Skip to main content

The Fall of Saigon Revisited

April 30, 2025, would be 50 years since the Fall of Saigon. Ho Chi Minh (real name, Nguyen Sinh Cung), who also used the pseudonym Nguyen Ai Quoc, while in Paris, died before the reunification. This was pretty much the reverse of what happened between East Germany and West Germany, years later, on November 9, 1989. This event is when North Vietnam finally triumphed over South Vietnam. The democratic South Vietnam fell into the hands of the Communist North Vietnam, which was a totalitarian state. The event was the triumph of the Communist Party of Vietnam (CPV) and its armed wing, the Vietnam People's Army (VPA). Communism won, and the CPV still occupies Vietnam to this very day.

The Fall of Saigon proved that Communism can win. True enough, dictatorships do get toppled but not all dictatorships get toppled. The 1986 EDSA Revolution and the 1989 Berlin Wall proved that dictatorships can fall. However, Vietnam is still under a dictatorship. In fact, the reunification created a refugee crisis, as these people were unwilling to submit to the totalitarian government of Vietnam. Even today, Vietnam still retains a certain degree of totalitarianism.

The National Museum of American Diplomacy states this about the final days of the two-decade war:

Saigon in April 1975

Although the United States had withdrawn its military forces from Vietnam after the signing of the Paris Peace Accords in 1973, approximately 5,000 Americans remained–including diplomats still working in the U.S. embassy in Saigon. While President Nixon threatened a forceful response to a violation of the treaty, many factors, including lack of domestic support and the distraction of the Watergate scandal, provided an opportunity for the NVA to launch an offensive.

Throughout March and April 1975, the North Vietnamese Army captured more and more Southern cities. South Vietnamese citizens began to flee in mass numbers. The fall of the second-largest city, Da Nang, sparked even more refugees to depart.

In Saigon, South Vietnamese lined up at the embassy to gain entry to the United States. Patti Morton, a trailblazing Diplomatic Security Special Agent serving as a Regional Security Officer in Saigon—the first woman in such a role—documented the scene on the embassy grounds in the footage below, taken on an unknown day in April.

The Final Days: The Fall of Saigon

On April 29, 1975, North Vietnamese troops shelled Saigon’s Tan Son Nhut Air Base. U.S. Ambassador Graham Martin then ordered the evacuation of Saigon. As a signal to Americans in Saigon that the evacuation had begun, Armed Forces Radio started to play “White Christmas” on repeat.

By this point, sea lanes were blocked and planes could not land in Saigon, leaving only one option for an evacuation: a helicopter airlift.

After the defense attachĂ© compound was attacked, the U.S. embassy became the sole departure point for helicopters. The original plans called to only evacuate Americans, but Ambassador Martin insisted on evacuating South Vietnamese government officials and the embassy’s local staff.

Meanwhile, 10,000 South Vietnamese waited at the embassy gates, hoping to make it onto a helicopter.

From April 29th to April 30th, helicopters landed at 10-minute intervals in the embassy, including landing on the embassy roof. With some pilots flying for 19 hours straight, over 7,000 people were evacuated, including 5,500 Vietnamese, in less than 24 hours.

The Vietnamese Heritage Museum reveals this concerning the refugee crisis, as a result of the Fall of Saigon:

1975 Exodus

In 1960, there was renewed conflict in South Vietnam. Anti-communist forces, supported by the United States, which eventually sent in over 500,000 troops, sought to halt the spread of Soviet and Chinese-backed communism in Southeast Asia. The war in Vietnam led to greater waves of displacement in all three Indochinese countries. Most of the displacement was internal, but in some cases it spilled across borders, as in the case of the ‘Delta Khmer’ who fled into Cambodia to escape the fighting in Vietnam. By the late 1960s, when the war was at its height, an estimated half of South Vietnam’s 20 million people had been internally displaced. The Paris Peace Agreement of January 27th 1973 brought a temporary end to the Vietnam conflict and opened the door for a greater role of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), which launched a program to assist displaced people in Vietnam and Laos.

In the final days before the fall of Saigon in April 1975, some 140,000 Vietnamese who were closely associated with the former South Vietnamese government were evacuated from the country and resettled in the United States. The US-organized evacuation was followed by a smaller exodus of Vietnamese who found their own way by boat to flee to neighboring Southeast Asian countries. By the end of 1975, some 5,000 Vietnamese arrived in Thailand, 4,000 in Hong Kong, 1,800 in Singapore and 1,250 in the Philippines. The UNHCR’s initial reaction was to treat these movements as the aftermath of war rather than the beginning of a new refugee crisis.

The discontentment with the new communist regime increased, so did the number of people fleeing the country. In July 1976, the government in Hanoi stripped the Provisional Revolutionary Government, which had been established in the south after the fall of Saigon, off any remaining autonomy it possessed and unified the country as the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. It also embarked on a program of resettling urban dwellers in the countryside in so-called ‘new economic zones’. More than a million people were placed in ‘re-education camps’. Many died while tens of thousands were left in anguish in detention until the late 1980s. As time went by it also became clear that the prominence of the ethnic Vietnamese Chinese population in the private economic sector was contrary to the socialist vision of the new authorities. By early 1978, formal measures were being taken to expropriate businesses of private entrepreneurs, most of whom were ethnic Chinese Vietnamese.

Boat People

In 1977, about 15,000 Vietnamese sought asylum in Southeast Asian countries. By the end of 1978, the numbers fleeing by boat had quadrupled and 70 percent of these asylum seekers were Vietnamese of Chinese origin. Many more ethnic Chinese Vietnamese fled to China. They were mainly from northern Vietnam, where they had lived for decades, and they were mostly poor fishermen, artisans and peasants. China subsequently established a project to settle the refugees on state farms in southern China.

By the end of 1978 the problem had begun to reach alarming proportions, there were nearly 62,000 Vietnamese ‘boat people’ in refugee camps throughout Southeast Asia. Tens of thousands had crossed the border into Thailand. As the numbers grew, so did local hostility. Adding to the tension was the fact that several of the boats arriving on the shores of countries in Southeast Asia were not small wooden fishing craft but steel-hulled freighters chartered by regional smuggling syndicates and carrying over 2,000 people at a time. In November 1978, for example, a 1,500-tonne freighter, the Hai Hong, anchored at Port Klang, Malaysia, and requested permission to unload its human cargo of 2,500 Vietnamese. When the Malaysian authorities demanded that the boat be turned back to sea, the local UNHCR representative argued that the Vietnamese on board were considered to be ‘of concern to the Office of the UNHCR’. This position was reinforced by a cable from UNHCR headquarters suggesting that ‘in the future, unless there are clear indications to the contrary, boat cases from Viet Nam be considered prima facie of concern to UNHCR’. For more than a decade, Vietnamese who reached a UNHCR-administered camp were accorded prima facie refugee status and were given the opportunity of resettlement overseas. At the beginning of the Indochinese exodus in 1975, not a single country in the region had acceded to the 1951 UN Refugee Convention or the 1967 Protocol. None of the countries receiving Vietnamese boat people gave them permission to stay permanently and some would not even permit temporary refuge. Singapore refused to disembark any refugees who did not have guarantees of resettlement within 90 days. Malaysia and Thailand frequently resorted to pushing boats away from their coastlines. When Vietnamese boat arrivals escalated dramatically in 1979, with more than 54,000 arrivals in June alone, boat ‘pushbacks’ became routine and thousands of Vietnamese may have perished at sea as a result. By mid-1979, of the more than 550,000 Indochinese who had sought asylum in Southeast Asia since 1975, some 200,000 had been resettled and some 350,000 remained in first-asylum countries in the region. Over the previous six months, for every individual who moved on to resettlement, three more had arrived in the camps. At the end of June 1979, the member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) —Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand—issued a warning that they had reached the limit of their endurance and announced that they would not accept any new arrivals. ‘Pushbacks’ were in full speed and asylum was in jeopardy.

1979 International Conference on Refugees and Displaced Persons in Southeast Asia in Geneva

With the principle of asylum under direct threat, on 20 and 21 July 1979, 65 governments responded to an invitation from the UN Secretary-General to attend an international conference on Indochinese refugees in Geneva. The international commitments they made were several and significant. Worldwide resettlement pledges increased from 125,000 to 260,000.

As a result of the 1979 conference, the immediate crisis was averted. In what amounted to a three-way agreement between the countries of origin, the countries of first asylum and the countries of resettlement, the ASEAN countries promised to uphold commitments to provide temporary asylum as long as Viet Nam endeavoured to prevent illegal exits and to promote orderly departures, and as long as third countries accelerated the rate of resettlement. Indonesia and the Philippines agreed to establish regional processing centres to help resettle refugees more quickly and, with notable exceptions, pushbacks were halted. International resettlement, which had been taking place at the rate of around 9,000 per month in the first half of 1979, increased to around 25,000 per month in the latter half of the year. Between July 1979 and July 1982, more than 20 countries—led by the United States, Australia, France, and Canada—together resettled 623,800 Indochinese refugees. From 1980 to 1986, as resettlement out-paced declining arrivals, refugee officials began to speak with growing optimism about solving the regional crisis.

For Vietnamese living abroad, Uncle Ho was still a monster. The successors weren't any better. It was a 20 year war, which caused massive deaths, even to the citizens of North Vietnam. The Vietnam War started in 1955 and ended in 1975. One can only imagine how life was disrupted on both sides, and how the South was hoping they would win. However, the South Vietnamese lost and the North Vietnamese took over, forcing the democratic south to accept Communist rule. 

If anything, Vietnam has better economics today, despite still being under a Communist regime. After all, in the 1980s, one man named the late Nguyen Duy Cong (who died in 2018 at 101) founded Doi Moi. Doi Moi became the instrument that allowed free marekts, despite Vietnam's supposed status as a Communist country. 

Popular posts from this blog

BRUTAL Truth: Stop HOPING for Another "PNoy-Like President" Because the Parliamentary System will Produce MUCH BETTER Leaders

Let me get this straight, I'm not here to totally dismiss the good that the late Benigno Simeon "Ninoy" C. Aquino III did. I'll try to be least biased  when I'm writing this to "give a shock" to those who tend to treat his term as a "magical time". However, I'm going to have to warn people about the problem of looking for "another Messiah leader". Yesterday was the would've been 66th birthday of Noynoy if he were alive. One can talk good about Noynoy's legacy. However, we need to realize that relying on Noynoy's term is a violation of the Mahathir Mohamad principle of "Never stop learning."  We need to think that there's only one Noynoy and when he died, he died . TV-5 reveals that Rep. Edgar Erice, a long-time friend of the late leader, also said the following: Caloocan City 2nd District Rep. Edgar Erice made the remark in a social media post marking Aquino’s 66th birth anniversary.  In the post, he co...

The 1986 Snap Elections Would Also Disprove the Myth of the "Marcos Parliament"

Anti-charter change proponents love to use Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. among their reasons, to defend their stand. The argument is that "charter change must be evil" because Marcos used it--a fallacy of Guilt by Association . Please, even Atty. Maria Leonor Gerona-Robredo's supporter  Andrew James Masigan  supports charter change! Now, we must look at Marcos and remember another significant event. It's the 1986 snap elections and why it's also proof that we never had a parliamentary form of government. February 7, 1986, was when Marcos declared snap elections. Two years before the snap election, Marcos even declared that the Philippines was never a parliamentary government under him : The adoption of certain aspects of a parliamentary system in the amended Constitution does not alter its essentially presidential character . Article VII on the Presidency starts with this provision:  ‘the President shall be the Head of State and Chief Executive of the Republic of the Ph...

Justice for Kingston Ralph Ko Cheng

Would you still want to hate to follow rules? Well, it's time to think about the tragic loss of Kingston Ralph Ko Cheng , who lost his life because someone in the road didn't want to follow simple guidelines. It was two days ago when, suddenly, Kington's life was taken away from him. It was difficult for me to process what happened. I would like to share my thoughts of this reckless incident of what happens when laws are ignored. Either you become the victim (for not following rules) or you end up someone who follows rules (like what happened to Kingston). Here's something I found on Facebook : The Price of Paper Laws   Kingston Ralph Ko Cheng was 23. A Monash university graduate, a talented musician, and a cafĂ© owner, he moved back to Cebu to build a life. That life ended on a pedestrian crossing near his home.   A speeding Toyota Innova hit him with such force it threw his body into a utility pole. The driver, 21-year-old Sean Andrew Pajarillo, had already hit a parke...

Facts vs. Gossip: The "Chona Mae" Incident is Proof You NEED to Verify What You Hear

It was in 2012 when the Chona Mae incident happened. I remember the panic when people were running the opposite direction while I was working at Downtown, Cebu. The traffic was bad. People were panikcing. But the real twist? It was actually a father looking for his daughter, whose identity we may never know.  The Cebu Daily News   said this last 2022, which was before entering the post-COVID world: CEBU CITY, Philippines — It has been a decade since the famous “Chona Mae” line was uttered by a father looking for her daughter after a 6.9 magnitude earthquake struck the island of Cebu, February 6, 2012 .  From what was a simple call of a father to his daughter turned out to be the biggest tsunami scare in Cebu City.  “Ang tubig naa na sa Colon!” ("The Water is already in Colon!") was the line that has gotten everyone running on the street of Cebu looking for shelters up in the mountain parts of Cebu.  Today, we remember that frightful yet somehow funny day that w...

Learning About Chinese Dialects

As I look back on my college days, I recall learning more about Chinese history in a Chinese Language Class elective. Yes, it was going back to Grade 1 Chinese, but doing Grade 1 Chinese right. I looked at this video and thought of China's many dialects. A dialect is defined by the Oxford dictionary as, "a particular form of a language which is peculiar to a specific region or social group." The subject was taught in English, not requiring students to learn Hokkien first, and it was how the Chinese school system should've been. Most Chinese Filipinos (like myself) are Hokkien speakers. Amoy is known as Xiamen today, a coastal city of the Fujian Province. I was shocked to learn there are many different types of Chinese, such as Cantonese (used in Hong Kong), and I wasn't shocked to learn that Hainan and Hakka are other dialects in China. Similar to Filipino, China has several languages too! In the Philippines, we have Tagalog, Cebuano, Kapampangan, Waray, and Hilig...