-1

According to Shaws book on International Law:

The Soviet Union made considerable use of legal arguments in its efforts to establish its non-liability to contribute towards the peace-keeping operations of the UN [sic]. And the Americans too, justified their activities with regards to Cuba and Vietnam by reference to international law.

Q. What were the US arguments, I assume at the UN, with regards to its war in Vietnam?

If it's not clear, I'm not asking here about the political dimensions but it's legal dimensions; (although the political dimension would be welcome).

Improve this question

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
4

They were there at the invitation the government of Vietnam

This is the justification.

The government of South Vietnam was the internationally recognised government of South Vietnam (at least by the USA and it’s allies - it’s not a requirement of international law to be recognised by everyone). They were engaged in counter-insurgency against internal rebels. They asked the USA and other nations to help. Those nations agreed to help.

Improve this answer
6
  • Oh the history here - the US refused to help while Ngô Đình Diệm was in power in South Vietnam, so the South Vietnamese military arrested and then executed him and his brother in a coup, which opened the door to US assistance. Fuller involvement of the US military was then sold to the American public and the international community with the fake Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964.
    – user28517
    Commented Nov 23, 2020 at 21:31
  • @Moo but none of that changes the assessment that US military presence in South Vietnam was by invitation, does it?
    – phoog
    Commented Nov 28, 2020 at 23:48
  • @phoog it adds a huge caveat to the invite - the Soviet Union was “invited” into Afghanistan under similar “circumstance” for example and yet everyone considers that an invasion...
    – user28517
    Commented Nov 29, 2020 at 0:31
  • 1
    @Moo The OP asked for the legal justification- people can disagree on if it was valid- that’s why we have courts and tribunals. And politics.
    – Dale M ♦
    Commented Nov 29, 2020 at 2:44
  • 1
    @DaleM i dont disagree with your answer, Im just pointing out the history of it. The entire US involvement in the Vietnam war was based on some extremely questionable things - but then the same thing has been done over and over, see for example the US and other countries recognising opposition groups as the “legitimate government” of countries such as Syria, Libya etc when they are anything but - whether those groups can legally request military aid as a result is why those recognitions are done.
    – user28517
    Commented Nov 29, 2020 at 4:06

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .