A SELECTIVE MEMORY OF THE VIETNAM WAR

Debates On Indochinese Refugees in
The New York Times
1975-1995

by SOPHIE SICKERT

August 2020

The Vietnam War left a lasting impression on the United States. Once the decades-long conflict had come to an end, the refugee crisis in Southeast Asia continued to divide Americans. An analysis of media representations reveals the different ways in which the exodus was perceived. In its coverage of the crisis, The New York Times actively advocated in favour of refugee protection. The paper highlighted the US’ moral duty towards the Vietnamese and used the situation to criticize American foreign policy. Changes in US politics between 1975 and 1995, however, compelled the paper to take a flexible approach in its presentation of the refugee crisis. At times, its support of refugees was vehement, at others, it was discreet. In either case, the paper continued promoting refugee protection.

The Power Of Words

The end of the Vietnam War in 1975, led to the complete withdrawal of American forces from Vietnam. Despite this, the conflict and its consequences continued to haunt the US for decades after its departure. Besides the war’s military and economic legacy, the refugee crisis that followed the communist victories in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia prolonged the region’s suffering for over two decades after the conflict’s end. For many, the refugees provided a vivid reminder of the initial cause of human suffering for the Vietnamese – American intervention. 

As with any overseas crisis, Americans relied on the media to stay informed. When the U.S. government made decisions regarding refugee policy, these outlets had to choose which questions to address and how to react to the developments. They reported prevailing opinions and, inevitably, took a position in the debates. Since editorial choices are so influential, it is valuable to investigate how newspapers represented the refugees, what secondary issues they related to the crisis, and why editors used certain publishing strategies. While scholars have studied the role and responsibility of the media during the Vietnam War extensively, the refugee crisis has received less attention. Studies have largely focused on refugees’ experiences in transit camps and in resettlement countries or on journalists’ memoirs.1 This analysis looks at a single newspaper, The New York Times, to analyze its changing representation of the refugees.

Founded in 1851, The New York Times has become one of the most circulated newspapers in the United States. As its 127 Pulitzer prizes for excellence in journalism show,2 the paper is well regarded on an international level. Its coverage of the Indochinese wars played a role in this critical acclaim. Sydney H. Schanberg won the prize in 1976 for his coverage of the Communist takeover in Cambodia, and Henry Kamm won it in 1978 for his reporting on the Indochinese refugee crisis.3 A previous quantitative analysis brought to light that, unlike other papers which deliberately fostered debates,4 the New York Times strongly advocated for refugee resettlement.5 This second analysis aims to examine the articles’ contents more closely. It shows that humanitarian concerns only made up one part of the debate surrounding Southeast Asian refugees. The situation in mainland Southeast Asia highlighted two other issues: the memory of the Vietnam War and American foreign policy.

Remembering the War

The withdrawal of American troops from Vietnam left the United States divided. Many Americans believed that America had a moral obligation towards the people fleeing the region. The New York Times often participated in this ethical debate at the national level.6 In the 1970s, it published editorials and caricatures that advocated for refugee resettlement and were critical towards policies that slowed or reduced aid. Contrasting points of view received little attention from the editors. Journalists assumed that everyone remaining in Vietnam after 1975 had a reasonable fear of persecution. Articles and letters to the editor disputing America’s moral duty were rare even after the paper reported that indiscriminate persecutions were not taking place. It seems clear that The New York Times wanted American humanitarian involvement to continue after military withdrawal.7

Letters to the editor, The New York Times, 22 April, 1975

Critical cartoons in the letters to the editor section represent the view that the United States was not doing enough to help the Vietnamese.

Distress in post-war South Vietnam was a recurring theme for The New York Times. Many journalists wrote feature articles that highlighted heartbreaking stories. For example, one article told the story of a young girl whose family was giving her up for adoption or marriage to Western strangers in order for her to continue her education. It went on to reveal that families had made suicide pacts so they would not have to live under the communist regime.8 As the number of refugees fleeing by boat increased, the paper reached out to survivors and published their testimonies.9 Refugees’ stories and memories of the past were used to underline the vulnerability of the displaced population and to defend a new, humanitarian commitment to the region.

Frances FitzGerald, “'Punch in! Punch Out! Eat quick!'” The New York Times, Dec 28, 1975

On December 28, 1975 The New York Times published a three page exposé on Vietnamese refugees in the US, complete with interviews and half a dozen photographs. 

The New York Times dedicated many articles to the lives of refugees who had resettled in the United States. The paper published inquiries meant to educate the public and patriotic stories that played up the ‘Americanness’ of the immigrant experience. To ease tensions that had arisen from Indochinese asylum seekers arriving in the United States, The New York Times wrote articles dispelling myths about the refugees and outlined ways in which their arrival would benefit America.10 In these articles, journalists did not shy away from the harsh realities that awaited refugees in the United States. Articles mentioned that the Vietnamese were underemployed in the U.S., that they faced discrimination and that they often had trouble adapting to American culture. The New York Times however counterbalanced this information with positive descriptions: the refugees were grateful, hardworking, intelligent, respectful and well educated.11 This, again, seemed to be a calculated decision to further promote refugee acceptance. When analysed as a whole, a recurring message can be seen in The New York Times’ reporting: Americans should feel obligated to fulfill their moral duty by helping past U.S. allies. 

Operation Babylift

Questions of morality extended beyond the war itself. It was not only asked if Americans should help Vietnam, but also how this aid should be provided if it were approved. Operation Babylift exemplified this debate. The Operation is often seen as a concrete manifestation of American feelings of responsibility and guilt.12 Operation Babylift orchestrated the evacuation of 3,300 children, many of whom were the children of American servicemen, out of Vietnam. Once they arrived in the United States, bilingual volunteers discovered that some of the children still had living parents.13 To make matters worse, one plane used in the Operation crashed and 138 people died, including 78 children, 35 employees of the Defense Attachés Office and 11 staff members of the U.S. Air Force.14

The New York Times presented mixed views on this issue. It promoted greater protection for refugees, while acknowledging that unmoderated humanitarian aid could become excessive. The articles and opinion pieces it published focused both on the children settling into life in the U.S. and on the moral quagmire caused by the Operation.15 Some articles approved of the decision to evacuate the children by presenting comforting stories of orphans adopted into happy American families.16 Others insisted that adopting children would not fix Vietnam’s systemic issues. They implied that the Operation was an act of cultural imperialism motivated by American guilt.17 Without undermining America’s moral duty towards Vietnam, this dual approach allowed The New York Times to highlight the interests of those receiving American aid. It showed that there was no simple ‘fix-all’ solution that could put an end to the crisis.

The Reagan Administration’s and the Refugee Crisis

The election of Ronald Reagan in 1981 brought about an ideological change in the White House. Among other things, the president wanted to inspire a new interpretation of the war and American diplomacy. Unlike Jimmy Carter who had advocated in favour of peaceful international relations, Reagan asserted the need for a more aggressive foreign policy.18 The administration used refugee protection as a strategic tool to reassert America’s role in overseas affairs and affirm its opposition to communism. In the 1980s, both refugee quotas and the definition of who should be considered a refugee were used as leverage in American foreign affairs.

Before Reagan’s election, the 1980 Refugee Act had determined that up to 168,000 Indochinese refugees could be resettled in the United States. The quota was however not met. Up to 16% of Indochinese cases were “deferred” as the Justice Department designated their subjects to be economic migrants, not refugees with a well-founded fear of persecution.19 First asylum countries in Southeast Asia bearing the brunt of the crisis, felt that these actions were unjust. Refugees were arriving in much larger numbers than they were being resettled, and transit camps were overcrowded and troubled. In 1981, Thailand considered closing its borders to its neighbours. To keep Thai camps open, the newly elected Reagan administration guaranteed the resettlement of all asylum seekers from Mainland Southeast Asia by announcing that the U.S. would process them as refugees. While the House Judiciary Committee worried about economic migrants arriving in the United States, the Reagan administration kept the pressure on Vietnam by insisting that it was persecuting its citizens.20

This new turn in the Indochinese refugee crisis received a restrained reaction from The New York Times. Its descriptions of refugee policy became brief and factual.21 In 1985, when The New York Times celebrated the tenth anniversary of the war it did not hesitate to use this event to criticize American interventions in Central America.22 However, these commemorative articles did not make a connection between the war and the refugee crisis.23 When the Reagan administration increased refugee quotas for political reasons, the paper did not question the arbitrary increase, nor did it widely advocate for more places. If it had taken such a position, it would have seemed as though The New York Times was endorsing Washington’s foreign politics. The paper’s reporting strategy had therefore undergone a drastic shift. A disparity appeared between the impassioned criticism of American foreign policy and the limited discussion of Indochinese refugees. The New York Times was once again making partisan editorial decisions, now by omission.

Bernard Gwertzman, “Side Effect of El Salvador,” The New York Times, Mar 14, 1981

In the 1980s, feelings towards refugees were becoming increasingly polarized in the United States. Members of the House of Representatives began publicly questioning the validity of Southeast Asian asylum claims. As more people attributed the boat people’s departure to economic hardships, the very definition of the term refugee came into question. The New York Times presented both sides of this debate. The paper published the opinions of those who doubted the vulnerability of the asylum seekers and those who maintained that they were refugees. In both cases, the refugee/migrant distinction was highly publicized.24 All sides acknowledged that de facto refugee status could not be granted indefinitely. The New York Times did not take a marked position in the debate. It did however continue to use the terms refugee and ‘boat people’ when referring to Southeast Asian asylum seekers. These terms carried a different connotation than economic migrant. They acknowledged that the people were fleeing a danger, and that they were facing hardships. Their use therefore suggests that the paper was still defending refugee protection.

In 1985, Bangkok, prompted by Vietnamese attacks against Khmer Rouge fighters in Thai refugee camps, renewed its attempts to repatriate the asylum seekers it was sheltering.25 Threats of repatriation pushed Reagan to increase refugee quotas by 1,000 a month.26 Since this renewed crisis aligned with the ten-year anniversary of the fall of Saigon, America’s moral obligation towards Vietnam once again became a matter of discussion. However, after a decade of refugee aid, many people believed that America’s “debt” to Vietnam had been repaid.27 The New York Times again approached this debate carefully. It contrasted articles that contested the increased refugee quota with emotionally charged pieces on refugee acceptance.28 The paper published articles that made refugees seem like the “perfect” American immigrants. They were becoming American citizens and saving up to go see the Statue of Liberty.29 While it did not generally support the Reagan administration, the paper withheld judgement of its migration policy and contented itself with the refugee resettlement that was taking place. There was no need for The New York Times to single out the government’s political motivations for refugee resettlement, since this type of combative journalism would only have undermined its own humanitarian agenda. At this point, the goals of the Reagan administration and The New York Times’ editorial boards coincided.

Contesting the End of Refugee Protection

With the implementation of the United Nations’ Comprehensive Plan of Action in the late 1980s, ‘boat people’ who arrived in first asylum countries after predetermined cut-off dates were no longer considered to be prima facie refugees. This decision incited a revival of opinionated reporting in The New York Times. Editorials advocated for refugee resettlement with a passion reminiscent of the Vietnam War.30 The paper’s word choice played an important role in delivering its message of “morality”. Although the paper acknowledged that many asylum seekers were fleeing economic hardships, it continued to refer to them as refugees or ‘boat people’. 

Thomas Kerr. Editorials/letters, The New York Times, 23 October, 1991
Titles of editorials in favour of refugee resettlement

Articles introduced the term “compassion fatigue” to describe the apathy caused by increasing numbers of refugees worldwide. The New York Times’ editorial page compared compassion fatigue to victim blaming and strongly condemned how it neglected human suffering.31 Besides passionate editorials, the paper also published photos of refugees being forced onto planes for repatriation in Hong Kong. These emotional images highlighted the suffering of those still held in transit camps. The year 1989 therefore marked a revival of moralizing journalism that had been sidelined for most of the 1980s. Over time, the newspaper reduced the number of articles it devoted to the crisis. Despite the decrease in coverage, it remained supportive towards refugee aid. The newspaper’s publishing strategy ensured a favorable presentation of the displaced population.[/efn_note] For an example of an article describing refugee treatment at the very end of the crisis, see Steven Erlanger, “Malaysia Accused On Boat People,” The New York Times, April 17, 1990. And for supportive letters to the editor, see Arthur Helton, “Thai Brutality,” The New York Times, March 8, 1988; Charles Schumer, “Congress Would Vote Funds for More Refugees,” The New York Times, January 25, 1989.[/efn_note]

Felicity Barringer, “'Repatriation' Is the Trend For Refugees Worldwide,” The New York Times, Nov 17, 1991.

Conclusion

The media coverage of The New York Times shows that the newspaper’s editorial board had a partisan view of the refugee crisis. Between 1975 and 1995, it alternated between silence and the persistent publication of editorials, feature articles and images to defend refugee protection. For Americans, the crisis in Southeast Asia was intrinsically linked to the Vietnam War. By repeatedly reminding its readers of the war and its consequences the paper underlined the ethical necessity of international aid. The crisis allowed Americans to debate their immediate responsibility for the refugees as well as to think about the future role of the United States either as a peacemaker or a police officer in the world order. The New York Times did not hesitate to use its influence as one of the largest and most influential newspapers in the United States to voice its opinion. It believed that the United States had a responsibility to help those who were in danger. The protection of Indochinese refugees was highly symbolic of that responsibility. In many ways, the Vietnam War had sullied America’s global reputation. By providing the displaced populations of continental South-East Asia with compassion and assistance, the United States could reassert its place as a beacon of hope and freedom.32

WHAT’S NEXT

Continue to the next article

Jump to a list of links and references for further reading

References

  1. For a list of relevant works on this topic see Moïse, Edwin E. “The Media”, Vietnam War Bibliography, http://edmoise.sites.clemson.edu/media.html.
  2. “Awards and Recognition.” The New York Times Company, https://www.nytco.com/company/prizes-awards/.
  3. Sydney H. Schanberg: “1976 Pulitzer Prizes.” The Pulitzer Prizes, https://www.pulitzer.org/prize-winners-by-year/1976; Henry Kamm: “1978 Pulitzer Prizes.” The Pulitzer Prizes, https://www.pulitzer.org/prize-winners-by-year/1978.
  4. See the analysis of the Globe and Mail, https://boatpeoplehistory.com/rp/media-repr/gm/
  5. A close reading of The New York Times articles, editorials and letters to the editors show that 46,374 articles were published on Vietnam with peaks appearing in 1975 and 1979. The displaced population was most often described as refugees (5,565 hits from 1975-1995). After 1977 the term ‘boat people’ was also used (1,545 hits from 1975-1995). The term migrant appeared less frequently but increased its use from an average of 43 monthly articles between 1975 to 1987 to 79 articles per month between the years 1988 to 1992. For more information see: Media Representations https://boatpeoplehistory.com/rp/media-repr/ (forthcoming).
  6. References to morality appeared with great frequency in 1975. After the war’s end the paper presented refugee protection as a necessity. See Editorial, “A Moral Responsibility,” The New York Times, April 24, 1975; Editorial, “‘We Have No Choice’,” The New York Times, May 5, 1975; Editorial, “‘Denying Our Heritage’,” The New York Times, May 7, 1975. Later on in the 1970s, the paper continued to present America’s moral duty as a given: Editorial, “Reprise: Moral Duty,” The New York Times, August 11, 1977.
  7. A letter from 1977 describes the need for Americans to overcome the bipartisan debate surrounding the legacy of the Vietnam War to help refugees and veterans: Charles Peters, “Vietnam Veterans and Refugees Still Exist,” The New York Times, Oct 24, 1977.
  8. Fox Butterfield, “A Saigon Question: Stay or Flee?” The New York Times, April 21, 1975.
  9. Fox Butterfield, “Saigon Economy Strained, Refugees Say,” The New York Times, September 22, 1975.
  10. Douglas Kneeland, “Fears on Refugees Called Unfounded,” The New York Times, June 27, 1975.
  11. James T. Wooten, “In U.S., Less Hope,” The New York Times, April 30, 1976; Gene Maeroff, “U.S. Schools Baffle Vietnamese Refugee Children,” The New York Times, Oct 12, 1975.
  12. Tracy Johnston, « Torment over the Viet non-orphans, » The New York Times, May 9, 1976.
  13. Nguyen Da Yen et al. v. Kissinger (1975) 528 F.2d 1194, US Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. For a more in-depth account of the implications of Operation Babylift see: Kathleen Ja Sook Bergquist, "Operation Babylift or Baby abduction: Implications of the Hague Convention of the Humanitarian Evacuation and Rescue of Children." International Social Work, vol. 52, no. 5, September 2009, p. 621-634.
  14. Aviation Safety Network. Lockheed C-5A Galaxy, Friday 4 April 1975. https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19750404-0
  15. Nan Robertson, “Vietnamese Adoptees in U.S. Are Settling In,” The New York Times, Jan 4, 1976; Tracy Johnston, “Torment over the Viet non-orphans: Non-orphans,” The New York Times, May 9, 1976.
  16. James Feron, “3 Orphans Land Here Amid Grief Over Saigon Crash,” The New York Times, April 5, 1975; The Associated Press, “Planeload of Vietnamese Orphans Arrives in U.S.,” The New York Times, April 3, 1975; Letters to the editor, “The Children's Airlift”, The New York Times, April 14, 1975.
  17. James P. Sterba, “American Couples Besiege Agencies for Vietnamese Orphans,” The New York Times, April 3, 1975; Roger Neville Williams, “The U.S. in Vietnam,” The New York Times, April 12, 1975; Carol Bernstein Ferry, “The Misused Children,” The New York Times, April 15, 1975.
  18. Reagan condemned resistance to military involvement overseas as a "Vietnam syndrome": Howell Raines, “Reagan Orders Cuts Of $3 Billion More In Spending For '82,” The New York Times, Feb 26, 1981.
  19. Bernard Gwertzman, “Policy That Limits Indochina Refugees Is Reversed By U.S.,” The New York Times, May 31, 1981.
  20. Edward T. Pound, “Cut To Be Sought In Refugee Quota,” The New York Times, Sep 23, 1981.
  21. Updates on the refugee crisis often were simply short Reuters articles. For an example see: Reuters, “U.S. Agrees to Accept More Vietnam Refugees,” The New York Times, June 27, 1984.
  22. For an example of a connection made between El Salvador and Vietnam see: Bernard Gwertzman, “Side Effect of El Salvador,” The New York Times, Mar 14, 1981. For an example concerning Nicaragua see: Tom Wicker, “Another U.S. Policy War for 'Democracy': Nicaragua looms after Vietnam,” The New York Times, Aug 15, 1986.
  23. An article published on the anniversary of the fall of Saigon offers an example: Charles Mohr, “History and Hindsight: Lessons From Vietnam,” The New York Times, Apr 30, 1985.
  24. See Robert Pear, “U.S. Panel Says Indochina Refugees May Increase,” The New York Times, Aug 14, 1981; Leo Cherne, “Economic Migrants,” The New York Times, Oct 3, 1981.
  25. Reuters, “Vietnam Attacks Condemned By U.S.,” The New York Times, Apr 18, 1984.
  26. Reuters, “U.S. Agrees to Accept More Vietnam Refugees,” The New York Times, June 27, 1984.
  27. Bernard Gwertzman, ‘The Debt To The Indochinese Is Becoming A Fiscal Drain,” The New York Times, Mar 3, 1985.
  28. The pro-resettlement articles often stressed that refugees saw the United States as a beacon of freedom: “Forgotten Refugees”, The New York Times, Nov 21, 1985.
  29. Special to The New York Times, “To Be A Citizen: A Newcomers’ Quest,” The New York Times, July 2, 1986; Samuel G. Freedman, “For Vietnamese Refugee, a Heartfelt Celebration of Liberty,” The New York Times, July 5, 1986.
  30. Editorial, “For Refugees: Open Arms, or Stiff-Arm?” The New York Times, Feb 29, 1988; Editorial, “Freedom Man, Mocked,” The New York Times, Jan 13, 1989.
  31. Editorial, “Boat People and Compassion Fatigue,” The New York Times, July 14, 1988; Editorial, “The Boat People and the Commonwealth,” The New York Times, Jan 5, 1990.
  32. Editorial, “America's Best Self,” The New York Times, May 12, 1975; Editorial, “Issue and Debate: U.S. Reviews Commitment To the Indochina Refugees,” The New York Times, Aug 3, 1977; Viet D. Dinh, “Drifting to Freedom: A Survivor's Story,” The New York Times, Jan 8, 1992.