Vietnam War POWs and MIAs left behind – Mythical Bullshit or Fact?

Vietnam War POWs and MIAs left behind – Mythical Bullshit or Fact?

Above Photo: American prisoners in the Hanoi Hilton in 1973, shortly before their release during Operation Homecoming (AP)

Our forthcoming film, MIA: A Greater Evil will bring fresh attention to the fate of those American servicemen who were left behind at the end of the Vietnam War.

Highly-charged debate continues in the US over this issue, and the below article is an example of the other side’s point of view. It provides a brisk and unsympathetic take on the history of POWs and MIAs alleged to have been left alive in the jungles of Asia, which the writer seems to believe is a conspiracy theory built around a myth.

The writer glosses over some important issues. He includes a very strong statement from a Brigadier General after the North Vietnamese supposedly released all American POWs in 1973, who “did not rule out the possibility that some Americans may still be held in Laos.” The writer doesn’t ask why some were left behind, who they were, where they were held and what the US should have done about it. Nor does he examine the large amount of supporting evidence that men were indeed left behind.

Instead he seems to believe the whole POW/MIA issue is a myth.

North Vietnamese soldiers carry an injured American POW to a prisoner exchange in Vietnam.

North Vietnamese soldiers carry an injured American POW to a prisoner exchange in Vietnam.

I totally disagree with this analysis.

The amount of evidence the CIA and national security agencies in the US picked up over decades – for example, unique authenticator codes of men lost over Laos and Vietnam, as well as names and secret escape signals stamped into the ground, visible by satellite long after the Vietnam War had ended. It beggars belief that faced with this body of evidence someone cannot reasonably conclude that men were indeed left behind and were abandoned by the US government in the jungles and caves of Laos, Vietnam and probably Cambodia too.

Further, many servicemen who’d been held in Laos but who were sent to Hanoi for the propaganda release of Hanoi Hilton prisoners in 1973, told of other American POWs alive in their former Laotian jungle camps who were not released. What happened to them?

Newly-released POWs from the Hanoi Hilton take off from Hanoi during Operation Homecoming.

Newly-released POWs from the Hanoi Hilton take off from Hanoi during Operation Homecoming.

Not one of the hundreds of POWs the US security services (rightly or wrongly) believed might still be held alive in Laos in 1973 was ever released from that country.

But I offer the below interesting article as evidence that this bitter debate still roils US politics and culture, and it won’t go away until there has been a full accounting of those who never came home.

Especially those held in Laos.

I have edited the below article (see link to full article at the end) and added photos for illustration.

The Enduring Cult of the Vietnam ‘Missing in Action’

By Nicholas Perlstein, The Nation newspaper

Inside the Hanoi Hilton, where US Prisoners of War can be seen at the windows.

Inside the Hanoi Hilton, where US Prisoners of War can be seen at the windows. (LIFE)

“I recently had occasion to attend an internment at a military cemetery in Washington State, over which flew, alongside the banners of all of America’s military service branches, the familiar “POW/MIA” flag with the forlorn, hangdog prisoner silhouetted in the foreground and guard tower and barbed wire in the back. Given the scale of national problems we’re facing these days, this one hardly registers a dent. But it creeps me out all the same. And if you deplore jingoistic, racist propaganda, it should creep you out, too—so, this afternoon, let me unburden myself.

When downed American pilots were first taken prisoner in North Vietnam in 1964, US policy became pretty much to ignore them―part and parcel of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s determination to keep the costs of his increasingly futile military escalation in Southeast Asia from the public. Then, one day in the first spring of Richard Nixon’s presidency, Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird announced the existence of from 500 to 1,300 of what he termed “POW/MIA’s.” Those three letters—“MIA”—are familiar to us now. The term, however, was a new, Nixonian invention. It had used to be that downed fliers not confirmed as actual prisoners used to be classified not as “Missing in Action” but “Killed in Action/Body Unrecovered.”

32 POWs who were released in Hanoi at the end of the Vietnam War (AP Photo/Horst Faas)

Some of the POWs who were released in Hanoi at the end of the Vietnam War. (AP Photo/Horst Faas)

The new designation was a propaganda scam. It let the Pentagon and State Department and White House refer to these 1,300 (later “1,400”) as if they were, every one of them, actual prisoners, even though every one of them was almost certainly dead. “Hundreds of American wives, children, and parents continue to live in a tragic state of uncertainty caused by the lack of information concerning the fate of their loved ones,” Secretary Laird said. That was part of an attempt to manipulate international opinion to frame the North Vietnamese Communists (against whom, of course, America was prosecuting an illegal and undeclared air war against civilians) as uniquely cruel, even though fewer men were taken prisoner or went missing in Vietnam than in any previous American war.

During the Johnson years, Sybil Stockdale, whose husband James was the highest-ranking and one of the earliest POWs, had organized a “League of Wives of American Prisoners of War” (later the National League of Families of Prisoners of War, then the League of Families of American Prisoners and Missing in Southeast Asia) which agitated for attention to the prisoners’ plight—against the Pentagon’s wishes.

The bracelet of a still-MIA airman whose plane was shot down over the Ho Chi Minh Trail in Laos and whose case I looked into recently.

The bracelet of a still-MIA airman, Captain Donald Brown, whose plane was shot down over the Ho Chi Minh Trail in Laos. I wrote about his crash and disappearance recently, and looked into it when I was in southern Laos. (© unknown)

Under Nixon, the Pentagon co-opted it, sometimes inventing chapters outright, as useful to their propaganda barrage. Their families showed up on news magazines and TV; “POW bracelets,” invented by the future wingnut congressman “B-1 Bob” Dornan, then a local Limbaugh on Orange County radio, were unveiled in the spring of 1970 at an annual “Salute to the Military” ball in Los Angeles. (Governor Ronald Wilson Reagan presided.) Bracelets soon sold at a rate of 10,000 a day. Matchbooks, lapel pins, billboards, T-shirts and bumper stickers (POWs never have a nice day!) proliferated, fighter jets made thunderous football stadium fly-bys, full page ads blossomed in every newspaper urging Hanoi to have a heart and release the prisoners for the sake of the children.

A bamboo prison photographed by a covert team in South Vietnam during the Vietnam War. SImilar prison cages held US POWs across the jungles of Laos.

A bamboo prison photographed by a covert team in South Vietnam during the Vietnam War. Similar prison cages held US POWs across the jungles of Laos.

Jonathan Schell, then of The New Yorker, observed that the American people were acting “as though the North Vietnamese had kidnapped…Americans and the United States had gone to war to retrieve them”—martyrs to an enemy so devious, as the Armed Forces Journal put it, that they denied hundreds of little boys and girls “a right to know if their fathers were dead or alive.” Ross Perot testified to Congress that when he visited North Vietnam to plead for their release they were incredulous at all this concern over “just 1,400 men.” Americans were plainly more morally sensitive than Communists.

Already, the issue made for “a lunatic semiology,” as the historian Richard Slotkin later described it, where “sign and referent have scarcely any proportionate relation at all.” But it sure was heartily useful to the national security state. When America’s involvement in the war ended in January, 1973, Nixon told his secretary of defense that the military-orchestrated celebration of their return, dubbed “Operation Homecoming,” was “an invaluable opportunity to revise the history of this war.”

This is when the story got even nuttier—when the propaganda slipped the bounds intended by its authors, and became more like the brooms in The Sorcerer’s Apprentice.

Another lucky POW - captured alive and later released: Navy pilot Robert H. Shumaker shot down over North Vietnam in 1965.

Another lucky POW – captured alive and later released: Navy pilot Robert H. Shumaker shot down over North Vietnam in 1965.

Operation Homecoming returned 587 American prisoners of war—but Nixon had by then settled on the number “1,600” as the number of Americans as “POW/MIA.” So where were the other 1,013? The brigadier general who supervised the repatriation announced that he “did not rule out the possibility that some Americans may still be held in Laos.” The secretary of defense promised, “We will not rest until all those still known captive are safe and until we have achieved the best possible accounting for those missing in action.”

Holding the government to that pledge had now become the raison d’être of the League of Families—an organization now all the stronger, thanks to its recent history as a veritable White House front group. Bracelets continued to be sold, now with the names of MIA on them. Next came that flag—pow-mia: you are not forgotten—soon flying over VWF and American Legion posts across the fruited plain. And barely months after the Operation Homecoming propaganda triumph, Chicago MIA families declared that the administration was “abandoning” men “seen in photos coming out of Indochina or who have been reported alive by returning POWs.”

US POWs in the Hanoi Hilton prison, Vietnam, before release during Operation Homecoming

US POWs in the Hanoi Hilton prison, Vietnam, before release during Operation Homecoming

The issue came to define the diplomatic relationship between the United States and Vietnam, a subject of considerable exasperation for Vietnamese officials now being called on to “prove” they held no more prisoners. As one of them reasonably exclaimed, “We have not come this far to hold onto a handful of Americans.” A congressman from Milwaukee, Clem Zablocki, opened hearings that fall to debunk the spreading absurdity. He assured concerned families, referring to the testimony both of American returnees and the North Vietnamese, “There are no missing in action or prisoners of war in Southeast Asia at this time that they believe are alive.” Which only meant, to many POW-MIA families, that Congress was just part of the cover-up. “Why are you willing to believe the enemy on this subject when they do not tell the truth on any other subject?” the Corpus Christi chapter of the National League of Families soon raged in a letter to the Pentagon. “The fact is, you have no proof our men are dead.” (Her emphasis.)

Another US Airman captured alive but injured after his plane was shot down over North Vietnam.

Another US Airman captured alive but injured after his plane was shot down over North Vietnam.

But how could there be proof that men shot down over jungles or the Gulf of Tonkin or the South China Sea were “really” dead? And so the “issue” endured. Governor Ronald Reagan, in Singapore as a special presidential representative for a trade deal, said that if North Vietnam didn’t return the POWs and MIAs supposedly still being held, “bombing should be resumed.” He accused liberals in Congress seeking to ban further military action in Southeast Asia of taking away “the power to sway those monkeys over there to straighten up and follow through on the deal.”

Here was the right-wing variant of the Watergate-induced dread about whether anyone in Washington could be trusted. It took on a life of its own. In 1975 a conservative Democratic congressman from Mississippi, Gillespie “Sonny” Montgomery, empaneled a House Select Committee on Missing Persons in Southeast Asia. He was initially sympathetic to the families’ claims of Communist perfidy. Then he led a delegation there which found their hosts warm, accommodating—and, once more, befuddled at what it was they were being asked to account for. (Just about every Vietnamese family had relatives who had disappeared in the war or whose remains could not be returned to the ancestral village—a sacred duty in Vietnamese culture.)

The POW/MIA flag.

The POW/MIA flag.

Montgomery concluded that the existence of American prisoners in Vietnam was almost certainly a myth. As a CIA pilot captured there in 1965 testified at one of the subcommittee hearings, “If you take a walletful of money over there, you can buy all the information you want on POWs on the streets” but “when you try to run them down they fizzle out somewhere down the line.” They also turned up evidence that China had manufactured stories of MIA’s still in prison camps in order to keep the US from normalizing relations with their Asian rival. Reagan, however, remained adamant: “If there is to be any recognition,” he boomed on the campaign trail in the spring of 1976, “let it be discussed only after they have kept their pledge to give a full accounting of our men still listed as missing in action.”

Henceforth paying ritual obeisance, hat in hand, at meetings of the League of Families of American Prisoners and Missing in Southeast Asia became presidents’ annual ordeal.”

See the trailer for our new film, M.I.A. A Greater Evil. Set in the jungles of Laos and Vietnam, the film deals with the possible fate of US servicemen left behind after the US pulled out of the Vietnam War.

For POWs left behind in Laos:

Link to the full article here: https://www.thenation.com/article/enduring-cult-vietnam-missing-action/

Like this? Share it.

Related Posts

2 Comments

  1. Roy Seals

    Your movie looks quite intense Peter, I can’t wait to see it.

    Reply
    • Peter Alan Lloyd

      Thanks Roy. We’re quite pleased with it so far, but there’s a long way to go in the editing process…

      Reply

Leave a Reply to Peter Alan Lloyd Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *