本頁使用了標題或全文手工轉換

新春攻勢

維基百科,自由的百科全書
(已重新導向自 春節攻勢
前往: 導覽搜尋

新春攻勢越南語Sự kiện Tết Mậu Thân事件節戊申,即戊申新春的事件)是1968年1月30日越南民主共和國(北越)人民軍越南南方民族解放陣線游擊隊(越共)聯手,針對越南共和國(南越)、美國及其聯軍發動的大規模突然襲擊,旨在摧毀南越境內各軍民指揮體系樞紐[10]。攻勢因第一次進攻發生時間為春節而得名。其中順化戰役雙方持續拉鋸長達一個月,而北方在占領越南古都順化市期間殺害了數千名無辜平民。而在溪生戰役中,美軍和南越軍為保衛其溪生作戰基地,持續戰鬥了兩個月之久。春節攻勢是越南戰爭中規模最大的地面行動。儘管此次攻勢最終以北方失敗告終,但是也令本以為擊敗了北越的美國軍政及公眾感到震驚,最終在促使美國主動發起和談並最終自越南撤軍上發揮了關鍵作用。

始末[編輯]

1968年1月30日,越南民族解放陣線以超過55萬大軍和越共游擊隊在南越100多個城鎮發動新春攻勢,駐越美軍最高統帥威廉·魏摩蘭將軍倉促應戰。共有2500多名美軍喪生,北越部隊遭受約4.5萬餘陣亡、4萬負傷。戰鬥最激烈的舊京順化幾乎全毀,美軍駐紮的前線基地溪生早在1月21日開打(溪生戰役),春節攻勢期間反而較為平靜。而美國駐西貢大使館也在1月31日凌晨遭到越共敢死隊襲擊,館內美軍5人死亡,越共19人被全殲[11]:34-36

順化[編輯]

聯軍估計北越軍在順化的激戰中陣亡2,500到5,000人,89人被俘。[12] 216名美國陸軍和陸戰隊陣亡,1609人受傷。南越軍陣亡421人傷2,123人,失蹤31人。[13]:213在140,000名原住人口中,超過5,800人口死亡,116,000人無家可歸。[13]:216[11]:54–55

在奪回城市後發現了幾個埋葬平民的大型集體葬坑(最晚的一個於1970年發現),這引發了直至今日的爭議。[11]:99–103受害者有棒毆致死的,有被槍殺的還有活埋的。[11]:55聯軍給出的解釋是北越軍剛攻下城市時就開始大規模地以「再教育」的名義系統地拘捕平民,然後加以殺害,共有2800名被認為是對共產黨統治潛在有害的人被殺。[14]被關押起來的人包括南越軍政人員,前官員,普通公務員,教師警官,和宗教人士。[11]:55, 99–103歷史學家京特-路易認為一份被繳獲的越共文件表明有「1892名行政人員,38名警察,790名暴政者」被處決。[15]

影響[編輯]

越南內部[編輯]

越南共和國柬埔寨境內的越共實力削弱,但北越方面創造了心理上的優勢。

1973年美國自越南撤軍後,南越政權僅維持兩年即被北越以武力推翻。

美國國內[編輯]

新春攻勢成為越戰中的轉捩點,其慘烈狀況驚動了美國公眾。美國政府高層內部因為新春攻勢而失去戰意,美國國內反戰浪潮日益高漲。威廉·魏摩蘭將軍計畫動用20萬6千的增兵以完全消滅敵軍,結果事機洩漏,被反戰師生們視為戰爭販子,其畫像在校園內被焚毀;1968年6月,魏摩蘭將軍卸任,由陸軍上將艾布蘭接替。

1968年3月31日,美國總統林登·詹森表示美軍將逐步撤出越南戰場,並宣布放棄競選下任總統。越南戰爭成為美國1968年總統大選的主要議題。

國際關係[編輯]

共和黨籍的理察·尼克森當選美國總統後,為尋求中華人民共和國合作對北越方面施加政治壓力,以給美軍撤出越南創造較有利的政治條件,通過其國家安全顧問亨利·季辛吉北京方面接觸,最終促成了1973年的巴黎和平協約,並成為美中雙邊關係「正常化」的契機。

相關條目[編輯]

註腳[編輯]

  1. ^ Smedberg, p. 188
  2. ^ Tet Offensive. History. [2014-12-22]. 
  3. ^ Hoang, p. 8.
  4. ^ The South Vietnamese regime estimated North Vietnamese forces at 323,000, including 130,000 regulars and 160,000 guerrillas. Hoang, p. 10. MACV estimated that strength at 330,000. The CIA and the U.S. State Department concluded that the North Vietnamese force level lay somewhere between 435,000 and 595,000. Dougan and Weiss, p. 184.
  5. ^ Tổng công kích, Tổng nổi dậy Tết mậu thân 1968 (Tet Offensive 1968) – ARVN's Đại Nam publishing in 1969, p. 35
  6. ^ Does not include ARVN or U.S. casualties incurred during the "Border Battles"; ARVN killed, wounded, or missing from Phase III; U.S. wounded from Phase III; or U.S. missing during Phases II and III.
  7. ^ Steel and Blood: South Vietnamese Armor and the War for Southeast Asia. Naval Institute Press, 2008. P 33
  8. ^ Includes casualties incurred during the "Border Battles", Tet Mau Than, and the second and third phases of the offensive. General Tran Van Tra claimed that from January through August 1968 the offensive had cost North Vietnam more than 75.000 dead and wounded. This is probably a low estimate. Tran Van Tra, Tet, in Jayne S. Warner and Luu Doan Huynh, eds., The Vietnam War: Vietnamese and American Perspectives. Armonk NY: M.E. Sharpe, 1993, pgs. 49 & 50.
  9. ^ PAVN's Department of warfare, 124th/TGi, document 1.103 (11-2-1969)
  10. ^ Ang, p. 351. Two interpretations of North Vietnamese goals have continued to dominate Western historical debate. The first maintained that the political consequences of the winter-spring offensive were an intended rather than an unintended consequence. This view was supported by William Westmoreland and his friend Jamie Salt in A Soldier Reports, Garden City NY: Doubleday, 1976, p. 322; Harry G. Summers in On Strategy, Novato CA: Presidio Press, 1982, p. 133; Leslie Gelb and Richard Betts, The Irony of Vietnam, Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1979, pp. 333–334; and Schmitz p. 90. This thesis appeared logical in hindsight, but it "fails to account for any realistic North Vietnamese military objectives, the logical prerequisite for an effort to influence American opinion." James J. Wirtz in The Tet Offensive, Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press, 1991, p. 18. The second thesis (which was also supported by the majority of contemporary captured Vietcong documents) was that the goal of the offensive was the immediate toppling of the Saigon government or, at the very least, the destruction of the government apparatus, the installation of a coalition government, or the occupation of large tracts of South Vietnamese territory. Historians supporting this view are Stanley Karnow in Vietnam, New York: Viking, 1983, p. 537; U.S. Grant Sharp in Strategy for Defeat, San Rafael CA: Presidio Press, 1978, p. 214; Patrick McGarvey in Visions of Victory, Stanford CA: Stanford University Press, 1969; and Wirtz, p. 60.
  11. ^ 11.0 11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 James H. Willbanks. The Tet Offensive: A Concise History. Columbia University Press. 2008年. ISBN 978-0-231-12841-4. (英文)
  12. ^ Schulimson, p. 213. A PAVN document allegedly captured by the ARVN stated that 1,042 troops had been killed in the city proper and that several times that number had been wounded. Hoang, p. 84.
  13. ^ 13.0 13.1 Schulimson, Jack; Blaisol, Leonard; Smith, Charles R.; Dawson, David. The U.S. Marines in Vietnam: 1968, the Decisive Year (PDF). Washington, D.C.: History and Museums Division, United States Marine Corps. 1997年. ISBN 0-16-049125-8. (英文)
  14. ^ Dougan and Weiss, p. 35. This was the version given in Douglas Pike's The Viet Cong Strategy of Terror, published by the U.S. Mission in 1970.
  15. ^ Lewy, Gunther. America in Vietnam. New York: Oxford University Press. 1980: 274. ISBN 0-19-502732-9. (英文)