Indochina Again

Ten years after the United States tore itself loose from Indochina, the House Asian and Pacific Affairs Subcommittee voted in late March —would you believe it?—6 to 3 in favor of putting us back in. At issue was $5 million in aid to the Cambodian patriots who are bravely resisting the military forces of Vietnam that have been occupying their country since 1979. Ironically, the proposal was sponsored by Chairman Stephen Solarz, the liberal Democrat from Brooklyn who began his political career by campaigning against U.S. involvement in Vietnam. What does this tell you about changing American opinion? Are we finally losing our Vietophobia? Or does the popular response to The Killing Fields and other recent films of that genre, as well as the preoccupation with the tenth anniversary of our enforced retreat from that theater [see John P. Roche’s “Indochina Revisited,” p. 26] reveal an incurable fixation on this American tragedy?

Solarz’s measure to aid the Cambodian resistance groups was supported by other liberal Democrats like Robert Torricelli (N.J.)—who accompanied Solarz on a recent trip to the Thai- Cambodian border—and Mervyn Dy-mally (Calif.), as well as by reliable Republicans like Gerry Solomon (N.Y.) and Toby Roth (Wisc.), all of whom share Solarz’s opinion: “We need to learn the lessons of Vietnam, but it would be a tragic mistake if we were to be paralyzed by them.” Opposition to the measure also cuts across party lines, including, for example, Jim Leach (R., Iowa) and Mike Barnes (D., Md.). “This measure amounts to congressional intervention without executive sanction,” says ranking Republican Leach.

JM

About the Author

John McLaughlin

Featured Tags

Ten years after the United States tore itself loose from Indochina, the House Asian and Pacific Affairs Subcommittee voted in late March —would you believe it?—6 to 3 in favor of putting us back in. At issue was $5 million in aid to the Cambodian patriots who are bravely resisting the military forces of Vietnam that have been occupying their country since 1979. Ironically, the proposal was sponsored by Chairman Stephen Solarz, the liberal Democrat from Brooklyn who began his political career by campaigning against U.S. involvement in Vietnam. What does this tell you about changing American opinion? Are we finally losing our Vietophobia? Or does the popular response to The Killing Fields and other recent films of that genre, as well as the preoccupation with the tenth anniversary of our enforced retreat from that theater [see John P. Roche’s “Indochina Revisited,” p. 26] reveal an incurable fixation on this American tragedy?

Solarz’s measure to aid the Cambodian resistance groups was supported by other liberal Democrats like Robert Torricelli (N.J.)—who accompanied Solarz on a recent trip to the Thai- Cambodian border—and Mervyn Dy-mally (Calif.), as well as by reliable Republicans like Gerry Solomon (N.Y.) and Toby Roth (Wisc.), all of whom share Solarz’s opinion: “We need to learn the lessons of Vietnam, but it would be a tragic mistake if we were to be paralyzed by them.” Opposition to the measure also cuts across party lines, including, for example, Jim Leach (R., Iowa) and Mike Barnes (D., Md.). “This measure amounts to congressional intervention without executive sanction,” says ranking Republican Leach.