Despite their insistence that the complete withdrawal of U.S. troops was the condition for the release of prisoners of war, the Democratic Republic of Vietnam took little action to account for American POWs at the end of the Vietnam War. Almost two decades would pass following the end of the war before significant internal political changes, shifting regional alignments, changing Western interests, Sino-Soviet rapprochement, a nonmilitary settlement of the Cambodian conflict, and the collapse of the Soviet Union would bring Hanoi to the point of recognizing the importance of mending its relationship with the West. From the Paris peace talks to the U.S. government’s decision in 1994 to lift the trade embargo against Vietnam, Hanoi’s policy on American MIAs and POWs is examined, with particular focus on the influence of individual decision-makers on the process and the ways the Vietnamese leadership arrived at their negotiating strategies.

Clawhammer banjo player Lewis M. Stern has written about traditional musicians including Dwight Diller, Tommy Malbeouf, and Jim Scancarelli. He lives in Durham, North Carolina.

Lewis M. Stern
Format: softcover (6 x 9)
Pages: 203
Bibliographic Info: notes, bibliography, index
Copyright Date: 2012 [1995]
pISBN: 978-0-7864-6718-1
Imprint: McFarland

Preface and Acknowledgments    ix
Introduction    l
One POW /MIA Negotiations from the Paris Peace Talks to the Fall of South Vietnam, 1971-1975   5
Two Postwar POW /MIA Contacts and Conflicts, 1975-1981  19
Three Progress and Accountability During the Reagan Presidency, 1982-1989   29
Four Expanding POW/ MIA Dialogue and Activity, 1990-1991   45
Five Making Promises, Moving Forward: POW /MIA Cooperation in 1992   71
Six POW /MIA Issues and the Trudge Toward Normalization, 1993-1994   95
Seven Conclusion: Vietnam’s Approach to the POW /MIA Issue-Concepts, Negotiating Style, and Decision-Making   127
Notes   151
Bibliography   l 71
Index   185

• “An authoritative chronological narrative”—Choice
• “Highly valuable”—Indochina Chronology
• “Excellent…comprehensive, and informed”—Infantry