| Return to Document Index |
|
POWs and Politics - Part 1 |
|
The recent diplomatic recognition of Vietnam, along with the lifting of the economic embargo, offers an opportunity to re-examine one of the most pernicious legacies of the Vietnam War, the POW/MIA dilemma. Two decades after the war ended, the POW/MIA issue continues to divide Americans in a manner reminiscent of the war itself. Recently, the Department of Defense's (DOD) office responsible for POW/MIAs, called the Defense Prisoner/Missing in Action Office (DPMO), undertook a year long review of all the remaining MIA cases to establish a base line for future efforts.1 Their summary states "we have found it exceedingly difficult to predict the extent to which evidence of accountability by Vietnam, Laos, or Cambodia about some aspect of a U.S. loss could lead to an accounting of the individual."2 Contrary to the government's current position, MIA family members and activist groups continue to maintain that Vietnamese wartime policy mandated keeping highly detailed records of incidents involving captured American personnel. Many families believe that the Vietnamese Communist Party (VCP)(formerly the Lao Dong Party) controlling the POW/MIA issue in Indochina could rapidly account for many more U.S. POW/MIAs. Obviously, that postwar accounting has not taken place, resulting in a twenty year climate of political controversy and suspicion of the motives of both governments involved. This suspicion among the POW/MIA families over Vietnamese actions was directly created from prior Vietnamese intransigence on accounting for American servicemen, a suspicion further aroused when U.S. government spokespersons label current Vietnamese POW/MIA cooperation as "superb" and "outstanding." This paper seeks to outline the roles of the various Vietnamese organizations responsible for handling American POWs, and examines the impact of VCP policy on this issue. In doing so, the authors will attempt to determine whether the U.S. government's characterization of Vietnamese cooperation as "superb" is warranted. The paper does not discuss the possibility of Americans remaining in captivity after the completion of "Operation Homecoming." To accomplish our goal, the paper is divided into two basic sections. The first part discusses the Vietnamese organs which processed POWs and outlines the known wartime Vietnamese communist POW policies. We will scrutinize these communist policies and organs through a wealth of declassified interrogation reports, numerous captured enemy documents, and several CIA studies on the Vietnamese intelligence services. In reviewing this material, a consistent theme emerges of VCP policies that placed a heavy emphasis on the use of remains for economic concessions, and prisoners and their documentation for use in propaganda, intelligence gathering, and political negotiations. Additionally, using recent Oral History interviews of Vietnamese cadre involved in the processing of American POWs and remains conducted by one of the authors and other members of the Joint Task Force-Full Accounting (JTF-FA), we will sketch out what we believe is a disregarded and ignored aspect of the Vietnamese POW system. The second part discusses whether the U.S. government claim regarding Vietnamese cooperation on solving the POW/MIA issue is deserved, and highlights the actions and contacts of some U.S. government officials who have pressed for improved relations with Vietnam. We do not disagree that current levels of access and activity are far superior to previous years, nor are we quarreling with obviously increased administrative and logistical cooperation. Instead, our view of cooperation revolves around defining a U.S. national policy based upon genuine results, rather than just activity, such as re-excavating crash sites previously excavated by the Vietnamese years ago, and then generating JTF-FA statistics that are then used to create an illusion of increased progress. If a young serviceman digging at a crash site breaks his shovel, and after requesting a new one from his Vietnamese counterpart receives it right away, that may be superb cooperation at his level, but it is not the actions upon which we should base our national POW/MIA policy towards Vietnam. Finally, we point out the highly unusual movement of former wartime cadre involved in handling American prisoners or their remains into positions dealing with economic and human rights issues, especially those organizations in direct contact with American companies or other associations. The author's believe these cadre are deliberately targeted against American veterans and business organizations to elicit their assistance in furthering the normalization process with Vietnam. Moreover, we will show how the analysis of the U.S. intelligence community, represented by internal studies as late as 1992 using basically the range of materials as the authors, consistently indicated that the Vietnamese could do much to unilaterally resolve the issue. When pressed in recent Congressional testimony, experienced DPMO analysts continue to express the same viewpoints. However, the Clinton Administration has backed away from that position, a policy that we believe is politically driven by desires to open up trade, and curry favor with major American corporations prior to the 1996 general elections. In terms of diplomatic links, we believe the current Administration, despite their rhetoric, views the POW/MIA issue as an implausible one that is seriously retarding relations with an important regional power. Given the current apathy over the POW/MIA issue, why is it necessary to re-address this issue? Once the Paris Peace Agreement was signed and the American prisoners repatriated, most Americans thought the issue was settled. However, since "Operation Homecoming," for the MIA family members, the issue has not faded and has not been resolved to their satisfaction, especially after Democratic of Vietnam (DRV) wartime actions regarding American prisoners became well documented. Those actions ranged from a refusal to allow ICRC inspections of POW camps, the use of brutal torture, and to denial and stonewalling regarding information on Americans missing in action. In terms of postwar results, from 1975 through 1990, few would argue that Vietnamese POW/MIA cooperation was anything but grudging. To the average citizen, the manuevering of the various U.S. political and business factions surrounding the POW/MIA issue are undoubtedly confusing and distasteful. For an American raised in the relatively simple aspects of democratic politics, trying to understand Vietnamese communist bureaucracies and policy is often a narrow, dull, and highly technical task. The Vietnamese wartime organs responsible for POWs were complicated entities, often ignored or only dimly understood. Unfortunately, two mediums which normally help shape public opinion, the media and the academic community, have been notably absent from this acrimonious debate. Little has been published by U.S. scholars concerning the actual mechanisms, systems, and policies the Vietnamese communists used to process American POWs.3 Reasoned discussion has alternated between the two polar extremes of unsubstantiated theorizing by various individuals, and the defensive, almost knee-jerk denials from the U.S. government when faced with any criticism. The U.S. intelligence organizations have further compounded the difficulty for any outside reviewer to piece together the outlines of the Vietnamese POW system through a haphazard declassification process, and in the years after the war, through stonewalling on the release of materials. Even after allowing for these complexities, the adversity qualified historians face when dealing in the grey area between national security considerations and public discussions of controversial events does not explain the dearth of scholarly studies on the POW/MIA issue. While DIA/DPMO has continued to study the Vietnamese prison system to identify the procedures that the communists used to process American POW/MIAs, once allowed access to Vietnam in 1987, it has focused its' primary research efforts on the Vietnamese military, especially on an organization called the Enemy Proselytizing Department (Cuc Dich Van)(EPD) of the Peoples Army of Vietnam (PAVN). This organization reported through the normal military chain of command to a department called the General Political Directorate (Tong Cuc Chinh Tri)(GPD) of the PAVN. However, the authors believe that the systems for the handling of American POWs organized by the VCP were dual-channeled, reflecting on the one hand, DRV security and special intelligence collection, as well short and long-term propaganda concerns, and on the other hand, routine prisoner handling through normal military channels. The authors are not suggesting that DPMO is not aware of the other, different Vietnamese organizations described in this paper, nor do the author's seek to suggest that the DPMO has not given serious consideration to the possibility of a so-called "second prison system." Instead, the authors' believe that the DPMO currently focuses too much of its' efforts on the PAVN, and not enough on VCP channels. We believe that the Vietnamese POW efforts were a delineation of duties between the military forces, the public security forces, and the Party Central Committee Propaganda Organ (Tuyen Truyen Dao Tao). This delineation not only prevented duplication of effort, but more importantly, served to compartmentalize the intelligence gathering and overall exploitation effort from a security standpoint, and served both the short and long-term interests of the Party. The authors' position is that the hidden policy of the VCP is to let the
foreign enemy believe that the PAVN possesses the answers to the POW
mystery. What the authors hope to demonstrate is the existence of a
short-term Vietnamese strategy designed and controlled by the Communist The U.S. Government's Position Since the middle of the war, the POW/MIA issue has had extraordinary public attention. In terms of national purpose, for the average American the war and its conduct were highly abstract. There was only one clear goal; the return of all U.S. POWs. Notwithstanding Vietnamese claims at the end of "Operation Homecoming" that they had released all the American prisoners they held, serious questions remained regarding Americans known to have been captured but not released or accounted for. Despite repeated U.S. efforts through various forums to achieve answers to these questions, postwar mechanisms designed to account for the remaining missing quickly collapsed. During the war, the U.S. military placed great emphasis on targeting Vietnamese POW installations and policies, and by 1966 American intelligence was laboring to penetrate the inner workings of the Vietnamese POW prison system. Consequently, an information collection and POW recovery program code-named "Brightlight" was created. Much information on Vietnamese POW procedures was gleaned from interrogations of captured or surrendered Peoples Army of Vietnam (PAVN) or Peoples Liberation Armed Forces (PLAF, or more popularly, Viet Cong) soldiers, and from monitoring North Vietnamese and other East Bloc news broadcasts and publications during the war.4 Additionally, Allied forces captured over a million pages of communist documents that provided elaborate details of their plans and personnel.5 By the end of the war, after extensive intelligence efforts, and combined with information provided by early American releasee's, the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) believed it had identified with precision both the numbers and locations where American POWs were being held in North Vietnam. Thus, the returnee debriefs, other still classified wartime intelligence, the "lack of proof" from postwar refugee interviews, and analysis from all-source intelligence information generally forms the basis for DPMO's stated belief that no prisoners remain alive in Southeast Asia. However, outraged over what many regard as Vietnamese political manipulation of a basic humanitarian issue, an activist community arose, combining veterans of the Vietnam War with more vocal family members. The activists have also continually savaged the U.S. government over its postwar POW/MIA policies and actions, culminating in bitter charges of a politically motivated coverup of evidence indicating the presence of live American prisoners remaining in Vietnamese or Lao custody. Several books, most notably Sauter's and Sander's Soldiers of Misfortune and The Men We Left Behind, Nigel Cawthorne's The Bamboo Cage, and Monika Jensen-Stephenson's Kiss The Boys Goodbye, have further developed this conspiracy theory. The Government has vehemently denied these allegations, and has steadfastly maintained that it possesses no credible evidence that any American servicemen remained as prisoners after "Operation Homecoming." As Vietnam slowly moved towards a free market economy, some U.S. policy makers hoped that the U.S. and Vietnam could re-examine and re-vitalize their strained relationship. These policy makers undoubtedly believed the lingering effects from the war had finally loosened their grip on the attitude of the American public and political elite towards Vietnam. Also, American business leaders, sensing a potential untapped market for U.S. goods and services, hoped to take advantage of the opening of the Vietnamese economy, and began pushing for a settlement of the diplomatic stalemate. By 1989, the Bush Administration had provided Vietnam with a "Road Map" of American requirements for re-establishing economic and political ties. However, the primary U.S. internal roadblock was a satisfactory resolution of the remaining POW/MIA questions. The hopes of the Bush Administration were dashed, when, in the Spring and Summer of 1991, photos surfaced allegedly depicting Americans still held in captivity. The resultant outcry lead to the creation of a Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs to investigate the wartime fate of the 2200 still missing Americans. The widely reported conclusion of the Senate Select Committee was that although evidence existed that as many as 100 men may have remained alive after "Operation Homecoming," no "proof" was found in U.S. government intelligence files to support the stance that men remain alive today, let alone support any wide-ranging conspiracy theory. Obviously believing itself vindicated in the January 1993 finding of the Senate Select Committee, the DOD has pressed on with its' remains recovery activities in Southeast Asia. These operations are conducted by JTF-FA, an expanded organization from its' prior unit, the Joint Casualty Resolution Center (JCRC). The report went further and counterattacked some of the POW/MIA activists, exposing several fraudulent operators. The recent publication of Susan Katz Keatings' Prisoners of Hope and Malcolm McConnell's Inside Hanoi's Secret Archives, has swung the pendulum even farther, leaving many of the activist's reputations in public ruin. Vietnamese POW policies, history, and views To understand the context of Vietnamese POW policies, it is necessary to understand the motivating philosophies of the VCP. The Vietnamese philosophy of liberation known as dau tranh, (literally struggle), evolved into what the Vietnamese termed the "three pronged struggle" comprised of "armed struggle" (Dau tranh vu trang), "political struggle" (Dau tranh chinh tri), and "proselytizing" (van).6 In the English language, the term proselytize means to convert from one belief or faith to another. To the Vietnamese communist, the term came to mean to accept the leadership and doctrine of the Vietnam Communist Party. The concept of the van programs were not just propaganda, but was a genuine effort to motivate or shape the perceptions of all elements of the enemy's military and society. It was just as often designed to influence the perceptions of the North Vietnamese. Unfortunately, while Americans view such motivational material as not worthy of being taken seriously, the enormous communist propaganda machine provided a tremendous undercurrent to the war, and may in fact have been one of the reasons the war was lost. In transforming the idea of proselytizing into a usable process, which former PAVN Commander Vo Nguyen Giap called "disintegrating the enemy," or "using the enemy to destroy the enemy," Party planners divided the members of the opposing forces into two basic categories: the South Vietnamese puppets and the foreign aggressor. The South Vietnamese target was further refined to include categories for Vietnamese servicemen and their dependents, and Vietnamese civilians. The organization tasked with the exploitation of South Vietnamese servicemen and their dependents was called Military Proselytizing (Binh van). The organ responsible for the exploitation of the civilian masses was called Civilian Proselytizing (Dan van). During the war with the French and later the Americans, Party planners created a more specialized category to include "foreign servicemen." This organization was considered a "subset" of the extant Military Proselytizing and was called the Enemy Proselytizing Department (Cuc Dich van)(EPD). The organizational model upon which the VCP intended to insure control of the militant and political "struggle" to liberate South Vietnam was called the "cadre system." This cadre system was borrowed by the Vietnamese Communist Party from the Soviet and Chinese models. In order to institute this process, General Giap linked armed military struggle with political struggle, and as a result every PAVN military organ, down to and including company sized units, had both a commander and a political officer. This represented two types of cadre within the PAVN military hierarchy, sometimes referred to as "command cadre" and "political cadre." While command cadre attended the normal military training courses, the political cadre were afforded only a brief exposure to military cross-training. At the upper echelon, political cadre from the Central Party Organ were joined with professional cadre of the armed services (police and military) in an organization similar in nature to the National Security Council of the U.S. called the "National Defense Council" (NDC), at times called the "Inter-Ministry"(Lien Bo). The constitution of the SRV provides that the President is the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces of the nation, and at the same time serves as the Chairman of the NDC. Membership in the NDC includes representatives of the Ministry of National Defense, the Military Affairs Committee, and the External Affairs Committee of the VCP, the Ministry of Interior, the General Political Directorate of the PAVN, and the Science and Technology Commission. Since the majority of Council members are concurrently members of the ruling Politburo of the VCP, Party control of military (PAVN), police (MOI), and intelligence and security (National Intelligence Office and General Research Department) operations are assured. With the decision to begin the war against the French, General Giap converted his guerrilla units into covert intelligence and propaganda teams. By building on the World War II era "Armed Propaganda Teams" (Doi Tuyen truyen Vo trang), of which Gen. Giap served as a Team Leader, the Vietnamese leadership could utilize trusted Party cadre in re-orienting those teams toward opposing foreign and domestic forces. These teams formed the basis for the later expansion of military intelligence, Enemy Proselytizing, and military security. Relying on the traditional "triangular concept," the Peoples Army was reorganized with the three primary functions of Staff, Political, and Rear Services. The Political element established policy and managed strategy, the Staff element implemented the strategy, and the Rear Services element provided the logistics to support that implementation. Due to their perceived importance, the responsibility for intelligence, security, and proselytizing were retained by the Political element. This reorganization created a system wherein the PAVN High Command was in reality subordinate to the General Political Directorate. At the small unit level, battalion and smaller sized units were managed by "party subchapters" (Chi Bo) under the control of the political officers (Chinh tri vien), while regimental and larger sized units were managed by "party chapters" (Dang Bo) under the direction of political commissars (Chinh uy). By operating solely on the instructions issued by the Politburo, Party cadre instilled the will of the Party through coercion, assassination, intimidation, and political/diplomatic manuevering. Although the military commanders, i.e., command cadre, were primarily responsible for tactical operations on the battlefield, all major decisions were ultimately approved by the political commissar. These military politicians were also responsible for writing detailed performance evaluations, and for assessing the reliability and suitability of all members occupying key positions, including the unit commanders. In addition to monitoring the commanders, other important responsibilities of the political cadre included the temporary detention, medical treatment, and evacuation of POWs to higher authorities. Most importantly, Party cadre attached to PAVN or PLAF units were responsible for implementing the POW policy by properly training their soldiers in Party policies for captured U.S. personnel. In outlining the role of the Party in dealing with American prisoners, some of the following points were emphasized. "The battalion Party Committee and the Chapter Committee should consider the mission and capability of the unit before prescribing criteria ((for the capture of prisoners)). In meetings, Party Chapters must use their time ((to study)) to thoroughly understand the importance of soldiers and Party members in capturing and handling prisoners in order to provide appropriate leadership."7 While the Political officers were responsible for carrying out the Party policy for capturing Americans alive, the Enemy and Military Proselytizing cadre were responsible for POW affairs. Similar in organization to the National Defense Council, Military Proselytizing Councils were organized at Central Office for South Vietnam (COSVN), Region, Province, and below. The cadre attached to the various commands would inspect the different units or POW camps in their areas for compliance. The Enemy and Military Proselytizing cadre at the lower levels would write monthly, semi-annual, and annual reports, which were forwarded to higher echelons. In the more southern parts of South Vietnam and in Cambodia, these reports were sent via courier along the commo-liaison routes. Further north, the cadre could transmit using the telephone wire nets that extended down the Ho Chi Minh Trail into communist Military Region (MR) 5, (which encompassed the northern portion of South Vietnam), and the B-3 Front (i.e., western Central Highlands). There is little current evidence to indicate if the cadre of the third main proselytizing element, Dan van, designed to sway the civilian masses of the countryside, had any relationship to POWs, other than occasional radio broadcasts and news releases extolling communist victories against U.S. aggression. Also during the war years, other specialized van elements, such as intellectual proselytizing (tri thuc van), were created when the situation dictated.8 By 1954, the General Political Directorate began training groups comprised of 30 Military Proselytizing cadre members under the guidance of Soviet and Chinese advisors. When the Geneva Agreement on Indochina was signed and with the regroupment of communist forces from the South to the North, and refugees from the North to the South, much of the intelligence apparatus in southern Vietnam was also dispatched to the north. As replacements, the LaoDong Party decided to dispatch 150 Military Proselytizing cadre to the areas of Saigon, Danang, and to the southern Headquarters of the Party located in western Tay Ninh Province near the border with Cambodia. Except for tactical military intelligence and reconnaissance, all intelligence and proselytizing operations were placed under the authority of the Bureau of Public Security. In October 1961, the controlling Southern Region Party Committee was reorganized as the Central Office for South Vietnam (COSVN). With the establishment of COSVN, subversion and espionage operations were retained by the Military Proselytizing Section, which was initially placed under the authority of the COSVN Military Affairs Committee, a Party organization devoted to monitoring military matters. In terms of VCP POW policy, after reviewing dozens of captured documents and interrogation reports, a consistent theme emerges of careful handling of not only American prisoners or their remains, but any documents or material possessions captured with them. Nothing was overlooked that could be used for Party policy, a policy that was driven by communist ideology to extract as much useful intelligence information from U.S. prisoners as possible. It was also important to create the seeds of a communist revolution in the prisoner's home country by "educating" the POWs in communist beliefs, and to generate propaganda statements designed to influence the anti-war movements in their home countries. A typical interrogation report emphasizes these communist motivations for actively managing this POW exploitation program."There is a threefold purpose in taking U.S. prisoners: They can be exploited for intelligence purposes; they can be exploited for propaganda and counter-propaganda purposes through radio broadcasts and interviews published in the neutralist and pro-Communist press; they can used politically to further the cause of communism beyond the limited confines of Vietnam by propagandizing them, brainwashing them, and converting them into communist or pro-Communist cadres who will work actively for the Party in their own country after they have been released."9 Prisoners, especially American prisoners, were considered a strategic asset to the North Vietnamese. Early instructions by the South Vietnam National Liberation Front (SVNLF) after the release of some captured Americans in December of 1963 stressed both the propaganda and document collection themes. "Take advantage of prisoners for international propaganda purposes. The prisoners must express good impressions about the Liberation Front...records of the deceased Americans were kept, and their remains were carefully maintained...You must understand the experiences and procedures for the release of prisoners in order to provide the necessary documents in the propaganda program."10 Other captured wartime documents and Sources provide evidence that as a part of their training, PAVN forces were often given instructions concerning the handling of American personnel captured or killed on the battlefield. According to those instructions "a detailed file was to be prepared on each POW as soon as he was brought to a detention camp. With regard to the deceased ones, records should be maintained, listing such information as deceased date and burial location. Personal belongings of the deceased should be carefully kept. Similar records were to be prepared for the U.S. POWs who escaped, were missing, became lost, or were killed by enemy bombing."11 In summary, Military Proselytizing cadre were involved in subversion and fifth column activities, i.e., attempting to convince ARVN soldiers to desert or not to engage in aggressive patrolling, while the PAVN's Research Department (Cuc Nghien Cuu)(CNC) was responsible for strategicintelligence.12 The Military Intelligence units attached to COSVN or Region level engaged in tactical reconnaissance for missions like sapper attacks, while the Public Security forces were responsible for counter-intelligence, assassinations, physical protection of COSVN, and other general police and judiciary work. The routine handling of foreign POWs was retained by the PAVN's Enemy Proselytizing Department, which in South Vietnam was placed under the authority of the Political Staff, SVNLAF. Due to its' mission of handling American POWs, the EPD was considered the main "POW Section." Although the EPD was organized specifically for foreign prisoners, the mission of exploiting foreign deserters and collaborators was retained by the Military Proselytizing cadre. This is an important juncture in the history of the VCP proselytizing effort that will be discussed later in greater detail under the topic of Military Proselytizing. Reality vs. Rhetoric Despite this policy of careful documentation regarding American POWs, in analyzing any military organization, some caution needs to addressed. The word "certain" has always been difficult to apply in dealing with communist cadre or organizations, and it is often impossible to say with absolute precision what documents the SRV still holds. The authors are not suggesting that PAVN/PLAF policies were always perfectly adhered to, or that documents pertaining to captured U.S. POW/MIAs may not have survived the journey to Hanoi, or were simply lost due to the ravages of war. Further, the POW policy was not always implemented and was often ignored. Indeed, numerous directives admonish subordinate units for not properly following POW policy, and many interrogation reports revealed that PAVN soldiers were unaware of POW policy. At times PLAF troops or North Vietnamese militia were either uninformed of Central Committee policies or failed to carry them out, especially in the early years of the war. While the PAVN/PLAF maintained a public policy of lenient treatment of POWs, the American POWs held in North Vietnamese jails experienced a considerable amount of torture and beatings. Policies were also ignored at times on the field of battle. A historical account by the Military Assistance Command Vietnam (MACV) provides one clear example. Like soldiers in every war, policies were often ignored at times in the heat of battle. The Military Assistance Command, Vietnam (MACV) Command History for 1967 notes one particular gruesome example of PAVN or PLAF atrocities against captured American soldiers. Marine Lieutenant William M. Grammar and Army Sergeant Orville B. Frits were captured early in the morning of May 20, 1967. When American forces had recaptured the area, the bodies of Lt. Grammar and Sgt. Frits were found in the courtyard of a church, horribly mutilated.13 There are many other Intelligence reports that discuss the killing of American prisoners. However, Party cadre worked hard to educate their soldiers and civilians to capture Americans alive, and to collect all their documentation. Military Proselytizing sections often set up special classes to correct this situation. "Combat units were constantly reminded to capture POWs, especially Americans. They are instructed to issue ropes to each soldier for binding POWs, to teach the troops English phrases such as "Hands up," and to teach such techniques as removing the shoes of U.S. POWs to hinder their escape attempts."14 Other proselytizing sections were urged to emphasize care of the POW, "for to do otherwise harms the revolution, decreases the chance for prisoner exchanges, and limits the international propaganda impact."15 Regardless of the circumstances of individual cases, there is absolutely no question regarding communist policy, a policy developed in the war with the French. That policy revolved around two principal strategies. Live prisoners were used for political concessions, and remains or information were used for economic concessions. The French Experience PAVN/PLAF policy on foreign POWs dated back to the war against the French. Foreign prisoners and remains were considered a key part of the VCP's near and long term negotiating strategies. An extensive Rand Corporation analysis of the French experience in coping with the POW/MIA issue provides a dramatic illustration of Vietnam's coldly calculated intent. "Despite the substantial political and economic concession the French have made to Hanoi since 1954, France has never received a full accounting for its missing and dead. The Vietnamese communist government has consistently circumvented and violated the terms of the 1954 agreement concerning the accounting for France's missing servicemen. Hanoi's actions clearly demonstrate that its only interest in the French military graves in Vietnam and the requests for remains by the families of the deceased is in the economic and political benefits that the Vietnamese Government can derive from control of these remains. We should keep this in mind in dealing with Hanoi. We can anticipate that Hanoi's objective is to obtain increasingly large economic and political concessions in exchange for piecemeal releases of remains and information about our missing servicemen."16 When queried by the U.S. government on French/Vietnam postwar POW negotiations, the French government provided sobering answers to the U.S. Although the French and U.S. situations were different, the "French believe that the U.S. may encounter some of the same basic problems from the Vietnamese: broad political "payment" to establish a program and then steep financial concessions for each body at each step of the way."17 Further, "the PAVN has remained the DRV representative for these matters. No deserters or ralliers have been repatriated. No remains of prisoners of war who died in captivity have been repatriated. Quai officials commented that the operation appeared to be run to provide revenue for the DRV. The French found they had to pay fairly stiff commercial prices for each body. They thought the U.S. would have to do the same."18 According to estimates, the French were required to pay 55 million francs (approximately 10 million US dollars) to the VCP each year from 1954 until 1986, when France received some 24,000 remains in a four month period. The cadre tasked to work with the French Government Task Force were later reassigned to work with the American Joint Task Force-Full Accounting. Looking at the 32 year period of doling out remains piecemeal to the French Task Force, MIA family members and veterans were skeptical of USCINCPAC/JTF-FA claims of a so-called "open window of opportunity" during which rapid progress was expected in return for similar payments by the U.S. Navy Regional Contracting Office to the bank account of the External Affairs Section of the VCP Central Committee in the Vietnam Commercial (VietCom) Bank in Hanoi. The Ministry of Public Security To accomplish this strategy of economic concessions for remains and live prisoners for political concessions, the VCP invested POW responsibility with several ministries. Generally, the most well known Vietnamese organizations which played a role in handling American POWs are the Ministry of National Defense (MND) and the Ministry of Public Security (Bo Cong An) (MPS), now known as the Ministry of Interior (Bo Noi Vu)(MOI). There is some controversy concerning the relationship of the public security apparatus to the overall process of exploiting American personnel. It is our understanding that DPMO believes that the MPS played only a secondary role in handling U.S. POWs. However, a CIA study from 1975 based upon captured wartime enemy personnel who possessed detailed knowledge of the Vietnamese POW procedures, stated that the MPS was deeply involved. The report concluded that "The MPS is similar in organization and mission to the Soviet Committee for State Security (KGB). The MPS is the executive arm of the communist party (Dang Lao Dong-Workers Party) of the DRV. It is responsible for the overall security of the party, internal security within the DRV, and for foreign intelligence operations, and has the overall responsibility for the administration and detention of POWs."19 Generally, the MPS ran the prisons. It had two main offices in Vietnam, with Office "A" in Hanoi and Office "B" collocated with the Central Office for South Vietnam (COSVN) in the south. The southern office of the MPS also maintained detention facilities in the outskirts of Hanoi at Thanh Tri. This prison, which detained U.S. POWs captured in South Vietnam who were later moved to the north, was designated "Hanoi B." Detention facilities of the MPS Office "A" in northern Vietnam were staffed by personnel of Prisons Department C-51 in Hanoi, while those in southern Vietnam fell under the authority of Prisons Department C-53, located in the Lo Go area of northwestern Tay Ninh Province. Some remains of U.S. POWs held in C-53 were repatriated after the war ended, but other prisoners executed there on orders of the party have never been returned. Live-sighting reports on American prisoners held in the C-53 prison continued to be received by the U.S. Government until late 1974, but were never acted upon due to procrastination and the sudden collapse of the Saigon Government. Public security prisons were considered more brutal than PAVN installations. However, the MPS also interrogated prisoners for its own requirements. In the north, intelligence interrogations of American POWs were conducted by Interrogation Department C-44 in Hanoi. In the south, interrogations were conducted by Public Security cadre attached to the various Party Regions and provinces throughout southern Vietnam, or by cadre assigned to the Security Section of COSVN. In selecting cadre for duty with the security services, the Party was again at the forefront. "The Party should be regarded as the sole body that provides absolute and direct leadership. Whenever possible, security sections at various echelons were to be staffed by Chapter Party Committee members exclusively, and individual Party Chapters were to as "steering" nucleuses in the various security and intelligence communities."20 Within the DRV, the MPS forwarded its' interrogation reports through Party channels to the MND and the Office of the Prime Minister for coordination throughout the remainder of the DRV government.21 Coordination with the Office of the Prime Minister is considered noteworthy, since the Vietnamese Office for Seeking Missing Personnel (VNOSMP), established after the war to work with American POW/MIA specialists, also reports to the Office of the Prime Minister. The Office of the Prime Minister also managed part of the wartime propaganda effort through the Vietnam News Agency (VNA) and the Radio Diffusion Board. Radio Hanoi, like the Vietnam News Agency (VNA), while under the nominal control of the Central Party Propaganda and Training Department (now called Cuc Tuyen Huan), was attached to the Office of the Prime Minister. Many of these radio broadcasts and newspaper articles, plus the "discovery" of VNA photographs of deceased American personnel, have helped the U.S. Government form a category from dozens of MIA cases called "Special Remains" cases. These are cases where photographs, films, or newspaper articles clearly show the deceased American to be in custody of the North Vietnamese, but his remains have never been returned. When considering the relationship between the Office of the Prime Minister and the long term implications of Vietnam's propaganda efforts, it should come as no surprise that such media were under the control of the Prime Minister's office. These propaganda broadcasts were considered very important, and long after the war the Vietnamese continue to use the Vietnam News Agency to issue subtle statements. As the U.S. began to conduct the first joint field investigations in Vietnam during 1988, the Vietnamese continued to send signals to the U.S. concerning the POW/MIA issue through the Radio Diffusion Board. The following broadcast by Radio Hanoi was monitored. "At a press conference on 4 July held in the Soviet Ministry of Foreign Affairs Press Center, Comrade Sukaret (Translator's note: spelled phonetically) the head of the public prosecutor's office raised the issue of Soviet soldiers who were captured as POWs in Afghanistan. He rejected the fabricated themes of a number of reactionary circles that apparently some repressive cases are being prepared in regards to the Soviet POWs captured in Afghanistan in case they return home. He emphasized that the military personnel who belong to the element of Soviet voluntary forces engaged in the fighting in Afghanistan who were captured as POWs and returned to the Fatherland from abroad will entirely enjoy the rights of political society and other rights of every Soviet citizen as specified in the Soviet constitution. Stemming from the lofty humanitarian viewpoint of socialism, the Soviet State is prepared to be lenient to all those Soviet POWs whose actions, because they were unable to withstand enemy torture, have caused damage to the interests of the Soviet State. Comrade Sukaret stated that approximately 312 Soviet military personnel have been captured in the Afghanistan conflict. A number of them were sacrificed while searching for a way to escape from the prison camps of the Afghan counter-revolutionaries. Currently there are approximately 200 people being held in Afghanistan, a few tens of people in America, and a small number in Canada and western Europe. He hoped that the administrations of the countries involved in this issue, especially America and Pakistan, would create conditions for the Soviet POWs to soon return and reunite with their families."22 In addition to military prisoners, Public Security camps also processed civilian Vietnamese and American prisoners. A document of the Binh Dinh Province Security Committee pertaining to captured Vietnamese personnel stated, "Camps for POWs and defecting soldiers should only be used to confine personnel from military or semi-military units. GVN cadres such as Inter-family Chiefs, Hamlet Chiefs, administrative personnel, "plainclothesmen," reconnaissance unit personnel and civilians should be placed under the control of Security Sections."23 Other documents of the Binh Dinh Province Party Committee captured during the war indicate that personnel transferred from regular detention camps to security agencies were scheduled for "further investigation." American civilians who performed other than normal military duties were also included in the security system. These personnel were considered as "spies," and subjected to very thorough interrogations. Even American female volunteer workers, like the school teachers and medical specialists captured in Hue during the 1968 "Tet" offensive, were suspected of being "spies." Although they were able to convince their captors that they were genuine volunteers, they were required to sign statements to be broadcast over Radio Hanoi, and then were released back to American control. The radio broadcasts were made from Hanoi only days after the statements were recorded near the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ). In other cases, those prisoners who were not successful in explaining their backgrounds either disappeared, died in captivity due to brutal interrogations, or were executed after capture. Chief Warrant Officer Solomon Godwin, from Hot Springs, Arkansas, also captured in Hue, died while undergoing a lengthy period of interrogation by the Public Security Police. Due to his assignment as an Intelligence Advisor to the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) National Police Special Branch in Hue, both CWO Godwin and captured CIA agent Eugene Weaver were held in a highly secret camp far removed from other American prisoners. Mr. Weaver survived the ordeal, and more recently the Vietnamese admitted to U.S. officials that not only did the Soviet KGB have direct access to Mr. Weaver for interrogation in Vietnam, the KGB also attempted to recruit him for intelligence operations in the United States. Although an American eyewitness account provides proof that CWO Godwin was in the custody of communist forces at a fixed location, neither he nor his remains have been returned. The Ministry of National Defense As mentioned, while the MPS shared responsibilities for the administration of U.S. prisoners with the MND, the military had the primary evacuation and handling system for American POWs. The military system began at the capturing unit on the battlefield and extended to the MPS run Hoa Lo Prison in Hanoi. Almost all of the captured Americans who lived to return home went through this system. Although this system was managed by PAVN military forces, nevertheless such operations, like other military operations, were controlled by the Party. Three components of the Ministry of National Defense (MND) function as the Ministry's intelligence, proselytizing, and security arms. These elements include the Research Department (Cuc Nghien Cuu) (CNC), which collected military intelligence and was organized similar to the Soviet "GRU," the Enemy Proselytizing Department (Cuc Dich Van)(EPD), and the Military Security Department (Phong 50). Although the Military Security Department office probably coordinated closely with the General Department for Security (Tong cuc An ninh) of the MPS, little is known of its activities with U.S. POWs. The Research Department (CNC) played an important role and maintained several separate offices tasked with the exploitation of American POWs, the Research Office (Phong 70), the Reconnaissance Office (Phong 71), the Technical Reconnaissance Office (Phong 72), and the Foreign Countries Intelligence Office (Phong 76). The CNC provided strategic intelligence to both the PAVN High Command and the most senior levels of the North Vietnamese government. The southern arm of the CNC attached to COSVN was designated B-22. While little is known of the full extent of CNC exploitation of American POWs, their documents and/or equipment, due to the amount of tactical and technical knowledge possessed by American POWs, the principal mission of the CNC element probably was the extraction of military information to be shared with the various PAVN Commands. The CNC analyzed documents, such as maps and flight manuals, captured from downed American pilots. "Interrogations emphasize collection of tactical information, particularly regarding the target objective of captured pilots. Research Office 70 conducts general interrogations, while Office 71 is concerned with specific targeting information."24 The Enemy Proselytizing Department (EPD) was the senior PAVN authority for routine POW management and, "had the primary responsibility for the indoctrination of American POW's."25 The EPD was a military organization that had been in place for over 20 years. EPD cadre reported through the Political Staff Sections of the various echelons up through the military chain of command to the General Political Directorate of the PAVN high command in Hanoi. In July 1965, the EPD sent its first group of cadre south. About 50 were assigned to COSVN, while approximately 20 were dispatched to MR-5. It is believed that both the Research and Enemy Proselytizing Departments maintained master lists of all captured U.S. POWs. While the EPD assisted the CNC to interrogate American POWs for collection of specific intelligence requirements, the EPD was more concerned with overall knowledgeability for making recommendations for further interrogation by the intelligence services, for possible recruitment by the Military Proselytizing Department, or for battlefield propaganda efforts with the use of loudspeakers and leaflets. The main component of the EPD responsible for American POWs was called the Policy Office. In South Vietnam and Cambodia, the EPD had forward commands that were attached to the Headquarters, SVNLAF, and below. One cadre, who was the Deputy Chief of the SVNLAF EPD Policy Office, "reviewed interrogation reports to assess the knowledgeability and attitudes of the US POWs. Source was required to submit evaluation reports to the Political Department in order to form the basis for recommendations for early release or exchange of US POWs considered progressive. Source recalled...all (POW) exchanges were directed by the Politburo in Hanoi."26 Even though the EPD was PAVN's primary POW organization, it still coordinated closely with other elements. In North Vietnam, the EPD arranged with the MPS regarding the placement of U.S. POWs in MPS-run facilities, helped screen and evaluate prisoners, and made recommendations concerning the further evacuation and future potential of captured personnel. Both the Military Proselytizing and the Enemy Proselytizing Departments maintained offices, designated C-12 and C-14, located near the "Citadel" POW Camp in Hanoi. In South Vietnam, these two proselytizing elements coordinated closely. A directive issued by COSVN head and Politburo member Pham Hung in 1969, and forwarded to units of the South Vietnam Liberation Armed Forces (SVNLAF), stressed the need and importance for cooperation between the Military and Enemy Proselytizing elements. "Close liaison with the Military Proselytizing Section was to be conducted to obtain an understanding of the psychological development within the enemy ranks so that an effective propaganda campaign could be carried out to intensify further the anti-war movement and decrease the enemy's combat effectiveness."27 The directive went further and stated that "American POWs constituted valuable capital assets and were an effective weapon in the field of the VC political and diplomatic struggle." Another document underlining the coordination between the Military Proselytizing and the EPD elements was issued by the Enemy Proselytizing Section, Political Department of the SVNLAF is titled "Public Presentation of U.S. Prisoners of War." "To make a rational use of POW's during their detention [period], the Political Department of Mien [Zone] (i.e. southern Vietnam, aka B-2) had, for the first time and in coordination with the Military Proselytizing Section of the Region (i.e. Party Committee Region, Khu uy), organized meetings during which U.S. POW's were publicly presented to the masses with a view to propagandizing our military victories and motivating the masses' hatred of the Americans and readiness to fight any American move in the Western Zone [of South Vietnam's Delta]."28 Concerning the relationship between the Military Proselytizing and EPD elements, the same document states "the only other COSVN-level organization which was in contact with the EPD detention facilities was the COSVN Military Proselytizing Section (Ban Binh van). The PDV (Phong dich van) sent information copies of all its indoctrination and interrogation reports to the Military Proselytizing Section via the SVNLAF Political Staff."29 The Unexplored Military Proselytizing System The general purpose of Military Proselytizing (Binh van) was to destroy the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN), or at least reduce its efficiency, through a spectrum of politically motivated acts. "A military proselytizing mission is a motivational mission aimed at soldiers in the enemy army to make them clearly understand the purpose of the revolution and the rights of the people. The military proselytizing mission is very important as it aims at demoralizing and disorganizing the enemy troops in order to strengthen our own and it is also one of the "three prongs" to defeat the US imperialists and liberate SVN."30 This was the main thrust of General Giap's "disintegrating the enemy" process. The Binh van element was oriented toward Vietnamese servicemen and their dependents, and American deserters and collaborators, rather than the general American POW population. This element sought not only to persuade soldiers to cross over to the communist side themselves, but to elicit their assistance in luring other servicemen to cross over as well. Due to the degree of importance placed by the communists on the motivation of personnel taken into custody, and their potential value toward propaganda efforts, any individual who voluntarily crossed over to the communist side would be considered a "deserter," and would, therefore, be under the control of the Binh van rather than the EPD element. This policy was apparently consistent without regard to the rank or position of the individual, and was based entirely on perceived motivation. It is crucial to differentiate between the themes of Binh van, which sought to play upon emotions like hatred, fear, longing for home, etc., in order to weaken and ultimately neutralize the opposing forces, versus the role of the Binh van cadre. Central Party Political cadre assigned to Military Proselytizing duties held no government positions, but were simply called Party Cadre (Can bo Dang). Usually, such cadre were graduates of the Communist Party Ideological School designed to train party cadre for critical positions. This elite course was called the "Nguyen Ai Quoc" school (Truong Nguyen Ai Quoc), i.e., Nguyen the Patriot, a pseudonym used at one point by Ho Chi Minh. Although the principal location for this school was in Hanoi, some cadre reassigned to Binh van duties during the war were also trained at a southern branch of the school located inside Laos and adjacent to Kontum Province, Vietnam.31 One responsibility of the Binh van element was penetration and recruitment from the POW population to further the manipulation of public opinion in France and America, which played a key role in advancing the strategy of the Party far into the future. The possibility exists that some charismatic Binh van cadre were tasked with gaining the sympathy of selected foreign POWs believed to have the potential for influencing public opinion after being released. "Long range strategic operations were designed to induce individuals to serve the communist cause upon return to their units and their homelands."32 The Military Proselytizing cadre's guidebook referred to earlier, which in addition to essays by American antiwar critics, contains the following instructions. "Special treatment was to be granted to U.S. PW's having special social standing, such as those who were the sons or relatives of American celebrities or high ranking officials in the U.S. Government. Intense propaganda and motivation should be imposed on these PW's."33 Because of the sensitive nature and agitation-propaganda aspect of operations designed to lure both Vietnamese and American personnel to desert and collaborate, the Binh van function of each Military Proselytizing Council was closely controlled by the Current Affairs Committee of the party at each echelon. A wartime interrogation report of a captured Binh van cadre from Quang Ngai Province reported that his section was one of 19 sections reporting to the Party Current Affairs Committee, and that within his section were seven subsections, one of which was an Enemy Proselytizing subsection.34 The power and authority of the Current Affairs Committee, as well as the requirement for coordination with the intelligence and security services for exploitation of selected American prisoners, is clearly illustrated in the following captured document used to pass instructions from the Current Affairs Committee of Song Be (formerly Phuoc Long) Province to POW Camp T-52 where U.S. Army SP4 James H. McClean was held during 1966. "Nguyen Thiet (Vietnamese prisoner) village 3, Duc Bon, Phuoc Binh District-kill in secret and afterwards put his body in a bomb crater. After, if his family wants to know where he is, we will show them. Hang him, do not shoot him because his family will know the round in his body. We will tell his family we put him in prison for three years, but his death was by bombs. Duong Thuc (Vietnamese prisoner) village 2, Duc Bon, Phuoc Binh district-kill here, do not move to his area. American soldier-need to send his documents to Security Area Office to check again."35 Psychological Operations programs of the Binh van would have been coordinated through the Propaganda and Training Department of the COSVN Military Affairs Committee. The MACV Command History for 1973 states that "The Military Proselytizing activities of the Party apparatus were directed by the Propaganda and Training Department (Cuc Tuyen Huan) of the Central Committee of the Lao Dong Party. Military proselytizing activities were directed by the military proselytizing sections found at all levels of the infrastructure...At provincial level military proselytizing activities were directed by the military proselytizing sections of the Party committee and by the military proselytizing sections of the military units."36 The Propaganda and Training Department of the Central Committee was represented within the government structure by the Ministry of Propaganda, which was later redesigned as the "Ministry of Culture and Information," and finally at one point "The Ministry of Culture Information and Sports." The need for "information" to be used in "arousing the voluntary will of the people and teaching them" was recognized by the Central Committee in 1965 when it issued an instruction for the formation of a new state organ," a directorate general for information and an information system at various levels."37 Subversion and espionage operations of the Binh van were coordinated with the COSVN security branch. According to a document of the Central Security Department (Khoi Bo Noi Trung Uong) classified Secret, "There are the following sections: specialized espionage, political security, Party security protection, discipline protection and security, judiciary in VC detention camps, techniques and science, signal and liaison, and propaganda and training."38 POWs who were performing normal military duties were placed in the custody of the Enemy Proselytizing Element and evacuated to a camp of the Military region. Subsequently, they were sent to Hanoi, except those south of MR-5, since they were too far south to make the trek to Hanoi. However, personnel who were involved in intelligence work or who "crossed over" were turned over to the Military Proselytizing elements for evacuation to a camp operated by Security Service personnel. Copies of all relevant reports from these POWs would have been forwarded by classified courier to Hanoi through Party/Security channels, and not the military system. Penetration and fifth column operations of the Binh van were also coordinated with the EPD element, as the EPD probably served as a spotting agency for the recruitment of potential collaborators from the overall prisoner population. The CMIC source mentioned earlier states that even though he was in charge of the Binh van section, he was not privy to the operations of the Penetration sub-section, as this person reported directly to the Current Affairs Committee.39 These Binh van penetration agents, (often recruited from POW populations), and operations were extremely skillful. An example of how these operations were conducted was revealed by one source, who "has provided information of the penetration of Popular Force (PF) Out Posts (OP). The source, a former Deputy Chief of the Military Proselytizing section of VC Can Tho Province, stated that as of late DEC 70, over 10 OPs in VC Can Tho Province had been penetrated, and an additional fifty agents were being trained. First the prospective penetrant must enlist in the PF and attend basic training. While at the PF Training Center he is contacted by a female commo-liaison cadre, posing as his wife or sister, who relays instructions and receives information. Instead of going home for his week's leave upon completion of basic training, the agent is taken to a location in which he receives detailed instructions about how to set up an OP for a successful VC attack. He then reports to his place of duty and begins reporting on the situation. When the OP is determined to be vulnerable to atk, the agent is provided with the instructions about what he is to do during and after the atk. Usually this involves the agent's "escape" and subsequent return with a story of his "heroism" and narrow escape from the en. The agent is then usually assigned to another OP and the process begins again."40 This delineation between PAVN and Party control highlights what we believe is a previously ignored divergence in communist POW policy. The different reporting channels for Enemy and Military Proselytizing, EPD through PAVN, and Military Proselytizing through Party, are crucial. For instance, one Oral History interview states, "When asked concerning the Military Proselytizing office, source said he was not familiar with the organization because it's activities and camp system were completely under the direct control of the Communist party and completely separated from the Enemy Proselytizing office during the war."41 To further refine this point, we believe that while at the lower echelons the various Military and Enemy Proselytizing cadre were primarily engaged in tactical operations, it was at the Front and COSVN level that the true differentiation occurred. While the authors recognize that in the MR-5 and B-3 Front area the Military and Enemy Proselytizing sections were combined, this was the only Region to have such an organization. This arrangement was probably due to the geographical distance from both COSVN and the Party Central Committee in Hanoi. However, the communists developed another proselytizing section for the large concentrations of American forces in the area of the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ), a specialized sub-element designated My van (American proselytizing). Some of the Vietnam specialists who work for the DPMO have maintained that Enemy and Military Proselytizing are not separate entities. The DPMO's senior archivist in Hanoi has stated this position during the Senate Select Committee hearings.42 Some of the confusion may be attributed to captured documents linking either the elements of Binh van and Dich van, or Dan and Dich van, which began to occasionally appear in captured communist documents or interrogation reports in the late 1960's and '70's.43 These documents generally discuss the plans and themes of proselytizing, and not the organizational separation. Further, Enemy Proselytizing was occasionally mis-translated as Troop or Military Proselytizing, which helped to badly confuse the two among intelligence analysts. However, captured documents from early in the war show that the Communist Party did give some responsibility for American POWs to the Military Proselytizing section. "The Z Current Affairs Committee has entrusted the administration and indoctrination of the American and RVN officer POW's to the responsibility of the Z Military Proselytizing Section."44 Further Oral History interviews conducted in 1992 support our position. When questioned concerning the differences between Military and Enemy Proselytizing, knowledgeable communist cadre summed up the situation by stating that the difference between the Binh van and Dich van elements was very similar to the difference between the Central Intelligence Agency and the Defense Intelligence Agency of the United States.45 Another Oral History interview indicates that "Enemy Proselytizing is a subset of Military Proselytizing."46 Additional Oral History interviews confirm that while the EPD element was under the military control of either the headquarters of the South Vietnam Liberation Armed Forces (SVNLAF), code named "Mien" (i.e. "Region") in southern Vietnam, or the General Political Directorate of PAVN in Hanoi, the Binh van element was under the direct control of either the southern arm of the Politburo in the Central Office for South Vietnam (COSVN) in South Vietnam, code named "R," or the actual Politburo in Hanoi.47 After the war in Vietnam ended in 1975, the Binh van element was reorganized as the propaganda element of a restructured "Enemy Proselytizing and Special Propaganda Department" (Cuc Dich van va Tuyen Truyen Dac Biet). This further signifies the propaganda duties of Binh van, which also had the responsibility of coordinating through the Party in arranging prisoner exchanges, obtaining approval for scheduled executions, and as mentioned, handling deserters/collaborators. The Enemy Proselytizing Department did not have this authority. While the
EPD handled most American military and civilian prisoners, the one category
it did not have jurisdiction over was deserters. They were handled by
Military Proselytizing elements. For instance, an interrogation report from
a former member of the EPD element in southern Vietnam comments, "The Enemy Much of the evidence thus far assembled indicates that the Military Proselytizing cadre were more interested in propaganda at the national level in order to sway the opinions of the family members of POWs, as well as the American people as a whole. To accomplish this task, the Military Proselytizing section had tape recorders available at the MR-5 camp, and wartime broadcasts were transmitted from Hanoi as well as Cuba. On the other hand, the EPD normally included a subsection called the "Combat Propaganda" (Tuyen Truyen Vo Trang) Section responsible for hand-held, bullhorn type broadcasts to American units. This group included both McKinley Nolan and Robert Garwood. However, there is some confusion as to which proselytizing element had control of Garwood. Documents from the war include letters Garwood wrote to fellow collaborator Gustav Mehrer, which indicate Garwood was under the control of Military Proselytizing elements.49 Other CIA reports also indicate Garwood engaged in activities such as megaphone broadcasts to U.S. troops inciting them to desert. However, an Oral History with a communist EPD cadre claims that Garwood was under the control of the EPD element.50 According to cadre formerly assigned to the area, due to the unique nature of Military Region, aka Inter-Region 5, the Military Proselytizing and EPD elements were co-located. Therefore, due to his English and Vietnamese language capability, it is possible that Garwood worked with both elements. Therefore, if the Military Proselytizing cadre reported directly to the Propaganda and Training Department through Party and not military channels, and they were responsible for collaborators like Bobby Garwood and McKinley Nolan, the key question becomes, how many other collaborators remained under their control at war's end?51 There are many interrogation reports in the "Uncorrelated Files" that discuss suspected American collaborators. If the Vietnamese propaganda experts had induced a number of Americans to collaborate, the security aspects of that program would go well beyond any paper protocols requiring "full accountability." For example, in reading the book by escaped American Special Forces officer Nick Rowe of his time in captivity, the psychological pressures put on him to cooperate and generate propaganda statements were tremendous. Considering the enormous amount of willpower and discipline exercised by Rowe to resist his captors, some less fortunate individual might have cracked under the physical and mental strain. The cases of Humberto Acosta-Rosario and Walter Cichon bear deeper investigation, since the Vietnamese now claim they don't know what happened to them, although they were definitely captured.52 There have been other cases where Americans were either known or have been suspected to be remaining in Vietnam and this was denied by the Vietnamese. When the former head of the Congressional POW/MIA Task Force, Rep Sonny Montgomery, visited Vietnam in 1976 he asked then Prime Minister Pham Van Dong concerning the presence of any Americans in Vietnam at that time. Assured by PM Dong that there were no Americans remaining, Rep Montgomery delivered that report to the White House and the American people. In reality, at the time of his conversation with the Prime Minister, both Garwood and Mr. Arlo Gay were being held not far from where Rep Montgomery attended his meeting. During a subsequent meeting in 1991 attended by Senator John Kerry (D, Mass), Vice-Foreign Minister Le Mai and one of the authors, the question was posed to Mr. Le Mai, "Why did Prime Minister Dong fail to reveal the presence of Robert Garwood and Arlo Gay to Rep Montgomery?" Mr. Le Mai explained that Robert Garwood had requested that the SRV Government not reveal his presence to American officials and in that case the Vietnamese were simply honoring his request. In the case of Arlo Gay, however, his stated background was "not clear" and as a result he was suspected of being a "spy." Since Robert Garwood did in fact elect to remain in Vietnam, and Arlo Gay was a contract employee of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) captured during the final days of the war, Mr. Le Mai's answer seemed to track with these previously unknown VCP policy aspects. Such distinctions may also have been considered as a point of law, since anyone who crossed over would normally be considered as a Hang binh, or deserter, and not subject to the law of land warfare. According to Vietnam's law on Vietnamese nationality, "Foreign citizens and apatrid (sic) persons residing in Vietnam, abiding of their own free will by the Vietnamese Constitution and law, are eligible to Vietnamese naturalization if they fulfill the following conditions: to be eighteen years old or more; knowing the Vietnamese language; having resided in Vietnam at least five years. In special cases, foreign citizens are eligible to Vietnamese nationality without being asked to fulfil (sic) the above mentioned conditions: have made contributions to the cause of protecting and defending the Vietnamese homeland."53 Some U.S. servicemen were released early to fulfill propaganda requirements, either to exhibit the "humanitarian" policies of the communists, or because the Vietnamese believed that the serviceman had changed and now displayed a "proper attitude." It was hoped that these POWs would contribute to the anti-war movement. However, before being eligible for release, the POW's background was checked. A wartime report of a meeting of the PLAF MR 3 Current Affairs Committee alleges that the "VC have carefully checked the background data and families of all POWs prior to their release. The personnel data of each prisoner is screened by the both the VC and the U.S. Communist Party. Some of the U.S. prisoners already released have joined movements and demonstrations for peace and complete withdrawal in Southeast Asia."54 We note that Nick Rowe was discovered to have falsified his background to his captors through such rendered assistance. This discovery almost lead to his execution. In educating the populace at large in the basic fundamentals of proselytizing, Party cadre compared efforts to gain the cooperation of POWs to "raising pigeons." According to another cadre handbook, "We release POWs like raising pigeons to be released, later they will bring the flock back to our house."55 Another interrogation report compiled in 1969 indicated that "Before 1968, North Vietnamese military and civilian personnel were hostile to U.S. military personnel and often killed those who were captured. In 1969, however, the North Vietnamese Government issued an order stipulating that captured U.S. military and civilian personnel be kept alive for anticipated exchange and compensation. Moreover, it was specified that special attention should be paid to captured Americans who had made specific achievements, or came from wealthy families.56 The other main Binh van theme was to persuade American military personnel in Vietnam to ask the U.S. Government to send them home, persuade the American military not to fight the PLAF and that the latter were fighting a just cause, and influencing the U.S. Government not to support the Army of the Republic of Vietnam nor to condone the killing of innocent civilians in "liberated" areas. This strategy was conceived of as early as February 1963. A captured Military Proselytizing document "emphasizes that US POW's must be properly handled, well fed, and made to write letters praising the lenient policy of the Front towards US POW's, for international propaganda purposes, and to encourage their fellow countrymen to go back to the USA and stop committing crimes against the Vietnamese people. If possible their picture must be taken, and declarations recorded prior to their release. Personnel belongings must be kept intact. In regard to US POW's who die, they must be well buried, their name and POB, date of death recorded, and personal property secured to send back to their families. Concerning important US POW, they must be kept as hostages for eventual exchanges of POW."57 The Binh van cadre accomplished this mission by various means. Upon being captured, each American POW was required to complete a standard questionnaire. The purpose of the questionnaire was to collect information that would be used for the overall goals and mission of "promoting the antiwar movement and urging US and satellite troops to refuse to take part in operations and to demand prompt return home."58 The Binh van cadre were interested in personal information from POWs concerning relatives, including their mailing address in the United States. Such information was obtained in an attempt to gain the support of the individual POW, his family and friends, and the American public. By using statements made by POWs, by "brainwashing" POWs to return home and spread propaganda, the Binh van element attempted to spread dissention and anti-war sentiment throughout the United States. This anti-war propaganda developed by the Military Proselytizing cadre was considered crucial to the communist war effort. Subsequent to his defection, former PAVN Sr. Col. Bui Tin, the editor of the Army newspaper Nhan Dan, underscored the importance of the overall proselytizing effort in demoralizing the American war effort: "It was essential to our strategy. Support for the war from our rear was completely secure while the American rear was vulnerable. Every day our leadership would listen to the world news over the radio at 9 a.m. to follow the growth of the American anti-war movement. Visits to Hanoi by people like Jane Fonda and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses. We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red dress, said she was ashamed of American actions in the war and that she would struggle along with us."59 Back to top |