Some people are wondering why the New York
Times and CBS' 60 minutes II would spend two and a
half years investigating war crimes allegedly committed
by former Senator Bob Kerrey 32 years ago in Vietnam.
But this is journalism at its best: it is forcing people to
rethink some important history, not just what happened
on a moonless night in the village of Thanh Phong, but
throughout that horrible war.
The American people need to know the truth
about the Vietnam War -- it was not, as former President
Ronald Reagan described it, "a noble cause." In truth it
was a vile cause, a dirty, rotten war waged by the most
powerful nation and military on earth against a poor
country struggling for its independence. In such a war,
where the foreign invaders are hated by the vast majority
of the population, we would expect these invaders to
commit certain kinds of atrocities.
The Kerrey story illustrates this very clearly,
regardless of whose account one chooses to believe.
Among the undisputed facts: Kerrey's squad was on a
mission to assassinate a man he describes as a "pro-
Communist political leader." Along the way they
encountered five unarmed people who offered no
resistance. They killed all of them.
It is also acknowledged that Thanh Phong was
within a "free fire zone," which meant that anyone living
there -- including the children slaughtered by Kerrey's
squad -- were "the enemy" and could be killed.
This was truly a war against the people of
Vietnam, as its history indicates. Vietnam was a French
colony until World War II, when the French Vichy (pro-
Nazi) government shared power with the invading
Japanese. After the war the Vietnamese declared
independence, but the French wanted to keep their empire
and Washington backed them with billions of dollars and
weapons.
The French could not win, but managed to get
control of Vietnam south of the 17th parallel, in a
negotiated agreement at the 1954 Geneva Conference.
This was supposed to be a temporary arrangement until
elections could be held (in 1956) to unify the country. But
the elections never happened because, as Eisenhower
would write in his memoirs, Washington knew that
"possibly 80 percent of the people would have voted for
the Communist Ho Chi Minh."
In order to keep the Vietnamese people from
freely electing their own government, Washington backed
a series of dictatorships, and created an army for a
"country" -- South Vietnam -- that was itself a creation of
the United States. But that army didn't do much better
than the French, so we had to invade with our own troops
to do the job. That's how Kerry and his Navy Seals ended
up on that mission in 1969.
Fast forward to 2001. There are two main points
of dispute in the story of Thanh Phong. Kerry claims that
their first five victims were men, although he does not
seem very certain in the TV interview. Squad member
Gerhard Klann recalls that they killed an old man (whom
he says he killed by slitting his throat while Kerry held
him down), a woman and three young children. Klann's
story is backed by a Vietnamese eyewitness, as well as
the five graves (two grandparents with three little ones)
shown on TV.
In the most chilling part of the story, Klann (and
the Vietnamese witness) say the squad rounded up about
14 women and children and shot them all to death. Kerry
claims they fired into the darkness from a distance of
about 100 yards after thinking they had been fired upon
(he's not sure). Here, too, Kerry's story is weak: one
would not expect to find most of the village dead in a
cluster, from a volley of shots into fired into the dark of
night. Kerry's account also suffers from other
inconsistencies and changes in his story, as documented
in the New York Times' Magazine article.
But the more important story is that the whole war
was a crime. And our political leaders are the ones who
should bear the blame -- not the soldiers whom they lied
to, telling them they were defending democracy and
freedom and their own country when they sent them to
war halfway across the world.
But even today, our leaders have yet to face up to
the facts: their only lesson has been that they shouldn't
send ground troops. Hence Washington's current support
for the military and death squads of Colombia, as well as
the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of civilians in
Central America in the 1970s and 80s. These are the real
costs of not facing up to the truth about the Vietnam War.
Mark Weisbrot is co-director of the Center for
Economic and Policy Research (www.cepr.net) in
Washington, DC.
###