Vietnam

Buddhism entered Vietnam during the beginning of first century CE. By the second century Buddhist visited a central region in Vietnam known as the Luy-Lau centre. This centre is now in the Bac-Ninh province. Luy-Lau was the capital of Vietnam and this is the reason it was an important place for the Buddhists to visit. On their way to china monks stopped at this central region and taught people about Buddhism. Many teachings were translated in this central region such as Mahayana sutras and the Agamas. These were translated into Chinese as Vietnamese culture and religion is influenced a lot by the Chinese culture .

Vietnam is influenced by Chinese culture because Vietnam was occupied by Chinese during the 111 BCE and 939 CE . GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION OF VIETNAM Vietnam has Cambodia and Laos to the west and Chinese colossus, Pacific Ocean, Gulf of Thailand and Burma to the east and south. The eastern most part of Vietnam reaches India. The coastline is almost 2,500 kilometers. This coastline spreads from Mong-Cay, which is in the north to Cambodia. In early days Vietnam was the region between India and China which is actually a peninsula. This was formerly known as Funan and Campa.

Being so near the two most densely populated countries, Vietnam had a lot of influence from their culture, politic and religion . BUDDHIST INFLUENCE Vietnamese are very religious. They practice quite a number of religions like, Buddhism, Christianity, Taoism etc. Buddhism first came in North Vietnam . It was then known as Giao-Chi. These were Indian or Chinese Buddhists who came here from either land or sea routes and started influencing people. Giao-Chi became the centre of everything by the end of second century as the Indian merchants started doing trade there, and with them they brought monks also.

Buddhism was very influential at that time, as we can see that these traders brought monks with them because they were called the “calmer of the sea” . These monks were priests who later started preaching their religion in Vietnam. It became easier for them, because Giao-Ching was the central place where every traders and foreign travelers, Chinese and Indians met. Moreover the merchants rested here also if they were travelling between India and China. Thus monks and priests had one central place to preach their religion. They started missionary activities and as a result monasteries were built.

This was the first time that monasteries were built in Vietnam during the reign of Si-Nhiep. The very first few monasteries were built in a province of North Vietnam which is now known as Ha-Bac. This was formerly known as Luy-Lau, as mentioned in the Introduction that it was the centre of missionary activities . THE FIRST BUDDHISTS IN VIETNAM The earliest form of Buddhist education was found to be given by a Taoist who later became a Buddhist. Before him, it is said, that several missionaries from China came to preach Buddhism . During the rule of Si-Nhiep, two monks named Ma Ha Ky Vuc and Khau Da La came to Vietnam.

These were Indian monks. Tu-Dinh from Khmer kingdom requested them to stay there in Vietnam. The second monk however refused and went back where as Ma Ha Ky Vuc stayed. Tu-Dinh was a very religious man himself and used to fast for several days. This he said helped purify his body and soul. These two were the first monks to reach Giao-Chi. After them a Chinese Buddhist preacher named Mau-Bac came to Giao-Chi. During the time when Mau-Bac came to Giao-Chi, China was in serious political chaos. Due to this several monks and scholars came to Vietnam. Giao-Chi was under the rule of Si-Nhiep back then and was considered a safe place.

Mau-Bac after coming to Vietnam studied Buddhism from an Indian monk named Ksudra. Ma Ha Ky Vuc, who had come to Vietnam before any of these, with the help of Ksudra and Mau-Bac started promoting Buddhism in Vietnam. These were the first people who started to promote Buddhism and their teaching is the very early form of Buddhist study to be found in Vietnam. After Mau-Bac many monks started to propagate Buddhism. Khang Tang Hoi and Cuong Luong Lau also came to Giao-Chi during the third century. Khang Tang Hoi entered a monastery when he was ten and from there started studying and practicing Buddhism.

Apart from Buddhism he also studied literature, astronomy and other subjects. He translated many books relating Buddhism into Chinese. Though he was Indian born but is considered as a Vietnamese Buddhist. Cuong Luong Lau like Khang Tang Hoi also translated many Buddhist books in Chinese . The main Buddhist centre was Luy-Lau at that time; it is now known as Ha Bac and is situated in North Vietnam. Phap Van was a famous monastery in Luy-Lau and during the second and third century was famously known as “the school of doctrine” and “the lotus school”. In 968 A.

D, when King Dinh Tien Hoang came in to power, Buddhism in Vietnam changed. It entered a new era. Buddhism now had a hierarchy of monks and priests and it was now accepted by the court. As Buddhism was now supported by the royal court many changes took place. Buddhists were respected and were asked advice before taking decisions. Buddhists were involved in many political and religious decisions. During this period Buddhism was at its best. It was the most predominant religion. Many kings and emperors after this period were Buddhists. Many laws came into practice in this era, which were influenced by Buddhism.

Van Hanh, who is also known as the meditation master is of this era. Any ruler who was not Buddhists was at least the supporter of Buddhism. In 1010 A. D, almost eight monasteries were built in Ha Bac. All other monasteries and Buddhist temples were also repaired. Tripitaka texts, which were in China initially, were brought in Vietnam. Thousands of Buddha statues and paintings were made and set up. Festivals were set up. Many new monasteries such as Sung Kharh monastery and monastery at Mount Ba were built. In 1086 A. d Dai Lam monastery was built in Ha Bac.

Later in 1118 A. D Thien Phat was built which had almost 1,000 Buddha statues . BUDDHIST STUDIES IN VIETNAM Buddhist studies in Vietnam can be divided in to four eras. 1. From the entrance in Vietnam to the first century 2. From 11th century to 14th century, which was the best era of Buddhist studies 3. After 25th century, which was the time of declination of Buddhism 4. Present Buddhist studies in Vietnam People have different opinions about the exact date on which Buddhism entered Vietnam. It is believed that Buddhism entered Vietnam in first century A.

D; some people believe it was the year 189 of the Christian era. Historians say that Meou-Po, who was a Taoist before he became a Buddhist, was the first person to make any Buddhist teaching in Vietnam. Though many missionaries came before him, but they only laid grounds on which it became possible for Meou-Po to enter and teach Buddhism. It was very difficult to teach Buddhism at that time as very little literature was available. Vietnamese had no written script; hence a few translations were made in Chinese. The era between 544 and 602 was an independent era and was helpful in spreading Buddhism.

Though there was some progress, in this era but the real progress was made during 603 to 939. During these years two major missionaries entered Vietnam. Vinitaruci and Vo-Ngon-Thong led these two missions separately. Almost 20 shrines were built at that time and there were about 500 monks preaching Buddhism day and night. These shrines were a gift from the Chinese government. During 939 and 968 there was not much development in case of Buddhist studies. In 939 Chinese reign in Vietnam ended. Buddhist teachings paused during these years, but only in Vietnam, in China Buddhism went under a lot of scrutiny.

When Dinh-Bo-Linh came in to power, Buddhism started to prosper. He acted as a protector of the religion and Buddhism was studied and adopted by many people till Dinf-Bo-Linh’s reign till 1009. The emperor made Ngo-Chan-Luu the head of Sangha (Community of Buddhist monks). Ngo-Chan-Luu was a monk, scholar and a poet. The emperor was very much impressed by this monk who was good at Zen meditation. The emperor used to take advice from Ngo-Chan-Luu in matters of politics and military. Due to his good advices and performance he was made Imperial Councillor. He got the title of Khuong Viet which means servant of Vietnam.

Ngo-Chan-Luu proved to be a very good monk and helped in spreading Buddhism. During this time Tripitaka was brought from china for the first time with the help of Vietnamese missions. People in Vietnam were taught how to read and write in Chinese characters, as Vietnamese lacked written script. This helped the scholars learn more by reading more books on Buddhism and translating others into their language. Hence the monks of those times were much learned and were respected a lot all over the country as there were very few people who could read and write.

A scholar at that time was respected a lot and as most of the scholars were Buddhists, people started to go to them in order to learn. This helped spread Buddhist teachings . Buddhism expanded a lot during 1031 as almost a hundred temples were built during this era. A lot of Buddhist ceremonies were held and they were exempt from taxes. In 1049, the emperor built the Dien-Huu temple which was actually what he saw in his dream. He later ordered it to be constructed the way he saw it in between an artificial lake. It is one of the most famous monuments in Hanoi and is known as Temple of single column.

Ly-Thanh-Ton, who reined Vietnam in 1054, was a true Buddhist. During his time food and clothing were distributed among the poor. He used to reduce the punishment of prisoners also. Hence Ly-Thanh-Ton, who tried to follow the steps of Asoka, was a very great Buddhist. In 1069, when Vietnam was at war with Champa, the emperor brought back a few prisoners. What he did not know was that one of these prisoners was a Buddhist monk. When the emperor found out about him he inquired him and discovered that he had a great knowledge of Dharma. The emperor got very impressed and allowed him to preach his religion in the Khai-Quoc temple.

It was also found out that he was a Chinese monk who was actually trying to preach and practice Buddhism when he was caught. The emperor was a true Buddhist and praised scholars, and hence allowed this Chinese monk to stay in the temple. Now Buddhism was under official protection and could be spread more easily and therefore Buddhism continued to be taught among all the Vietnamese. Many writings of that time show the studies of Buddhist scholars . After this emperor all the other emperors also got interested in Buddhism. Most of them followed Zen meditation and practice. One of them became a monk and abdicated from his post of emperor.

The Ly Dynasty was spread over a period of 215 years. This was the only dynasty during which the religion of Buddhism was at its climax . After this came the Tran Dynasty, during the early years of which the spread of Buddhism slowed down. Though the emperors of this dynasty were more inclined towards Buddhism, but none the less during the first seventy years of this dynasty the Buddhist studies did not prosper as it did before. One of the emperors became a monk and started practicing Zen. The last dynasty definitely proved to be the climax of Buddhism, as it was now declining.

China started to reign again and due to this Confucianism started to prosper and made developments in various aspects such as philosophy and literature. Taoism grew and prospered, whereas Buddhists were stopped from preaching and practicing their religion. Buddhists books were burned and temples destroyed. This dropped the level of Buddhists studies in the country. When Vietnam got independent in 1428, it was thought that now it will be easier to renew Buddhism and spread its studies from the beginning. However, this proved wrong and Buddhists studies did not budge.

Buddhism lost its original touch and purity and people started mixing it with different ideas. No new temples were allowed to be built at that time and this also hindered the prosperity of the religion. Many monks were sent back to their lay lives and were stopped from preaching Buddhism saying that they were incompetent to do so . During 1528 and 1802 new Zen sects were developed. Temples were built and Buddhism was supported a lot. Lord Tr? nh Giang ordered rebuilding of temples. Almost 6,000 workers worked day and night to build temples of Quynh Lam and Sung nghiem. In South of Vietnam Thien Temple was built which still stands.

This Temple is equipped with its famous bell which is very resonant. Chinese monks were allowed to preach their religion and therefore they moved around whole of the country teaching and preaching Buddhism. Though many efforts were taken, yet Buddhism had such distorted form that monks were made to reside over ceremonies, Buddha was taken as a god and gifts were presented to his statue. This shows that the actual Buddhist religion had changed a lot and almost nobody knew and practiced the actual teachings of Buddha. THE IMPACT OF BUDDHIST EDUCATION The impact of Buddhist education was very great.

It not only effected the religious beliefs but also had a great impact on every other day to day activity. Music, which was influenced by Indian music because of the monks coming from India, was used in religious ceremonies. Today out of eight musical instruments almost six are Indian. These instruments were taken by Indian monks, first to China and then to Vietnam. It will not be false if we say that India and China are solely responsible for spreading Buddhism in Vietnam. Though China influenced mainly the northern areas whereas, India influenced the south; China had more impact on Buddhism in Vietnam than India had.

The reason is that China was in contact with Vietnam for thousands of years and had an influence on the politics and culture of the country. India had a lesser impact as Indian merchants went to Vietnam solely for business purposes. They sometimes took it as a resting place on their way to China. Hence they had no interest what so ever in the religion in Vietnam. However, there is certainly some influence on their religion and culture by the Indians, as the first monks to enter Vietnam for the purpose of preaching their religion were Indians. Buddhism gradually spread all over Vietnam.

Though there are quite a few religions practiced in Vietnam, but almost two thirds of the population practices Buddhism. People sometimes do not have clear vision for example today a Buddhist may visit Taoist temple. These sometimes lead to superstitions and practices which show their ignorance towards the religion. Sometimes even monks do not have clear concepts about Buddhism. Buddhism really had a very strong impact on the culture and behavior of common man. People have better morals due to Buddhism. Even people who are not educated know that bad deeds will result in bad results.

They know that they should be kind towards the people. Buddhists teachings are ordinary things which everybody should know. The motif of Buddhism is Lotus Flower. Monks are vegetarians and their teachings are based on purity and compassion. BUDDHISM CONCEPT IN VIETNAM Buddhism in Vietnam is mainly Mahayana. This Mahayana tradition has compassion as main entity. They take main words or buzzwords from Buddha like, Enlightenment, Delivered etc. The monks of Mahayana tradition try and improve their spiritual life. This spiritual life is then translated into action which is based on truth.

During the decline of Buddhism in Vietnam, the monks were just an entity to receive gifts in the ceremonies. Today due to the movement in 1920, they know what ceremonies are actually for. They now have clear concept. They have texts and books to refer to and find meditation as the best tool. The General Buddhist Association in Vietnam is a very dynamic organization representing Buddhism in the country. It represents the true picture of Buddhism in the country. They have done efforts, held conferences in order to not only promote Buddhism but paint a clear picture about the fundamentals of Buddhism.

Buddhism has prospered leaps and bounds in the country. Though there are many rival religions in the country, Buddhism is by far the most popular one. As mentioned earlier, almost two thirds of the population practices Buddhism. During 968 it was made the state religion. Buddhism in Vietnam is no wonder superior than any other religion there, as it is not only accepted publicly but also helped in the moral and spiritual training of the general public. People believe it and accept it by heart. They call it the religion of compassion. The imprint of Buddhism can be seen in art and literature as well.

Music has also been inspired from it. A European author writes: “Buddhism was the first foreign influence which had a powerful bearing on the evolution of Chinese thought; and the effect of such an influence was to rekindle, stimulate and develop to the highest pitch not only the religion but also all the other spheres of its civilization A casual glance, even by one who is almost completely unaware of the spiritual world of China, at the plastic arts of China shows how completely they stem from the spirit of Buddhism and how wonderfully they blossomed forth during the Buddhist period”

As Buddhism in Vietnam is influenced a lot from China and India, hence it can be said that the Chinese really had an impact on Vietnamese paintings, culture, literature and art.

The popular protest culture that formed within the 1960’s, that rebelled against the American traditional system arguably occurred because of the involvement in the Vietnam war from the federal government. Many young student and black Americans specifically, were highly against American intervention, prompting the protest culture.

However, other reasons could have prompted this too, like the assassination of Kennedy, more political interest and involvement from young radicals now favouring communist and socialist ideas, and also, arguably the increase in education meaning young adults now didn’t have to earn their livings as early on in their lives. Firstly, the Vietnam war was undoubtedly a very significant factor in the increased protests during the 60’s.

For example, the excessive bombing of North Vietnam lead in 1965 lead to many student protests, as so many civilians including women and children were being purposefully killed in order to ultimately, win the was by flattening Vietnam. This caused outrage amongst the student rebels. In particular, the student rebel group called Students for Democratic Society (SDS) used the Vietnam war to suggest that the US government was corrupt. The cause struck a chord with those at university more so than other groups of people due to the immense number of students that were made to go and fight.

The average age of soldiers fighting the Vietnam war for America was 19, meaning almost every student knew someone that had been killed or injured due to the combat they were being forced to take part in. This lead to not only resentment for the war, but also fear that they would be called up to fight, and therefore even more resistance and protesting towards continuing the fight. The war faced huge resistance, and in a way gave the rebels a force and action to fight against. This could be argued as the stimulant for the protests, as they could now use the ideas of the racist, corrupt government with evidence.

Many said the Vietnam war was a racist war, and that white America wanted to conquer Asia, as well as attack the gaining black equality within America. This was because in order to avoid ‘the draft’ (being called up to fight once a month), many wealthy white Americans would enrol in universities or colleges. This would excuse them from having to fight, unlike other working classes and black Americans, who could simply not afford this escape route as they could not manipulate the system as easily, leading to a hugely disproportionate number fighting being black or working class.

This figure was around 80%, increasing the ominous fear in students as the news of the deaths returned. Over 11000 were killed in 67, increasing to 16500 in 68. The many reasons for why the Vietnam war was so hated by many of the protests suggests its significance and its undoubtable impact on the Student Rebels. Although many argue the Vietnam war was the reason for the protests, it could be said that the protest culture would not have happened without a big spark effecting the nation. This was the assassination of president J F Kennedy, who was shot in November 1963 causing deep sadness in much of the population.

There were many theories concerning his death that spread around the youths of America, leading to further diminished trust amongst young people. Before the assassination, America was a different place; despite the Vietnam war, many said there was hope in this period, but the hope shattered when he was killed. Questions were raised about US society, as the civil rights movement took over encouraging civil disobedience as they said Kennedy would have wanted this because of his backing of the Freedom Rides.

The shock of his death was overwhelming and arguably this caused the most fuel for the counter culture emerging than anything else. Along with the assassination of Martin Luther King and Kennedy, followed by the involvement in the Vietnam war, the impact upon the public was huge, and arguably, it was those drug crazed, protest evolved and in some cases, politically aware teenagers that came from this. However, this is not the only reason for the now more rebellious teenagers of America.

As education became increased within a pupils lifetime and schooling lasting longer, many students were turning towards the SDS, who particularly focused on political issues and and came up with ideas for change within America. Many were becoming fed up with the untrustworthy American Federal government,and as this view became wider spread and more popular within the youth culture, many began favouring the idea of communism or a socialist movement. This new left group were key in organising protests and became more and more influential as numbers increased.

In October 1963, their total membership was 610, however, after protests of Vietnam they became even more influential and an even more recognisable and known group. Those involved were still in education at various Universities and colleges, meaning this age when previously they would have to go our and find a job and work to make a living was gone, and instead they could still afford to live off parents money. This split teenagers, some taking a political route, while others became more interested in ‘finding themselves’ within the flower power movement.

The opportunities for young people opened up within the 60s,and they were no longer held to finding a job and starting the typical American family lifestyle. They now had a time in their life that they could experiment with – possibly with various drugs – and this new sense of freedom and flexibility allowed more time for those wanting to reject the ‘too good’ American society have the opportunity to protest. In conclusion, I think the main reason for the sudden development of the protest culture was the Vietnam war, as it gave students a cause to fight because of genuine opposition as well as the opportunity.

It was incredibly significant in stimulating the protest culture as they faced the fear of being called up to fight themselves, causing incredible resentment of the war, as well as the arguments the students proposed that the war was indeed racist and the government corrupt. This alone was undoubtedly the most significant factor, although without events like the assassination of JF Kennedy, I do not think the movement would have been so big and influential, as there would have been less people backing the cause.

Robert S. McNamara’s memoir ‘In Retrospect: The Tragedy and Lessons of Vietnam’ offers an explanation of McNamara’s handling of the Vietnam War as Secretary of Defense during the Kennedy and Johnson administrations. McNamara’s goal directed as well as logico-mathematical approach to decision-making must be blamed for the failure of the US to stop North Vietnam from winning the war. Bloodshed would have been evaded if merely McNamara had looked at the probable outcome of his decisions on Vietnam. What appears from pages of this book are mechanics of a machine closed in on itself.

It digested just the information that suited its version of reality or served its bureaucratic interests. It unnoticed discordant views, reorganized unlikable facts as well as, when proved wrong, simply redoubled its efforts. It was a machine suited to a military colossus whose directors never doubted their premises or their capability to make reality symbolize the exercise of their power. The book is written down in a manner that brings joy particularly to the hearts of the pacifist crowd even while they criticize him, as its confessions appear to justify their opposition to the war.

That was Bill Clinton’s self-satisfied response. Thus far the book is extremely superficial in its political analysis — signifying how far in over his head McNamara was in that job from the start. Certainly, it’s high time that someone inquired our country’s inclination of picking big-time industrialists for defense secretary on the theory that it’s just a big management work. Sometimes the job needs a lot more than management talent: deliberate understanding and judgment, which McNamara without a doubt never had.

In justice to McNamara, his long silence had an admirable cause. Given the national shock that Vietnam brought, he feared that any apologia would be expedient and inappropriate. This caginess renowned McNamara from egregious former colleagues for instance Clark Clifford, Averell Harriman, as well as Cyrus Vance, who within months of leaving office were attacking the Nixon Administration with peace proposals also demands for concessions to the North Vietnamese.

The end of McNamara’s book in brief touches non-Vietnam matters — particularly the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis and the Harvard conferences he has lately attended, which brought together Soviet, American, as well as Cuban veterans of that crisis. The malice of such conferences is established by the breast-beating wrapping up of McNamara and some further Americans that it was our entire fault: Khrushchev put missiles in Cuba for the reason that he feared we were planning one more Bay of Pigs.

Suffering regarding that brush with nuclear tragedy has led to another of McNamara’s recantations his vigorous anti-nuclear activism, proceeding proposals for disarmament and no-first-use of nuclear weapons. He has championed this reason with the same sanctimonious obstinacy with which he once sold us the body counts and wunderkind strategizing in Vietnam, and with which he at present proclaims his confessions of our Vietnam errors. He possibly will never get it right. (Kevin Hillstrom, Laurie Collier Hillstrom, 1998). DEVELOPMENT OF THEME

This book “In Retrospect: The Tragedy and Lessons of Vietnam” is barely likely to assuage that cynicism. Certainly, it will most likely reinforce it. For what it exposes is a leadership class so in thrall to power, so persuaded of its own intellectual superiority, so cut off from, and even disdainful of, the wider society it has been empowered to serve, that it was eager to sacrifice virtually everything to evade the stigma of failure. The usefulness of McNamara’s book is in the description of that trickery and of that failure.

Much of the documentation has long been accessible in the Pentagon Papers, which he commissioned soon before leaving office, and which were leaked to the press by Daniel Ellsberg in 1971. However there is something to be erudite in hearing it from such a highly placed participant. Nevertheless, no one else, at such a level of influence–not Johnson, or McGeorge Bundy, or Walt Rostow, or Henry Kissinger or Richard Nixon–ever openly admitted error or accepted blame. McNamara has at least broken the wall of silence.

And even though he remains protective and largely uncritical of his colleagues, including the most imperceptive, the picture that appears is not one to motivate confidence. What this account noticeably discloses is that at no time did officials in either the Kennedy or Johnson administrations ever seriously think about anything less than an enduringly divided Vietnam with an anti-communist government in the south. The North Vietnamese, for their part, never measured anything less than a unified nation under their, i. e. communist, control. No one was in any doubt about this.

The problem was that the Americans were persuaded that by inflicting unbearable pain they could force Hanoi to desist however they were wrong. It was their country, not ours. In the end it was we who withdrew in the face of unbearable pain. Why did three successive administrations think that Vietnam was so imperative? First, there was the domino theory, which decreed that if Saigon fell to communism, the rest of Southeast Asia would shortly follow. Kennedy himself authorized it. When asked in 1963 by a television interviewer whether he doubted the correspondence, he answered, “No, I believe it. “

Second, there was confronting of communist-led “wars of national liberation. ” As nuclear weapons had made war too risky between America and Russia, the conflict transferred to the Third World, where a host of impecunious, ex-colonial nations looked up for grabs. Did it matter whether these were communist or anti-communist despotisms? Almost certainly not. Although there was nowhere else the competition could occur, and so there it raged. Vietnam turned into a test case. Third, there was the well-known supposition that Beijing was taking its marching orders from Moscow, and calling the shots in Hanoi.

The truth that China and Russia were already disputing publicly and that the Vietnamese had historically viewed the Chinese as their greatest enemy made no impact whatever on U. S. policymakers. It did not fit into their worldview. Fourth, the world’s greatest military power was not going to confess failure, least of all against what Johnson once mentioned as a “piddling, piss-ant little country. ” It was too mortifying even to contemplate. Beyond all this there was one more reason that neither Kennedy nor Johnson, once the United States so carelessly slid into Vietnam, could easily get out.

The Democrats were the party, in accordance with the Republicans, who had “lost” China to communism. They were definitely not going to offer more fodder for their foes in Vietnam. As Truman had pushed above the thirty-eight parallel in Korea to illustrate that he was tougher on communism than the Republicans, so Kennedy and Johnson felt they dare not lose Saigon to the Reds. This is why the assumption, here thoughtfully echoed by McNamara, that Kennedy would have pulled out of the war had he lived, appears wishful thinking.

Kennedy fans, including McNamara, time and again cite the president’s much-quoted September 1963 statement regarding Vietnam that “in the final analysis, it is their war. There were, certainly, ways out all along, had anyone wanted to follow them. One opened up in the fall of 1963, when Ngo Dinh Nhu, Diem’s influential brother, started secret contacts with Hanoi. Sensing a possibility for a deal akin to the arrangement previously worked out over Laos, French President Charles de Gaulle suggested the amalgamation and neutralization of Vietnam.

However the Americans saw this as an intimidation somewhat than an opportunity. Second-level officials in Washington plotted with the Saigon embassy and South Vietnamese army officers to conquer Diem and replace him with a government more resolute to fight the war. Kennedy could not make up his mind whether or not to endorse the coup. It came anyway in November, ending in the assassination of Diem and Nhu. Three weeks later Kennedy himself was murdered. McNamara now articulates that would have been a good moment to leave.

However at the time he recommended the newly installed Johnson that impartiality was unthinkable for the reason that “South Vietnam is both a test of U. S. determination and particularly a test of U. S. capacity to deal with wars of national liberation. ” This was our war and the Vietnamese were not going to be permitted to get in the way. At present McNamara confesses that “we erred seriously in not even exploring the neutralization option. ” Although at the time there was no way officials would have discovered it, given their view of the stakes at issue.

This was a war they were resolute to win, even against their reputed South Vietnamese allies. So far McNamara cannot bring himself to accept the noticeable insinuations of what he is so undoubtedly saying. He wants to convince us, and conceivably himself, that it is all a problem of management. In other words, he is still the bureaucratic organizer who thinks that all troubles can be reduced to flow charts and statistics McNamara informs us that as early as the fall of 1965 he had doubts regarding the value of the bombing in breaking Hanoi’s will or reducing the flow of supplies into the south.

Sporadically he espoused bombing pauses with the argument that this might influence Hanoi to negotiate. This was a wan expectation, as he was never ready to negotiate what Hanoi sought: a withdrawal of the United States from South Vietnam and communist representation in Saigon. By the fall of 1967 he had lost his value: the Joint Chiefs and the hawks in Congress were infuriated by his antagonism to sending more troops and extending the bombing, whilst Johnson considered him undependable and feared that he might join Robert Kennedy’s camp.

He was pushed out the door with a golden handshake as well as the presidency of the World Bank. However it was all done in a spirit of good fellowship and mutual congratulation, together with an overenthusiastic letter of appreciation he wrote to Johnson that he here reproduces. “I do not know to this day whether I quit or I was fired,” he says of his departure. This was consistent with his not knowing whether he measured the war to be wrong or just badly organized. Certainly he left silently. Almost all of them do. If he felt the war was so “awfully wrong,” why did he not leave in protest and take his case to the public?

20,000 Americans died in Vietnam on his watch, and almost another 40,000 died, along with millions of Vietnamese, after his departure. Did he be in debt something to them? Not it seems that as much as he owed to Johnson, and most probably to Nixon too. It “would have been a violation of my responsibility to the president and my oath to uphold the Constitution” to have publicly protested the war, he explains. Whereas the Constitution says not anything regarding muzzling public officials after they leave office, it is right that complainers are hardly ever asked to come back and play one more day.

Would it have made a difference if McNamara had openly turned against the war? One cannot be certain. It might or might not have ended the war sooner. However it would have justified those who protested against or refused to battle in a war they considered morally wrong, and it might have saved the lives of some of those who went to Vietnam for the reason that they thought that their country wanted to send them there for fine reason. Regardless, the assurance of making a difference is not the issue. We often cannot be certain of the outcome of our actions when we undertake them.

We either do something since we think it is right, or we decide not to do it. McNamara privileged what he supposed to be his duty to Johnson above what many others, but in fact not he, would consider his responsibility to his country. He can live with that, although he must not expect our appreciation. We can be glad that McNamara wrote this book without admiring the man or sanctioning his elusions. He had an opportunity to redeem himself for a war he felt to be wrong. However those opportunities came almost 30 ago, and at present it barely matters.

What is constructive regarding this elusive book is the terrible picture it represents of men caught in the prison of their own narrow suppositions and of their bureaucratic roles. These were men who knew that their strategies were not working, that their actions were driving ever-deeper divisions within the country that they were losing the admiration of several of those whose opinions they most appreciated. And thus far they persevered. Or else they shuffled out without a sound, like McNamara, and found other ways of trying to change the world and of trying to redeem themselves.

McNamara was not unaware to what was happening. In his memo to Johnson of May 1967 quarrelling against a planned major intensification in the war, he wrote: There may be a boundary beyond which several Americans and much of the world will not allow the United States to go. The picture of the world’s utmost superpower killing or critically injuring thousands noncombatants a week, whilst trying to pound a tiny backward nation into submission on a subject whose merits are fiercely disputed, is not a pretty one.

He was sensitive at least to the bad public relations of the killing, and he acknowledged that the supposed merits of the war were “hotly disputed. ” Nevertheless within the hothouse where Johnson and his advisers met to orchestrate the war, it was merely methods, never eventual aims that were questioned. There was fighting in the streets and good manners in the war room. McNamara’s book presents a sense of how divorced the two realms were from one another. The planners were locked into the academic concepts of “credibility” and the mechanics of graduated intensification.

Although he had doubts regarding the effectiveness of the methods, he never questioned the assumptions. In his defense McNamara makes the amazing complaint that, because of the McCarthy hysteria of the early 1950s, “our government lacked experts for us to consult to recompense for our unawareness” of Southeast Asia. True, numerous Asian experts had been driven from the government for envisaging that Chiang Kai-shek was doomed. However they had not moved to Mars. There were telephones then. They were keen to talk to anyone who would listen.

Hence were other considerate and outspoken critics of the war: scholars for instance John Fairbanks and Hans Morgenthau, columnists for example Walter Lippmann, former diplomats for instance George Kennan. In 1966 Senator Fulbright, smarting at having been snookered by Johnson over the Gulf of Tonkin, sponsored weeks of hearings in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, offering a forum for a broad range of experts to inspect the premises and outcomes of American policy. Nowhere in his book does McNamara make reference to these hearings, and hardly at all to outside critics.

The delirious arguments over Vietnam all the way through the country appear never to have infiltrated the glass bubble of the war room. EVALUATION OF THEME McNamara stayed silent regarding Vietnam, repudiating all interviews until 1994, when he wrote his memoirs. The book–In Retrospect: The Tragedy and Lessons of Vietnam–ignited a firestorm of argument upon its release and turned into a national bestseller. Even though McNamara confessed in the book that he had been wrong on the subject of Vietnam, that the United States should never have become involved there, his belated confession did little to endear him to the American people.

The book elevated the ire of veterans’ groups, who blamed McNamara of trying to profit from a war that, in their minds, he had started and that had caused so much anguish. Too much blood was on his hands, they said, for him to try to make money off the war. McNamara’s assertion, in his memoir In Retrospect: The Tragedy and Lessons of Vietnam, of having been “terribly wrong” regarding rising the war revive an old query often on the minds of young people at present: Would the U. S. have lost the war in Vietnam had Kennedy lived? The easiest answer is: We cannot know; history happens merely one way.

The more intricate answer is: most likely not. We must not forget the significance of the Cold War and containment. Just as Kissinger’s predictions that the United States would split itself apart over Vietnam did not come to pass, the cause behind American involvement in the war turned out to have been intensely flawed. The position of the United States in the world was not so shaky and that of the Soviet Union and other revolutionary movements not so prevailing that an earlier communist victory in Vietnam would have altered the effect of the Cold War.

We are familiar with this now, and many people came to doubt the significance of U. S. involvement in Vietnam as the war went on. Thus far given the depth of leaders’ commitment to the principles of suppression, it is hard to think that the United States would not have contributed the way it did in Vietnam, at least until 1968. (Kevin Hillstrom, Laurie Collier Hillstrom, 1998). Without a doubt the enthusiasm with which people long for a hero to have lived and saved them from the tragedy of Vietnam makes known how poignant a wound the war left.

When McNamara spoke at Harvard University in the spring of 1995, observers noted how Vietnam appeared to have taken place merely yesterday for the people in the audience over forty. Their feelings were raw. For many, McNamara was a figure out of the past. Ernest May, one of the country’s leading diplomatic historians, gave the most dispassionate elucidation of why he thought McNamara was wrong to have asserted that Kennedy would not have become as intensely involved as Johnson.

McNamara appeared to have forgotten the influential spell of the Cold War. It was as if, May noticed, a Crusader wrote his memoirs without mentioning Christianity. However McNamara maintained his usually cool reserve all through the entire controversy. Reference: Kevin Hillstrom, Laurie Collier Hillstrom (1998). The Vietnam Experience: A Concise Encyclopedia of American Literature, Songs, and Films; Greenwood Press

Back in the 1960’s, President Lyndon B. Johnson decided to help support South Vietnam against the Viet Cong. While doing this, LBJ did not think of all the hate that would soon follow. Protests and marches started to occur around college campuses throughout the United States. Music festivals and concerts were held to help support the anti-war movement.

Many people were involved in the anti-war movement. Most activists believed that it was unfair that men had to fight in a war that they did not believe in. Young men in America were supposed to register with the Selective Service System within 30 days of their 18 birthday. This system was called the draft.

The draft was a system the United Armed Forces created. This was one of the main reasons for all of the protests and polarization. Protesting soon became very common in the 1960’s. Some people took protesting to the extreme and even burned themselves. The 1960’s anti war movement is a major part in our U.S. history, and helps us learn that we the people have the power to change anything.

Many U.S. presidents were involved in the Vietnam War, but specificity Lyndon B. Johnson. As president, LBJ escalated military involvement in the Vietnam War. The Vietnam War was declared an American war in 1965. The U.S. decided to join the Vietnam War because they were scared Communism would spread all the way to America. Now with the U.S. involvement in Vietnam, LBJ did not know all the polarization and soon to follow.

The media played a substantial role in all of the polarization. In 1965, most of the media focused on military tactics, with very little discussion about the need for for a full scale intervention on Southeast Asia . The media also established the Hawks vs. Doves debate. The Hawks argued that the Vietnam War was legitimate and winnable. They also claimed that the one-sided criticism of the media, contributed the U.S. losing the war.

On the other hand, the Doves claimed that the war was well-intentioned, but was a disastrous mistake. It is important to understand that the Doves did not question the U.S. Intentions in Vietnam, nor did they question the legality of the U.S. intervention. Rather, the Doves made practical claims that the war was a mistake. Now with the Vietnam War in full swing, many U.S. citizens mourned the losses of all the soldiers who had to die fighting.

Being 18 in the 1960’s was hard because you never knew when you might have to be sent away to war. Many young boys dodged the draft. Some fled to Canada, but most went to college. But at the same time, many families could not afford to send their kids to college, so there was no escaping the draft. Unfortunately lots of families could not afford to send their kids to college. So the Vietnam War hit home a lot harder. Many families lost their sons or other family members to the war.

As the war escalated, many more U.S. troops were sent to Vietnam. By the end of the first year, more than 200,000 troops were sent. Sending more troops into the war made many activists angry. Many anti-war support groups started to form. These groups varied from women to Asian Americans.

During the 1960’s, college students started to become increasingly involved with the VIetnam War, Civil Rights Movement and Second Wave Feminism. Students all around the U.S. started to have marches and rallies on college campuses to protest the war in Vietnam. College enrollment reached 9 million by the end of the 1960’s. College and universities had more students than ever!

MICE and the potential of MICE for Vietnamese tourism and corporate entertainment In this presentation, there are 3 main points. First, I’ll start by giving you the definition of MICE to understand what MICE is; then I will analyze the potential of MICE for Vietnamese tourism, and I will finish the presentation by showing the potential of MICE for corporate entertainment..

If you have any question, feel free to ask! But to make my presentation uninterrupted, please keep them until the end of my talk. Thanks! Ok, let’s start with the MICE definition or what is MICE.MICE stands for: Meetings, Incentives, Conferences or Conventions and Exhibitions or Events. MICE is used to refer to a particular type of tourism in which large groups, usually planned well in advance, are brought together for some specific purpose. So,we can say that, MICE is a type of synthesis tourism, combining many activities. MICE has quickly developed in many countries across the world in recent years, bringing about active development of tourism operations. It becomes a type of industry,called: MICE industry.

It is one of the fastest growing segments within the tourism industry, generating millions in revenues for cities and countries. MICE is also the popular trend of tourism in almost every country in the world, including developing countries like Vietnam. However, Europe and America still remain the major markets worldwide in respect of the number of meetings, conferences and exhibitions. Here is the rank of countries which have the highest number of meeting last year 2007. You can easily find out the top countries, having the highest number of meetings and MICE tours in the world. That is USA with 376 times, Germany with 320 times ….Well, you have heard about MICE definition and known that MICE is not an new tourism type but it is a potential type, popular over the world.

So now, be ready to move to the next part of my presentation about the potential of MICE for Vietnamese tourism. As you can see here, there are 3 main ideas to say about the potential of MICE for tourism. They are bringing huge revenue, improving domestic services and introducing Vietnam to the world. I will begin the analyses of high profit. Yearly, there are more and more MICE activities taken place in a long time in Vietnam. And MICE has really brought high profit rely on having a large number of ourists in each tour, 150-200 visitors on average. Moreover, the kinds of visitors almost are politics, businessmen, traders… who are willing to pay high cost to have high quality products and services.

In recent researches, expenditure of MICE tourists is about 6 times to normal tourists. According to Ben Thanh Tourists’ Centre of Incentive, Tours and Events (CITE), tourists usually spend an average of US$1,200-1,800 a day, and some up to $2,000 a day. World tourism organization has informed that the yearly revenue from MICE over the world is about $ 300 billion, equal to 10% in world GDP.So, MICE is one of the most potential tourism types, should be concentrated in order to develop national tourism. Have a look at this graph, showing the number of international tourists in 8 first months of 2008. As you can see, the number is increasing almost continuously in 6 first months, and begin going down a litter bit from month 7 However, the quantity is still keeping at high level, bring a big revenue for tourism! In next months, it is predicted that the tourist number will go up more and more. Besides bringing huge sum of money, MICE plays an important part in improving domestic tourism.

Together with the high requirement from MICE, tourism services have improved not only in quantity but also in quality. There are many new hotels and resorts are invested to increase and improve/ As of May 2006, Vietnam has 175 state-of-the-art hotels ranging from three to five star grades, and is able to meet customers’ demands for both business and leisure… Moreover, the need of traveling and relaxing are getting more and more, that lead to researches, finding new spots and building new tourism places, open new tourism agencies over country, new flight lines to more countries….So, Vietnam tourism will be more and more developing, attracting many international tourists and satisfying domestic demands. I can conclude the potential of MICE for tourism in this connection. As you can see here, this is a round with 4 factors for themselves. When MICE developed, serves MICE groups well, makes good impression about Vietnam and Vietnamese tourism, there will be more companies choose Vietnam to hold their events (meeting, incentives, exhibitions and conferences). And this goes with the development of domestic tourism and economy.

Tourism with have capacity to invest and improve MICE wider and deeper.And now, let’s turn to the last point of my presentation, about the potential of MICE for corporate entertainment. Nowadays, in Vietnam, not only international companies or multinational companies but also for domestic companies have the requirement to entertain their workforces and clients. And MICE is the most effective way to help them! First of all, MICE is the type of tourism suitable to companies or corporations. It can meet the demand of a large number of people, so it will serve the company entertain with the highest quality and most professional services.The companies do not have to prepare a lot because the tourism companies help them to do almost everything. In addition, combining events of company likes meetings or yearly evaluations with entertaining activities in replacing holding in 2 different times and places will help them save a considerable amount of time and money.

Moreover, right after attending a work activity in MICE, the workforces and clients are brought a relax time with a tourism activities, they will feel relax, comfortable and ready to begin new work with enthusiasm and happiness, so the company can gain really many benefits from the MICE activities.So,I am certain to say that MICE is the most suitable type for corporate entertainment Well, I have given you a presentation about what is MICE, its potential for Vietnamese tourism and corporate entertainment. Hope that all of you now have a clear view about MICE. Hope that Vietnam can take advantages of MICE and grow more and more become a developed country in the near future!

Increasingly, Muslim women are involved in their countries’ economy as part of the labour force. Saudi Arabia in particular has seen higher numbers of Muslim women become economically active. However, women around the world are disadvantaged in employment for social, cultural and other reasons, and it has been argued that this is particularly true of Muslim women, as in addition to the obstacles faced by women worldwide, they also face additional problems including religious factors, cultural issues and the lack of role-models to encourage enterprise and a culture of women in work. While Saudi Arabia, as a large producer of oil, has a healthy economy, women currently play only a minor role in the work force, and of women available for work, nearly 30% are unemployed, although there are signs that women are starting to play are larger role in the economy.

The study aims to examine the particular obstacles to full participation in the labour market for Muslim women, through looking at their experience in Saudi Arabia. In order to do this, it examines the nature of the social and cultural norms in Saudi Arabia to assess the role they play in oppressing women in the workforce, as well as looking at current legislation and its role.The role played by other factors including childcare, financial issues and personal perceptions is also considered.

A literature review analyses the background in detail, providing a context for the primary study. The literature review covers a number of general areas, for example the social, geographical and cultural factors which surround women’s lives in Saudi Arabia, particularly the nature of the Islamic code which dictates behaviours.Statistics showing the current participation of women in the workforce are given, and the nature of working life for women in Saudi Arabia is analysed.

The primary phase of the research was carried out through interviews with a mix of both quantitative and qualitative data was collected, in order to give a detailed picture of how women working in Saudi Arabia perceive the world of work, as well as one which is statistically valid and reliable. The rationale for taking this particular stance is discussed. 20 women from Saudi Arabia, currently studying in the UK were interviewed. Demographic data was collected, information about work experience and future work plans were also noted. The women were also asked in depth about barriers to working in Saudi Arabia, their awareness of laws and regulations in the workplace, attitudes to marital responsibilities and work, work and religion, and attitudes about gender roles in work.It was found that women face many challenges in the Saudi Arabian workplace, and that 60% of those interviewed were not planning to return to work there. Issues mentioned include the right to work in the same workspace as men, inequalities of pay, and limits on women taking managerial roles over men.It was concluded that the main issue is the cultural diversity between Islamic and non-Islamic societies.Recommendations for Saudi Arabian government, business organisations and the general population are made.

Project Details:

Order Number: 2506

Title: Factors affecting women working in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Project Type: Dissertation.
Academic Level: Masters.
Work done so far: 8,000 Words (Full Project).

Purchase Details:

The abstract you just read is for a pre-written project. These projects are and of a 2.1. (B) quality. Click here for more information on our pre-written essays and dissertations for sale.
These projects were written to match a client’s specific requirements, and may need to be tweaked to match yours.
If you’re interested in one of these titles, kindly contact us, so we may send you a sample. Kindly include the name of the essay and order number in your email.
Once you have paid, it would be taken off this page and never re-sold. You would also be sent a plagiarism report.
Click here to Buy this Dissertation