forces.
The fall of Saigon on April 30, 1975 ““ referred to as
Black April by Vietnamese overseas ““ was certainly a fateful
day that marked not only the end of the Vietnam War, but also
changed the lives of millions of Vietnamese forever.
Since that day, hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese have been
subjected to humiliation and torture in re-education camps.
Ineffective economic policies and widespread corruption have
characterized a nation that is one of the poorest in the world,
with an annual GDP per capita income of $390 in 2000, according to
the World Bank.
The country’s communist government, which the United
Nations Human Rights Commission recognizes as one of the
world’s worst violators, has continued to deny its citizens
religious freedom and basic human rights.
To escape these dire conditions, tens of thousands fled Vietnam
as refugees in search for freedom. They became known as “boat
people,” many of whom perished in the seas.
Many Vietnamese are still being held in run-down refugee camps
across the world, waiting to relocate and start new lives. The
effects of South Vietnam’s defeat, on top of over three
decades of war, are still felt strongly today.
However, to say that the anti-war protesters were responsible
for the consequences of Black April ““ as Horowitz suggested
““ would be an overly simplistic view of a complicated
war.
Although there is great resentment toward these protesters, many
other factors also contributed to the downfall of the South
Vietnamese.
An ineffective military strategy by the United States, unstable
leadership within the South Vietnamese government, continuous
Soviet and Chinese aid to the North Vietnamese and the use of
widespread propaganda and guerrilla tactics by the Viet Cong were
some other factors that actually prolonged the Vietnam War and
delivered South Vietnam to the forces of Communism.
The connections that Horowitz attempts to draw between the
anti-war protesters of the Vietnam War and those of today are
confounded by the very simplicity of his argument.
The circumstances surrounding the Vietnam War and the events of
Sept. 11, while both tragic, are different and cannot simply be
compared through the personal experiences of Horowitz and the
actions of anti-war protesters.
The Vietnam War took place in a different social and political
context ““ from the end of French colonization in Vietnam to
United States involvement. The war’s consequences and lessons
remain in many ways unresolved, misunderstood and
misinterpreted.
In fact, it is Horowitz’s message that is misdirected.
Today’s protesters are not motivated by “malevolent
hate,” as Horowitz puts it. Rather they are motivated by
those who fear backlash and hate crimes directed against Muslims
and Muslim Americans.
While ignorance and stereotyping of the Muslim community has
resulted in countless hate crimes across the nation, misplaced
anger has also affected Sikh Americans and South Asians as
well.
It is actually those who perpetrate these hate crimes and
disregard the civil rights of others that should be considered as,
in Horowitz’s words, the “true enemies of
within.” With some critical thought, it is not hard to
realize that it is these perpetrators of hate crimes who should be
“stopped in their tracks.”