From the Steppes of Russia to Monte Cassino - The brave history of the Polish 2nd Corps

May 18th next year marks the 70th anniversary of the victory of the famous battle at the Monastery of Monte Cassino in Southern Italy in 1944. This highly significant battle was one of the most important Allied victories of the war, and had by then been raging for nearly six months. Its capture from the German Army had required four separate hard fought bloody battles involving Allied soldiers from Britain, America, Canada, France, Morocco, India, Poland, and New Zealand. However, its success and significance were largely overshadowed early the following month by the D-Day landings in Normandy which signaled the beginning of the end of WWII.

Soldiers of the 2nd Polish Corps at the battle of Monte Cassino, May 1944     

For the Poles it represented the pinnacle of their wartime achievements. In the battle, members of the celebrated Polish 2nd Corps led the final successful assault and capture of the mountain top monastery. How proud it was for them - in the eyes of the world - to raise the red and white Polish flag above the captured ruins. For most of the Polish soldiers who participated it was their first combat involvement since their homeland was invaded by Germany nearly five years earlier on the first day of September 1939.

But who were those Polish soldiers at Monte Cassino? Why were they there in Southern Italy? Where had they come from? How had they arrived there? And most importantly, why were they even bothered about fighting at all? 

Polish Monte Cassino medal certificate

Most of the Poles there had originated from the eastern borderland region of Poland known as Kresy and theirs is the tragic and truly unbelievable story of the short lived 2nd Polish Army Corps.

Born in Russia's frozen steppes from the emaciated remnants of a Polish nation exiled to Stalin's labor camps in Siberia, who against all odds and despite unimaginable hardships, murder, intrigue, conspiracy, international betrayal, mystery and controversy, they developed into an elite fighting force in a hopeless struggle to liberate a homeland that would never be free. Theirs is a story that occurred during a largely unknown and poorly documented period of modern history that has been denied by successive Russian Administrations and overlooked by Western governments and media: a story hidden from most in the West.  But it is a story with long lasting ramifications - a story that continues to the present day.

Even before the victory at Monte Cassino, the allies, who had gone to war in Poland’s defense, had abandoned her to Stalin’s demands for the Kresy region to be permanently incorporated into the Soviet Union. For the disillusioned Polish soldiers there was no recognizable country of their own left that they felt able to accept. They knew that they could never return to their homes or the families they had left behind ever again.

For most of the Poles at the battle of Monte Cassino it was just the next phase in a long battle that had started in late 1939 at the start of the war. At that time, over a million Polish citizens were deported, not by German, but by advancing Russian troops. They had battled starvation and brutality just to stay alive, in prisons, in cramped cattle trucks, in the bowels of murderous ‘Slave ships’ and in Soviet hard labor camps: the dreaded Gulags. 

Ex 2nd Polish Corps combatant Jósef Królczyk

They received an unlikely “amnesty” in 1941 when Germany invaded Russia and Stalin was desperate for anybody to help him fight against Hitler’s mechanized war machine. On release they had to find their way to recruiting centers in an attempt to join a Polish Army being created by the charismatic General Wladyslaw Anders. They moved through Russia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, and for those lucky enough, onto Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Palestine, Egypt, and eventually to Italy. Once there, loyal to the Polish Government-in-Exile in London, they fought without fear in battles against the German Army - hoping to in vain for the opportunity to liberate Poland.

Success on the battlefield was tempered by catastrophes on the political field. The already strained Polish relationship with Russia moved to breaking point in 1943 when the bodies of thousands of military officers, academics, politicians, and doctors murdered in 1940 were discovered at Katyn near Smolensk. General Sikorski, leader of the Polish Government-in-Exile, demanded an immediate independent investigation. Stalin was incensed and severed all diplomatic relations. Within weeks Sikorski had died in a mysterious plane crash and as Stalin’s Red Army grew stronger and pushed further west towards Berlin he demanded acknowledgement from the allies for his puppet Polish Government. The allies needed Stalin and distanced themselves from the Polish Government-in-Exile, and so the fate of the Polish 2nd Corps was sealed.

For most, like General Anders, the man who was arguably the savior of the exiled Poles and millions of other Poles around the world, the fight to see a free Poland has never been won. Many, including Anders, died in exile never returning to see the country of their birth. The Poland that they knew and fought so long and hard for would never return. Even now, with Poland fully integrated into the European Union, the pre-war Polish Kresy region, lost to the Russians in September 1939, is now part of Belarus and Ukraine.

Sanctuary was reluctantly offered by Britain and as the Polish 2nd Corps was disbanded the soldiers moved through the Polish Resettlement Corps to new lives in England, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia where known as Polonia they still maintain strong Polish communities. Even the memory of the Polish 2nd Corps is kept alive with active ex-combatants groups and the name of Anders and the Polish 2nd Corps, once ridiculed and denounced in Communist Poland, has at last been recognized and honored. It is now quite rightly remembered with pride for their place in modern Polish history.

By Frank Pleszak

The father of author Frank Pleszak was deported to Siberia aged 19 and Frank has had the story of his journey published by Amberley entitled “Two years in a Gulag”. Frank is also finalizing a book on the concise history of the Polish 2nd Corps for publication next year and is a contributor to the Kresy-Siberia Virtual Museum.

Polish 2nd Corps Facebook – Click here | Polish 2nd Corps Twitter­­ – Click here | Kresy-Siberia Virtual Museum – Click here

And what happened once the Soviets dominated Eastern Europe? Click here to read about escaping Poland’s neighbor, Czechoslovakia, with the ‘freedom tank’. 

The Australian gold rush as you’ve never seen it before – Image of the week

This week’s image (or images) of the week looks at a few photos of people being transported to the Australian gold rush… Probably as you’ve never seen it before!

The first image above shows a gold miner who cycled a round trip of 1,000 miles to a gold rush in Western Australia in 1895.

The image is in the public domain and available here.

The second image features a stage coach laden with luggage and many Chinese people en route to the gold fields. It is from the early 20th century.

This image is also in the public domain and available here.

George Levrier-Jones

Missed last week’s image of the week from New Orleans? Just click here!

To New Zealand. Elizabeth Yates, the British Empire’s first female mayor

Elizabeth Yates (1845–1918) was the mayor of Onehunga in New Zealand in 1894, just two months after women gained the right to vote in New Zealand. This made her the first woman to be a mayor anywhere in the British Empire.

Elizabeth Yates

Born Elizabeth Onan in Scotland, she was the older of two daughters. She moved with her parents and sister to Auckland, New Zealand in 1853, where her father worked as a laborer. Onehunga, which is now a suburb of Auckland, was an important harbor at the time. Most shipping in the 19th century came to Onehunga via South Africa and Australia from Great Britain.

Elizabeth was married to master mariner Captain Michael Yates in 1875. He became mayor of Onehunga from 1888 to 1892 until he had to retire due to ill health.

By the time of her husband’s retirement, Elizabeth had already been involved in politics. She strongly supported women’s suffrage, and participated in debates at the Auckland Union Parliament. Also, Elizabeth was the first woman to record her vote in 1893 when women were first legally allowed to vote in New Zealand in parliamentary elections.

When her husband stepped down as mayor, she accepted the nomination for the office. Only a few months after New Zealand women led the world by voting in a general election, Elizabeth Yates defeated her opponent Frederick Court at the poll. The race was very close, decided by only 13 votes. She was sworn in on January 16, 1894.

Manukau Harbour and Onehunga from Mangere Bridge, before the urbanization of Onehunga.

Her appointment as the first female mayor in the British Empire was news around the world. Queen Victoria even congratulated her on her election.

“Women’s enfranchisement proceeds apace. Early this morning I read of the election of the new mayor of Onehunga, Mrs. Elizabeth Yates! She defeated a male candidate. If we Britishers have a queen, why not a lady mayor?” (Letter To the Editor. Wellington, December 30, 1893. The Inland Printer, Volume 12. Maclean-Hunter Publishing Corporation, 1894.)

Along with her appointment as mayor she also automatically became a Justice of the Peace. She occasionally officiated as magistrate in cases involving women.

Elizabeth Yates was an able and effective administrator. During her tenure as mayor, she liquidated the borough debt, established a sinking fund, reorganized the fire brigade, and upgraded roads, footpaths, and sanitation.

Despite all her accomplishments, she met stubborn opposition in her role as mayor. When she was elected, four councilors and the town clerk resigned immediately in protest. A group of three councilors organized against her, opposing her every proposal. Even members of the town joined in, cramming the council chamber to hoot and jeer at her at every meeting. Critics blamed her for bringing it on herself by being “tactless” and “dictatorial” and disregarding established rules of procedure.

All of her achievements were accomplished with only one year as mayor: Elizabeth was defeated in the polls in November of the same year, 1894. Afterwards, she served on the Borough Council for two years from 1899 to 1901.

In 1909, Elizabeth was admitted to Auckland Mental Hospital for reasons unknown. She died while still in the hospital on September 6, 1918, and now rests beside her husband in St. Peter’s churchyard in Onehunga.

First country to grant women suffrage?

Of all the countries which still exist independently today, New Zealand was the very first to grant women the right to vote on September 19, 1893. The Corsican Republic, Pitcairn Island, the Isle of Man, and the Cook Islands, along with various American states and territories, granted women suffrage before New Zealand.

This article by KeriLynn Engel was originally published on AmazingWomenInHistory.com, a website about all the kick-ass women the history books left out. Article here.

Stay tuned for more great articles from the likes of KeriLynn!

Even better, join us here.

After slavery was abolished in the USA - Oral Culture and Political Mobilization in the Post-Bellum South

This article was originally previewed on the blog. You can find the full-length article in issue 2 of our magazine, History is Now, published in November 2013. 

Click here for more information on the magazine.

Meanwhile, here is the start of the article... 

In the era of modern electronic communications it is sometimes hard to appreciate the immense difficulty which previous generations had in passing messages over both large and not so large distances.  An era in which the written word was the sole means of correspondence with other communities, relations and business interests, made responses slow, with no guarantees of them being received.  This method was of course the preserve of the educated few and seems to those who enjoy instant world-wide correspondence as almost pre-historic.  It is harder to imagine the difficulties which the poor and illiterate had in conveying their message to friends and family outside of their locality.

African-American slaves dancing to music. Name: The Old Plantation, late 18th century, artist unknown.

The rural mid-nineteenth century Southern States of America was populated by millions of poor and illiterate black and white people. The black slave population, continuously denied the most basic of rights, were never going to be presented with a chance to better themselves educationally....

Click here for information on the magazine on iTunes. 

Click here for our magazine information page.

The full-length article is by Barry Sheppard, a talented part-time blogger with a varied and growing list of historical interests.

‘Hoisting of American colors over Louisiana’. New Orleans – Image of the week

This week’s image of the week takes us to the southern US - New Orleans to be exact.

This patriotic painting shows the French tricolore coming down and the American stars and stripes coming up, with a beautiful sky in the background… But what is it about?

The "Hoisting of American Colors over Louisiana" is a painting depicting the raising of the US flag in New Orleans following the Louisiana Purchase, in the main plaza (now Jackson Square). The ceremony took place on March 10, 1804. It was painted by Thure de Thulstrup in 1904 on a commission to commemorate the centennial of the event. The painting has been praised for the research and historical accuracy which went into the period depiction. It is on display in the Cabildo Museum.

The image is in the public domain and available here.

Is there a history image that you love? Or a history image from your local area that you would like to share with us? If so, let us know! Click here.

George Levrier-Jones

Unknown World War I - The underground battlefield of tunnel warfare

Our mental image of the First World War usually excludes the army of tunnellers who toiled beneath the trenches. We picture the war in grainy, treeless black and white landscapes or stern portraits of men in heavy uniforms. Mud, trenches, heavy artillery and rows of wooden crosses come to mind, overflown by fragile biplanes and the menace of Zeppelins.

The tunnellers are forgotten. That’s because there are so few photos of a dark, dangerous activity that most contemporary soldiers preferred to ignore.

A more common view of World War I - British soldiers in a German trench during the Battle of the Somme, July 1916

The impact of tunnel warfare 

On June 7 1917 the British attack on the Messines ridge, in south Belgium, began with the detonation of nineteen huge underground explosions beneath the German trenches. Each one literally ripped a hole in the German defenses, making it easier for the advancing British to achieve their objectives.

Every explosion was caused by an underground mine, created by digging a tunnel and then filling it with explosives. When it was detonated, the mine destroyed everything above it.

Around 10,000 German soldiers were never accounted for after the battle of Messines and many of them were probably killed when the mines erupted. The explosions were so loud they could be heard in London, over 130 miles away.

Unexpected and devastating, mines were impossible for the individual soldier to defend against. Because of their work, tunnellers were both respected and reviled.

 

Lochnagar Crater in 2012 - Created by a British mine in 1916

The difficulties of tunnel warfare

Much of the First World War involved fighting over a relatively narrow strip of land running from the Swiss border to the English Channel. Carved up into a web of trenches and dominated by machine guns, going underground was one of the few options for outflanking the enemy.

Both sides dug miles of tunnels. They started from behind their own lines, cut through the rock below no man’s land and ended, or even emerged, below or near the enemy trench.

Sometimes rival groups of tunnellers met, as their paths collided. Short, sharp encounters followed, out of sight, which usually ended in one side blowing up the tunnel. Some of those who fell remain entombed in the passages they helped construct.

The tunnellers biggest enemy was carbon monoxide, the silent killer that also stalked the coal mines where so many had worked before military service. The canary is one of the least remembered of the animals that served the British army, but many died as a primitive, but effective, method of detecting gas.

 

One of the many tunnels under Vimy Ridge

The First World War tunnels today

Sections of tunnel are open to the public at Vimy Ridge in France, where the geology made tunneling easy and prolific. While many passages stretch out across the battlefield towards the enemy, they were also used as accommodation and storage, and some signs of these uses still remain.

In 2011 a major project began to excavate part of the Somme battlefield, at La Boisselle in France. This was one of the most tunneled areas during the First World War and the site is within a stone’s throw of Lochnagar Crater, a deep hole blown in the earth by a mine in 1916 and still very visible today.

The British created twenty-one mines at Messines in 1917 but only detonated nineteen, because the others were outside the area of battle. The locations of the remaining two mines were lost until, in 1955, one went off during a thunderstorm. Fortunately, no one was hurt. But one mine, with the power to gouge a hole in the Flanders countryside, remains undiscovered to this day.

By Andrew Knowles

This article originally appeared on Andrew’s site infamousarmy.com, an excellent personal research blog on British military history from 1789 to 1945. Click here to see the site.

For more updates on our articles on British and international history, why not like us on Facebook? Click here!

References:

• The La Boisselle Study Group: http://www.laboisselleproject.com/
• The Tunnellers Memorial: www.tunnellersmemorial.com
• WW1 underground: Unearthing the hidden tunnel war: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-13630203

The death of gentlemanly war? The Battles of the Wars of the Roses 1455-1464

In the next in our series on the Wars of the Roses, this article looks at the key battles in the early years of the war. It follows our introduction to the Wars of the Roses available here and our article on Edward III’s descendants and the causes of the Wars of the Roses available here.

The grand old Duke of York, he had 3,000 men, he marched them toward London in order to fight for his right to be King.

Richard Plantagenet had an unbroken male line all the way to Edward III and so assumed he was more entitled to rule England than the mad king and his infant son. On May 22, 1455 Richard, leading the Yorkist army, marched on London. King Henry VI, leading the Lancastrian force, marched to intercept it and halted at St. Albans thinking an ambush would be in his benefit. He was wrong; the Yorkists defeated the Lancaster force in 30 minutes. Henry was now a prisoner and his Queen and their son were in exile. This was the first battle of the Wars of the Roses; its brutality would set the stage for the war that changed the face of England and changed the way the nation fought. It was also the first battle where Richard Neville – the Earl of Warwick – put fear in the enemy. Warwick would go on to have a near perfect battle record - his presence was like a secret elixir spurring the Yorkists to victory. That alone must have helped break the Lancastrian spirit as it took them four years to rally an army and stage a counter-attack. The battle of Ludford Bridge left the Yorkist army desecrated and running into the night. Indeed, there was a full scale retreat in the morning led by Richard of York, who fled to Ireland. As you can imagine, the Earl of Warwick did not attend this battle. Could that be why the Yorkists deserted in the night and why the Lancasters walked away with victory?

Shakespeare's King Henry VI, part III, act II. Warwick, Edward and Richard at the Battle of Towton

Nine months later, the Earl of Warwick, his father and the Earl of March led their army north to attack a Lancastrian army marching south. When the two armies met, Warwick chose discussion rather than battle and spent hours trying to reach a settlement with the King. Then finally, out of frustration, the Yorkist force attacked and won. The crown was now clearly under Yorkist control. England believed the civil war was over but the mad King’s Queen was assembling an army and planned to fight for her heir.

The battle of Wakefield is considered to be the end of chivalrous warfare. Until that point, those in retreat were not killed. Nor were nobles. There were rules to war. On December 30, 1460 those rules came to an end. Richard of York travelled to the city of York and took up a defensive position at Sandal Castle. For some unknown reason, Richard left his stronghold and directly attacked the Lancastrian force even though it was twice the size of his army. The Yorkists were brutalized; retreating soldiers were slaughtered as they ran. And Richard of York, the man who fought to call himself King, was killed in cold blood. The Lancastrians walked away victorious and to show their victory, they captured the Earl of Warwick’s father and brother and executed them. Nobles were not meant to be slain; those were not the ways of chivalrous warfare. Were the Lancastrians so desperate that they ignored chivalry or were the murders of Warwick’s father and brother a sign to him?

There were three more battles before the battle of Towton - one of the most important of the civil war. These three little engagements fuelled the fires of anger in both camps, especially since the Lancastrians managed to win one more battle. Interestingly enough, the Earl of Warwick was present at this engagement. Knowing full well what happened to his brother and father, Warwick fled, leaving his hostage King Henry VI under a tree. The sad old King was to be finally reunited with his Queen and son.

On March 29, 1461, the Yorkist forces attacked in a driving snowstorm, on a sloping hill at Towton. Using the snow and wind as an aid, the Yorkist archers were able to shoot further than their adversaries. The Lancastrians, believing that their best strategy was to charge, managed to weaken the Yorkist force. After hours of intense fighting, the Duke of Norfolk arrived with reinforcements which helped to defeat the Lancasters. Having lost their army, their weapons and their spirit, King Henry VI, his Queen and their son fled to Scotland, leaving a victorious Earl of March to be crowned King Edward IV. There were two more battles at Hedgeley Moor and Hexham over the next few years, but they did nothing more than further break the Lancastrian cause.

Edward IV may have been a ferocious and clever fighter but as a King and politician he was severely lacking. The Cousin’s War would have ended on the day he was crowned and the Plantagenets would more than likely still have been on the throne decades, if not centuries, later had Edward kept his nose clean and ruled the way he was advised to. But alas, fate had other ideas. And so after only eight years of peace, Edward’s own policies forced the civil war to rise from the dead. He forced the house of York and the house of Lancaster to once again do battle.

And as Shakespeare said, England hath long been mad and scarred herself; the brother blindly shed the brother’s blood, the father rashly slaughtered his own son; the son, compelled, been butcher to the sire: all this divided York and Lancaster.

What battle from The Wars of the Roses most intrigues you?

By M.L King, a history enthusiast and part-time blogger.

The next article in The Wars of the Roses series is the Kingmaker, the Earl of Warwick - available here.

Join the debate and hear about the next in the series! JOIN US and we’ll keep you updated! Click here.

References

Encyclopaedia Britannica: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/509963/wars-of-the-roses

http://www.warsoftheroses.com

The Road to Bosworth Field by Trevor Royle (published by Little, Brown)

Syria in a different age – Image of the week

In the first of a regular series, we bring you the first of our images of the day – this beautiful painting! 

This image is of Damascus, capital of Syria. It shows The Hamareh (Suk Ali Pasha)  bazaar in Damascus in 1907. In the image we can see the sunlight streaming into the bazaar, as well as a mixture of animals and people going about their daily business.

This image comes from the Travelers in the Middle East Archive (TIMEA).

The original source is Margoliouth, David Samuel. "Cairo, Jerusalem, & Damascus: three chief cities of the Egyptian Sultans". With illustrations in color by W.S.S. Tyrwhitt, and additional notes by Reginald Barratt. Chatto and Windus: London, 1907, p 230.

See image here.

Is there a history image that you love? Or a history image from your local area that you would like to share with us? If so, let us know! Click here.

George Levrier-Jones

Cold War Taiwan’s Electronic Industry

In this article we look at the importance of countries such as the US in the growth of the Taiwanese economy in the 1960s, and consider the role of the electronic industry in those Cold War years. 

President Eisenhower's trip to Taiwan in 1960

Taiwan’s entry into the global economy was facilitated by a relationship between the Nationalist military and the US.

Taiwan focused on direct exports, subcontracting, consignment work for foreign corporations, and joint ventures. These opportunities provided substantial employment opportunity in Taiwan where, by the mid-1960s, 150,000 additional jobs were needed each year to keep pace with population growth.

In 1966, 723 new factories were established in Taiwan by foreign private corporations, creating 30,000 new job openings annually, 20% of the annual deficit. Moreover, Taipei’s relatively large number of trained professional management and technical persons was a factor in attracting industry.

One corporate executive noted the large reservoir of local talent stating:

In Taiwan trained people work at lower levels than anywhere else. There were many trained engineers among the refugees from the mainland who were working as porters.

Most of the trained refugees had settled in Taipei. Consequently, few Americans were assigned as resident managers in Taipei and most jobs went to local residents, not American expatriates.

An in-depth look at the electronics industry will expand our understanding of the penetration of the local economy by the multinational firm and the associated impact on Taipei’s urban development.

The Electronics Industry

By 1968 the electrical and electronic goods industry was Taiwan’s second biggest exporter after textiles and by 1984 it overtook textiles. The two industries were quite different.

Unlike textiles, the electronics industry had no base in Taipei prior to the arrival of the multinational corporation in the 1960s. It was shaped by global forces from the very beginning. Most of its production was exported, chiefly to the United States. The industry was characterized by a few foreign-invested assemblers, most from the US, and many locally and privately owned suppliers of components to them. Thus, the industry was strongly associated with the emergence of SME’s (small and medium enterprises), which eventually became the core of Taipei’s export sector.

As previously mentioned, the electronics sector was targeted as desirable by the military which was deeply involved in efforts to solicit foreign investment, along with the assistance and advice of US AID. Their hard work brought in first General Instruments (1964) and then other companies which set up bonded export factories throughout the island.

Much of the US incentive came from a need to compete with the Japanese.

In 1953, a Taiwanese firm (Tatung) had signed the first ever technology agreement between a Taiwanese and a Japanese firm. The Japanese company agreed to take engineers from the Taiwan firm for training. The agreement was supported and even funded by US AID (formerly the Economic Cooperation Administration).

By the late 1950s, a number of Japanese firms began seeking local partners for electrical assembly in order to obtain lower labor costs. Seven joint ventures were formed by 1963.

In the next two years, 24 US firms entered into production agreements with the Taiwanese. In 1965, the first export-processing zone opened in Kaoshiung in the south of Taiwan. The bonded factories established by many US firms offered basically the same advantages — relatively unfettered conditions in return for exporting all of their production. The object was to cut costs by getting the labor-intensive part of semi-conductor manufacturing — connecting the wire leads and packaging — done more cheaply than was possible at home.

By 1966, the Taiwanese government had decided to make Taiwan into an “electronics industry center.’

A Working Group for Planning and Development of the Electronics Industry was established to assist in marketing, coordinating production with the demands of foreign buyers, procuring raw materials, training personnel, improving quality, and speeding up bureaucratic approval procedures.

In 1967 and 1968, major exhibitions were held to introduce local manufacturers and foreign investors to each other. The objective was to take what began in Taiwan as an enclave industry and use it to create an entirely new sector of parts and components makers and, eventually, assemblers of finished goods able to compete internationally. According to Thomas B. Gold:

The state was the contrapuntal partner to the market system, helping to insure that resources went into industries important for future growth and military strength — including import substitutes for use in export production, such as synthetic fibers and plastics, and new export sectors such as electronics. Multinational companies became important players in these developments, but only after the state had a well-established presence and leadership position from which it could channel their activities rather than be made subordinate to global profits.

The consumer electronics industry is a good example of a dynamic industry that the state helped initiate and guide, but otherwise did not invest in directly or tie to state enterprises. Transnational corporations (TNCs) performed this function. This is a significant departure from the state-led pattern of the 1950s and represents a clear commitment to the American promoted approach of granting increased scope for private capital, local and foreign.

In a related move, in 1965, the regime established a publicly owned China Data Processing Center to push the use of computers in local industry. In advanced electronics, public research organizations and public enterprise spinoffs were used to acquire and commercialize new technology, a strategy promoted by both the Taiwanese military and the US.

Taipei’s locally owned SMEs play an important role.

Electrical and electronics exports grew at a rate of 58% a year between 1966 and 1971. Foreign firms were quite important in this area.

By the 1970s, over half of foreign firms’ exports were in electronics and electrical appliances, with foreign firms accounting for 2/3 or more of total exports from this industry. It is important to note, though, that foreign-owned companies (companies where more than of the 50% equity is held by foreigners) were surprisingly small and in no way dominated the economy. In fact, they paved the way for a new cohort of entrepreneurs, mostly Taiwanese of a petit bourgeois background.

To underscore, despite the contribution of the American multinational enterprise to the birth and success of export oriented industry in Taiwan, it is important to emphasize the significance of Taipei’s locally owned SMEs. They were an integral part of the drive toward expanded export capability, becoming more crucial over the course of the 1960s.

SMEs were the essence of the new middle class in Taipei which was to become a strong force in the move toward a democratization of politics in a city where the scale of business had a large influence on party affiliation and competition.

Most of the leaders of Taipei’s largest conglomerates had strong ties with the KMT, while heads of small and medium sized businesses tended to support the opposition. This is also consistent with splits along ethnic lines, for owners of SMEs tended to be native Taiwanese rather than mainlanders.

By Lisa Reynolds Wolfe

 

Want to find out more about Cold War Taiwan? Well click here to the see the original article on Lisa’s Cold War Studies site and scroll down the page for a variety of other great Taiwan articles!

And there is even more on Taiwan by clicking here. In this article we look at the deadly Taiwan Straits Crisis.

The start of the Vietnam War? The Central Intelligence Agency – Eisenhower and Asia’s Back Door

This is the second in a series of articles that explores the iconic CIA and its use as a tactical weapon by the presidents of the Cold War (1947-1991). The first of the series was The Central Intelligence Agency – In the Beginning.

Allen W. Dulles, the head of the CIA during the Eisenhower years of the 1950s

In the late 1940s, the CIA grew quickly as it acquired the political turf and added the expert staff required to keep the president informed on who was doing what to whom around the globe. The National Security Act of 1947 added covert operations coupled with ‘plausible deniability’ to the mix of collecting and analyzing data. Covert operations weaponized the agency. Now, not only could the CIA convert data into information, it could, at the behest of the president through the State Department, act on it with impunity; the CIA had become a tactical weapon.

Presidential elections tend to return with grueling regularity in the U.S. and by 1952 it was time, once again, for Americans to choose a leader through the Electoral College.  Truman, who announced he would not run again, took an historic step when he required the CIA to brief the presidential candidates so they would know what-in-the-world was happening. In Chapter 2 of the CIA Briefings of Presidential Candidates, 1952-1992, John L. Helgerson states, “Mindful of how useful the weekly briefings were to him, Truman determined that intelligence information should be provided to the candidates in the 1952 election as soon as they were selected. In the summer of 1952, the President raised this idea with Smith. He indicated he wanted the Agency to brief Gen. Dwight Eisenhower and Governor Adlai Stevenson, remarking at the time, "There were so many things I did not know when I became President." Smith suggested to Truman that Davidson might be the proper individual to brief both Eisenhower and Stevenson to ensure they were receiving the same information.”[1] It was an unprecedented step based on Truman’s early experience in office and the beginning of a tradition that is still respected.

DCI General Walter Bedell "Beetle" Smith had served as now ‘presidential candidate’ Eisenhower’s chief of staff at Allied Forces Headquarters. Smith tried, and failed, to delegate the briefings to Meredith Davidson, a senior staff officer. It must have been a monumentally awkward situation for Smith as he served his new master and his old master. The record indicates that Eisenhower was not above playing his past relationship with Smith and did not make Smith’s job easy. Just before Eisenhower’s November election Smith resigned from active duty status and later took a lesser position in the State Department.

Eisenhower was a popular candidate and his war hero status effectively tied the opposition’s hands. Adlai E. Stevenson, Eisenhower’s opponent, was at a distinct disadvantage. The planks in Eisenhower’s platform included exiting Korea and getting rid of government corruption, which was a big deal with the bribery incidents that were uncovered among the Truman appointees. The 1952 election was odd even by U.S. standards where election time is referred to as the silly season.[2]  In retrospect, Eisenhower failed to achieve either objective and, during his administration, the U.S. stuck its nose deeply into other countries’ business through CIA actions.

Allen W. Dulles was appointed by the Eisenhower administration in 1953. He would serve in that capacity until 1961 when President Kennedy canned him following the Bay of Pigs. Dulles was from the old school, the OSS, and he came to the job with the mindset of being a major league player back-in-the-day.  “… in training Kuomintang troops in China and Burma, and recruited Kachin, and other indigenous irregular forces for sabotage as well as guides for Allied forces in Burma fighting the Japanese Army. Among other activities, the OSS helped arm, train and supply resistance movements, including Mao Zedong's Red Army in China and the Viet Minh in French Indochina, in areas occupied by the Axis powers during World War II. OSS officer Archimedes Patti played a central role in OSS operations in French Indochina and met frequently with Ho Chi Min in 1945.”…[3]

A banker and corporate lawyer between public service assignments, Dulles was connected to a power network that ran in the family. His brother, John Foster Dulles, served as Eisenhower’s Secretary of State during this same period. It was a cozy arrangement given that covert operations went through the State Department. In reading the documents, no one seemed particularly concerned with the potential for abuse or the loss of checks and balances with this banking family’s arrangement. Perhaps, and this is pure speculation, the arrangement even provided cover for plausible deniability.

The analysts who strive to make sense of the information gathered are one breed of CIA employee and the stuff of great Tom Clancy novels. Covert operators are another breed entirely. To this day covert operatives live according to the OSS creed, which places its “faith in individual initiative or “derring-do”, a willingness to act unhesitatingly in ambiguous situations, to “do something” even if it goes beyond the original mandate, a belief in the efficacy of unconventional methods, and distrust or even disdain for the bureaucratic process and structure.”[4]

Under Eisenhower, CIA covert operations meddled early and often in Southeast Asia as the U.S. marched inexorably forward into what became the Vietnam War and the sacrifice of over 58,000 American lives.[5] The Vietnam stage was already set when Eisenhower took his presidential oath in January 1953. The U.S. was picking up about 75 percent of France’s military cost in Indochina (North and South Vietnam), a result of decisions made during the Truman administration. The record indicates that Eisenhower did not particularly care for the French effort to recolonize Indochina after WWII but was politically stuck with them. The spark of war ignited a fire at Dien Bien Phu, in northern Vietnam near the Laotian border. Like two pieces of flint being struck against each other, sparks flew when Giap, with the Viet Minh[6], vowed to wipe out French forces and the French were equally determined to wipe out the Communists.[7] The problem was that while General Vo Nguyen Giap was an acknowledged and experienced military genius, the French decision to lure him into a trap was fatally flawed.

The French managed to get several thousand soldiers trapped in the fortress at Dien Bien Phu, and borrowed a US Navy aircraft carrier, 10 US Air Force B-26s, several C-47s and C-119s, and hundreds of US Air Force personnel to try to dig themselves out.[8] Eisenhower was in a pickle. How much of America was he willing to sacrifice to deny the Communists a victory?  Plans entailing the use of three tactical nukes were drawn up for Operation Vulture. Eisenhower tied Britain’s approval to the execution of Operation Vulture and when Britain refused to sanction the idea it was dropped.[9] In the end, 13,000 French soldiers died[10] in the battle of Dien Bien Phu and the U.S. suffered its first two casualties of the Vietnam War. “On May 6, 1954, CAT pilots James B. McGovern and Wallace A. Buford were flying their C-119 Boxcar on a Dien Bien Phu airdrop mission. Clear weather made it easy for the Viet Minh anti-aircraft gunners to target the aircraft. The stricken Boxcar crashed behind enemy lines. Thus it was that McGovern and Buford—two pilots—became the first Americans known to have died in combat in Vietnam.” (See footnote 7)

A member of the French Foreign Legion in Indochina, 1954

Dien Bien Phu fell on May 7, 1954 and the French beat their feet to get out of the area. The next day, May 8, 1954, planning for a Geneva conference of the main Indochina actors was initiated. By June of 1954, France granted southern Vietnam independence. In July 1954, the Geneva conference was convened. The major players were the US, France, Britain, and the Soviet Union, while the three Associated States of Indochina, including Hồ Chí Minh 's Democratic Republic of Vietnam, were also at the table. Vietnam was partitioned into north and south at the 17th parallel. This was an interim solution pending the outcome of the 1956 Vietnamese elections, which never came.  The U.S agreed to the Geneva accords but, not liking the partition, never signed the agreement. By September 1954, the US and seven other nations signed the Manila Pact; the basis of the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization and the rationale for the U.S’s Vietnam War.

While the U.S. military was busy helping the French, what was the CIA doing? Elections? Did somebody say elections in Vietnam? Elections are right up the CIA’s alley and the CIA boys and girls were very busy bees according to declassified documents released about four years ago. South Vietnam’s new Prime Minister, Ngo Dinh Diem, was a puppet who had played no role in the war or in the negotiations that ended it. Diem’s credentials were his fluent English, his anti-Communist nationalist position, and his religion, Roman Catholic. Diem was putty in the CIA’s hands.

During this period, the CIA considered itself a nation builder. It drank from the goblet of power filled by placing the Shah of Iran on a throne in 1953 and sponsored a successful military coup against the leftist government in Guatemala in March 1954. In Europe, the CIA supported the Christian Democrats in the 1948 Italian elections ensuring the survival of ‘democratic government’ there. The also CIA participated in the 1954 defeat of the Hukbalahaps or Huk Rebellion, who were labeled as Communists, in the Philippines during Ramon Magsaysay’s regime.

Drunk on the wine from these victories, the CIA entered Vietnam certain of another success. Unfortunately, they did not understand the Vietnamese people, their culture or their history. Diem was inaugurated in July 1954. He won the presidency by dubious means and the CIA knew he did not have the support of the people. Toward that end they had been grooming his brother, Ngo Dinh Nhu, for several years. By that time, the CIA had been busy in Vietnam for four years. The Agency first reestablished the covert action section in the Saigon Station, which had its plug pulled when the French found out about its activities in Hanoi. Secondly, Colonel Edward Lansdale of the USAF, renowned for his work as "kingmaker" in the Philippines, was to find a Vietnamese equivalent of Ramon Magsaysay. Lansdale’s assignment was approved about the time that Harwood arrived in Saigon. Colonel Lansdale followed him in June, assigned to the Embassy as Assistant Air Attache.[11] Paul Harwood was the CIA’s Saigon Chief of Covert Operations and very good friends with Ngo Dinh Nhu. And Diem soon became quite the dictator. By the time his administration was drop-kicked and Diem was assassinated during the Kennedy administration, Diem had killed thousands and extended his hatred of Communists to include political and religious dissidents, such as Buddhists, and anti-corruption whistleblowers. 

President Eisenhower greets South Vietnamese leader Ngo Dinh Diem in Washington, 1957

The CIA in Vietnam, spearheaded by Lansdale and Harwood, failed both in providing accurate information and in nation-building. When Diem was overthrown and assassinated, Hồ Chí Minh reportedly stated: “I can scarcely believe the Americans would be so stupid.” But stupid we were. In 1963, Lyndon B. Johnson dropped the pretext of plausible deniability when he admitted to the murder of President Ngo Dinh Diem.[12]

The U.S. had its CIA nose under the Vietnamese tent for twenty-five years before it finally accepted it had lost. Vietnam was a political war, not a military war, and it cost millions of lives, including tens of thousands in the U.S. military services, trillions of dollars and the loss of the American ‘good guy’ innocence.

Instead of opening trade and freeing markets following WWII, the U.S. pulled in, went underground, and embarked on an imperialistic march through the back alleys of the world. Where trade was allowed to flourish, countries recovered and thrived after WWII; Japan, Hong, Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan come to mind.  Those early CIA victories in Iran, Guatemala, and Italy did not lead to long-term stability or democracy. The Philippines did better, although it appears we slew the wrong dragon there. The Dulles dynasty in the CIA and State Department was weighted by numerous disasters offset with very few victories. Perhaps bankers look at the balance sheet from a different perspective. In the end, it is the President of the United Sates, Eisenhower in this case, who must take responsibility for the CIA; it was his baby and his choices.

For the years I served the government as a member of the contractor community, my least favorite agency to do business with was the CIA followed quickly by the DEA. While I wrestle the bias to the ground most of the time, it still manages to creep into my writing on occasion. We, each of us, had a job to do for the United States government and most of us took that responsibility very seriously. Our oaths were pretty much the same and have no expiration date; to uphold and protect the U.S. Constitution. How we go about doing that, however, is very different.

By Barbara Johnson

 

Barbara is the owner of www.coldwarwarrior.com, a site about the men and women from all the cold wars who worked so hard for something they believed in and played so hard they forgot the pain.

To find out more about the Vietnam War, why not listen to our audio podcast on that war? Click here. 

References 

[1] George Washington University NSA Archives; John L. Helgerson; CIA Briefings of Presidential Candidates, 1952-1992; http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB116/cia/CIA%20Briefings%20of%20Presidential%20Candidates.htm

[2] Kennesaw State University; Political Sciences and International Studies Department; 1952: The Election of a Military Hero; http://www.kennesaw.edu/pols/3380/pres/1952.html

[3] Wikipedia; Office of Strategic Services; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Strategic_Services

[4] CIA Library; The Way We Do things; http://www.foia.cia.gov/sites/default/files/document_conversions/48/5_THE_WAY_WE_DO_THINGS.pdf

[5] National Archives; Statistical Information about Fatal Casualties of the Vietnam War; http://www.archives.gov/research/military/vietnam-war/casualty-statistics.html

[6] The term "Viet Minh" is an abbreviation for VietNam Doc Lap Dong Minh-the Vietnam Independence League-the national front created by Ho Chi Minh in 1941 to resist the Japanese occupation and the Vichy French colonial regime that collaborated with it. South Vietnam as a separate, provisional entity came into existence as a result of the Geneva Accords. The other two Associated States, which together with Vietnam made up French Indochina, were Cambodia and Laos. Under the terms of the ceasefire, the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (DRV) was to take control of all Vietnamese territory north of the 17th parallel, while the French Expeditionary retired to the south.

[7] Bernard B. Fall; 1961; Street Without Joy: The French Debacle In Indochina; http://www.amazon.com/Street-Without-Joy-Indochina-ebook/dp/B001GIPFD2/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1376831015&sr=1-1&keywords=street+without+joy

[8] Air Force Magazine; Rebecca Grant; August 2004; Dien Bien Phu; http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2004/August%202004/0804dien.aspx

[9] Google Books; Nathan Miller; 1977; The U.S. Navy: A History;  http://books.google.com/books?id=aJhgcoxbjLoC&hl=en

[10] About.com Asian History; Kallie Szczepanski; The Battle of Dien Bien Phu, 1954; http://asianhistory.about.com/od/timelinesofvietnamwar/a/Battle-of-Dien-Bien-Phu-1954.htm

[11] George Washington University; National Security Archives; Thomas L. Ahern, Jr.; House of NGO covert Action in South Vietnam, http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB284/2-CIA_AND_THE_HOUSE_OF_NGO.pdf

[12] Youtube; November, 1, 1963; LBJ Admits Murder of South Vietnam's President Ngo Dinh Diem; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqyklafeXpY