Gore's opposition to Vietnam
Expanding on a previous discussion, Gore describes how a visit to Vietnam solidified his opposition to the war there, revealed the potential dangers of the United States' involvement in the region, and disclosed the questionable actions taken by various federal agencies active in the region.
Citing this Excerpt
Oral History Interview with Albert Gore, October 24, 1976. Interview A-0321-2. Southern Oral History Program Collection (#4007) in the Southern Oral History Program Collection, Southern Historical Collection, Wilson Library, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Full Text of the Excerpt
- ALBERT GORE:
-
I'm trying to identify it. I believe it was '59, either '58 or '59. I
believe it was '59. And then Madame Nu, the sister-in-law of Ngo Dinh
Diem who later became world-renowned, invited us to dinner. And I began
to have doubts about the regime there, about our involvement there. I
remember I became very critical of a tactical program of establishing
strategic villages in the Vietnam highlands, largely in an unpopulated
area except for the roaming Montagnards. And the United States was
financing largely all the things in South Vietnam, almost entirely if
not entirely financing the establishment of strategic villages. I
remember now seeing a bamboo fence around the village. This was supposed
to be protection against the North Vietnamese, against the Vietcong. I
saw several of these strategic villages. I can recall now being shown
around one of the villages. And the village was really a
newly-established, inhabited area out in the mountains. And the Diem
regime would conscript people and families from the cities, from Saigon
for instance, and force these people to go out in these strategic
villages and live. And they were supposed to be, as I understood it,
buffers to infiltration of the North Vietnamese and the Vietcong,
whichever. And I remember that in being shown
around one of these villages I was told that here was a spot that the
peasant's cow had brought forth a new calf, had given birth to a new
calf. A tiger had leaped this bamboo fence and grabbed the calf and
leaped back over the fence and made away with the farmer's baby calf.
Well, I remember it struck me as being quite unusual that we were
furnishing the money in a war of tanks and planes and massive armor to
establish a strategic village out in the jungle protected by a bamboo
fence which a tiger could leap without benefit of power or lead or
gasoline and make off with a calf. It seemed to me to illustrate the
insecurity and the futility of this whole tactic. And they were felling
these huge trees, 3-4-5-6 feet in diameter, clearing the ground to
conscript these people who (I was convinced) wanted no part of it to go
out and live in this jungle to be a foil to infiltration. And they would
fell the forest and build many air strips for small planes to land at
these strategic villages. It seemed to me to be unrealistic.
And then I had another eye-witness observation. Of course our route was
well mapped out for us (and I wouldn't have gone if it hadn't been), but
it was mapped by those who were strongly in support of the Vietnam war,
the Vietnam policy, the policy that was being followed. And here was a
field; I remember it was on the right, and I was sitting on the right in
the back seat. And these peasants, oh maybe forty or fifty of them were
hoeing.
[END OF TAPE 2, SIDE A]
[TAPE 2, SIDE B]
[START OF TAPE 2, SIDE B]
- ALBERT GORE:
-
There was a thick infestation of weeds in a field; I've forgotten whether
it was corn or cotton or flax or what it was. Anyway, there were more
weeds than the cultured plant. And they were chopping vigorously
at these weeds. And after we passed I leaned over
and looked out the back window, and they were all throwing their hoes
down on the ground in disgust
[laughter]
. So this illustrated to me that a show was being put on for us.
And the longer I stayed the more I realized that there was something
synthetic, something deceptive about this whole operation, and I became
harshly critical. Remember this was in the early stages of our
involvement in the war. And I did go to President Kennedy after his
election and say that in my view our national security was not involved
there, and that if it were we were allied with a weak and a corrupt
regime, an authoritarian dictatorship that demonstrated no regard for
human rights or civil rights or individual dignity. Well, with this
beginning I developed a questioning, and from a very critical point of
view. As a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee I was
entitled to the secret information available. One man who gave me
unstintingly (insofar as I could tell from the stand of security
information) was the head of the CIA, Dick Helms. Ultimately, after the
Pentagon Papers were released, I found little new in them. They did,
however, show that Helms had been the most accurate adviser of both the
President and the Senate on the question of aid to Vietnam.
[Omission]
- ALBERT GORE:
-
I think the event that confirmed me as to the deception involved in the
whole policy, the misconception, the misleading leadership that we had
had, the falsifications, was in an investigation of the Gulf of Tonkin
incident. It fell to me to interrogate Robert S. McNamara, the Secretary
of Defense. And I became convinced beyond any question in my mind that
he had deliberately sought to mislead the Senate Committee and mislead
the country. I became convinced that there was no attack on the
second night. I became convinced that in the
first instance there was some sort of an attack but it was not
unprovoked, that in fact it was provoked, that the very presence of our
task force there was intended to provoke. So there appeared to me a
scheme of deception, of deliberate establishment of incidents to inflame
the people and to justify intervention in the war. Well, after having
become convinced of this, which conviction was supplemented with almost
every issue of confidential information that I had from Helms and such
other sources as I had, I came to have an emotional, a very strong
commitment against it, and particularly when so many United States men
were losing their lives and many many more people in Southeast Asia were
being slaughtered in this cause that I considered unjust and unsound and
unneeded, unjustified, unwarranted. I became immune to the criticisms
that my position was steadily bringing to me. The issue seemed to me to
transcend in importance my own personal political fortunes, so I became
a very strong opponent of the war. And I was one of those (in fact I
think I can say that I was the deciding influence) that persuaded
Senator J. William Fulbright to lead (I forget the authorization of the
committee) the committee to hold the investigation of the Vietnam war.
And if you will recall, it was only this investigation that made
opposition to the war respectable. It was this investigation which, in
my view, saved the country from the mistake of invading North Vietnam,
which the Chinese had said would be the cause
célèbre which would cause them to enter
the war. So though it can't be established, I nevertheless then held the
view (and I still hold the view) that this investigation of the Vietnam
war by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which I was one of those
who sought and had the deciding vote to bring about, may have saved us
from the cataclysmic mistake of a war with
China.