376 The Ch<strong>in</strong>a QuarterlyFrom early August 1965 to March 1969, a total of 16 divisions (63regiments) of Ch<strong>in</strong>ese anti-aircraft artillery units, with a total strength ofover 150,000, engaged <strong>in</strong> operations <strong>in</strong> <strong>Vietnam</strong>. These units, whichentered <strong>Vietnam</strong> <strong>in</strong> eight separate stages, were ma<strong>in</strong>ly from <strong>the</strong> artilleryforces, <strong>the</strong> air force, <strong>the</strong> navy and, <strong>in</strong> some cases, <strong>the</strong> Kunm<strong>in</strong>g andGuangzhou Military Regions. Follow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ir experience dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>Korean <strong>War</strong>, <strong>the</strong> Ch<strong>in</strong>ese military leadership adopted a rotation strategyfor <strong>the</strong>se troops - usually a unit would stay <strong>in</strong> <strong>Vietnam</strong> for around sixmonths and <strong>the</strong>n be replaced by ano<strong>the</strong>r. Their tasks were to defendstrategically important targets, such as critical railway bridges <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>Hanoi-Youyiguan and Hanoi-Lao Cai l<strong>in</strong>es, and to cover Ch<strong>in</strong>ese eng<strong>in</strong>eer<strong>in</strong>gtroops. There is no evidence that any of <strong>the</strong>se units were engaged<strong>in</strong> operations south of Hanoi or <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> defence of <strong>the</strong> Ho Chi M<strong>in</strong>h Trail.The last unit of Ch<strong>in</strong>ese anti-aircraft artillery forces left <strong>Vietnam</strong> <strong>in</strong>mid-March 1969. The Ch<strong>in</strong>ese statistics claimed that <strong>the</strong>se troops hadfought a total of 2,154 battles, and were responsible for shoot<strong>in</strong>g down1,707 American planes and damag<strong>in</strong>g ano<strong>the</strong>r 1,608.70It is <strong>in</strong>terest<strong>in</strong>g that <strong>the</strong> Ch<strong>in</strong>ese air force was never directly engaged<strong>in</strong> operations over <strong>Vietnam</strong>ese territory while Ch<strong>in</strong>ese anti-aircraft artillerytroops were sent <strong>the</strong>re, although <strong>the</strong>re was evidence that this hadbeen discussed by Ch<strong>in</strong>ese and <strong>Vietnam</strong>ese leaders <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> spr<strong>in</strong>g andsummer of 1965. Was this non-<strong>in</strong>volvement a product of Hanoi's reluctanceto allow <strong>the</strong> Ch<strong>in</strong>ese air force access to <strong>Vietnam</strong>ese airspace or areflection of Beij<strong>in</strong>g's desire to restrict <strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>a's</strong> military <strong>in</strong>volvement <strong>in</strong><strong>Vietnam</strong>? Or were <strong>the</strong>re more complicated or hidden factors at work?Unfortunately, Ch<strong>in</strong>ese source materials now available suggest no def<strong>in</strong>iteanswer to <strong>the</strong>se questions.It is known, though, that Beij<strong>in</strong>g's policy towards American planes<strong>in</strong>vad<strong>in</strong>g Ch<strong>in</strong>ese airspace underwent a major change <strong>in</strong> early 1965.Before <strong>the</strong> end of <strong>1964</strong>, <strong>the</strong> guidel<strong>in</strong>e of Ch<strong>in</strong>ese policy toward <strong>in</strong>vad<strong>in</strong>gAmerican planes was to avoid direct confrontation. A CMC order dated25 June 1963, for example, made it clear that when an American militaryvessel or plane entered Ch<strong>in</strong>ese territorial water or airspace, <strong>the</strong> Ch<strong>in</strong>esecommand<strong>in</strong>g officer should pay more attention to <strong>the</strong> political, ra<strong>the</strong>r than<strong>the</strong> military, aspect of <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>cursion. They should <strong>the</strong>refore be cautious <strong>in</strong>tak<strong>in</strong>g action, to avoid putt<strong>in</strong>g Ch<strong>in</strong>a <strong>in</strong> a politically and diplomaticallydisadvantageous position even at <strong>the</strong> expense of los<strong>in</strong>g military opportunities.As late as January 1965, when <strong>the</strong> Ch<strong>in</strong>ese air forces on <strong>the</strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>ese-<strong>Vietnam</strong>ese border area entered combat read<strong>in</strong>ess as <strong>the</strong>result of <strong>the</strong> worsen<strong>in</strong>g situation after <strong>the</strong> Gulf of Tonk<strong>in</strong> Incident, <strong>the</strong>CMC reiterated its previous <strong>in</strong>structions. An order dated 11 January1965 emphasized that Ch<strong>in</strong>ese air units <strong>in</strong> sou<strong>the</strong>rn Ch<strong>in</strong>a shouldbe restra<strong>in</strong>ed when American military planes entered <strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>a's</strong>70. This summary of <strong>the</strong> operations of Ch<strong>in</strong>ese anti-aircraft artillery forces <strong>in</strong> <strong>Vietnam</strong> isbased on <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g sources: Han Huaizhi et al., Dangdai Zhongguo jundui de junshigongzuo, Vol. 1, pp. 550-53; Qu Aiguo, "Ch<strong>in</strong>ese supporters <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> operations to assist<strong>Vietnam</strong> and resist America," p. 43; and Wang D<strong>in</strong>glie et al., Dangdai Zhongguo kongiun,ch. 17.
Ch<strong>in</strong>a <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Vietnam</strong> <strong>War</strong>, <strong>1964</strong>-69 377airspace, and that <strong>the</strong>y should take off to monitor <strong>the</strong> movement of <strong>the</strong>American planes, but not to attack <strong>the</strong>m.71The situation changed <strong>in</strong> early April 1965. On 8 and 9 April, twogroups of American fighters <strong>in</strong>vaded <strong>the</strong> airspace over <strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>a's</strong> Ha<strong>in</strong>anIsland. Follow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> CMC's <strong>in</strong>structions, four Ch<strong>in</strong>ese planes took off tomonitor <strong>the</strong> Americans, and <strong>the</strong> Americans reportedly opened fire on <strong>the</strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>ese. On 9 April, Deputy Chief of Staff Yang <strong>Chen</strong>gwu reported <strong>the</strong>two <strong>in</strong>cidents to Zhou Enlai and Mao Zedong, suggest<strong>in</strong>g that Ch<strong>in</strong>ese airforce should "give a firm strike" to American planes <strong>in</strong>vad<strong>in</strong>g <strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>a's</strong>airspace. That afternoon Mao ordered that <strong>the</strong> air force and <strong>the</strong> navyshould send <strong>the</strong>ir best units to sou<strong>the</strong>rn Ch<strong>in</strong>a and South Ch<strong>in</strong>a Sea, unify<strong>the</strong>ir command system and strike <strong>the</strong> Americans firmly if <strong>the</strong>y <strong>in</strong>vaded<strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>a's</strong> air.72 On 17 April, <strong>the</strong> CMC issued a new order formallyimplement<strong>in</strong>g Mao's new <strong>in</strong>structions.73 From this time to November1968, accord<strong>in</strong>g to Ch<strong>in</strong>ese statistics, Ch<strong>in</strong>ese air forces were engaged <strong>in</strong>155 operations aga<strong>in</strong>st American planes <strong>in</strong>vad<strong>in</strong>g <strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>a's</strong> airspace, shoot<strong>in</strong>gdown 12 American fighters and o<strong>the</strong>r planes (unmanned reconnaissanceplanes not <strong>in</strong>cluded).74 Although <strong>the</strong> exact motive beh<strong>in</strong>d thischange of Ch<strong>in</strong>ese attitude is not clear, <strong>the</strong> effect of <strong>the</strong> new policy seemsevident. By respond<strong>in</strong>g firmly to <strong>in</strong>cursions <strong>in</strong>to Ch<strong>in</strong>ese airspace, Beij<strong>in</strong>gsent a clear signal to <strong>the</strong> Americans, while at <strong>the</strong> same time demonstrat<strong>in</strong>gto <strong>the</strong>ir comrades <strong>in</strong> Hanoi <strong>the</strong> firmness of <strong>the</strong>ir stand <strong>in</strong> deal<strong>in</strong>g with<strong>the</strong> American threat.Military and o<strong>the</strong>r material support to <strong>Vietnam</strong>. When Ch<strong>in</strong>ese troopsentered <strong>Vietnam</strong>, <strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>a's</strong> military and o<strong>the</strong>r support <strong>in</strong>creased dramatically.Mao issued explicit <strong>in</strong>structions that support<strong>in</strong>g <strong>Vietnam</strong> should begiven top priority. On 16 June 1965, Mao made it clear that <strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>a's</strong>economic structure should be fur<strong>the</strong>r transformed <strong>in</strong> order to meet <strong>the</strong>need of "prepar<strong>in</strong>g for com<strong>in</strong>g wars." Late <strong>the</strong> next month, <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> contextof <strong>the</strong> escalat<strong>in</strong>g military conflicts <strong>in</strong> <strong>Vietnam</strong>, <strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>a's</strong> State Plann<strong>in</strong>gCouncil fur<strong>the</strong>r decided to make <strong>the</strong> streng<strong>the</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g of national defenceand "prepar<strong>in</strong>g for an early and major war with <strong>the</strong> imperialists" <strong>the</strong>central task of <strong>the</strong> Third Five-Year Plan. The council decided also that <strong>the</strong><strong>Chen</strong>gdu-Kunm<strong>in</strong>g railway, which was designed to improve <strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>a's</strong>connection with <strong>Vietnam</strong>, should be completed no later than 1969.75One Ch<strong>in</strong>ese source reveals <strong>the</strong> contents of an agreement signed on 11June 1967 by Liao Kaifen, deputy director of <strong>the</strong> Logistical Departmentof <strong>the</strong> Kunm<strong>in</strong>g Military Region, and his <strong>Vietnam</strong>ese counterpart, <strong>the</strong>71. Li Ke and Hao Shengzhang, Wenhua dagem<strong>in</strong>g zhong de jiefangiun, p. 341.72. Yang <strong>Chen</strong>gwu's report to Zhou Enlai and <strong>the</strong> CCP Central Committee, 9 April 1965,and Mao Zedong's remarks on Yang <strong>Chen</strong>gwu's report, 9 April 1965, Mao Zedong junshiwenji (A Collection of Mao Zedong's Military Papers) (Beij<strong>in</strong>g: Military Science Press,1993), Vol. 6, p. 403.73. Li Ke and Hao Shengzhang, Wenhua dagem<strong>in</strong>g zhong de jiefangiun, pp. 341-42.74. Ibid. p. 344; and Wang D<strong>in</strong>glie et al., Dangdai Zhongguo kongjun, p. 392; for acomparison between American and Ch<strong>in</strong>ese records, see Whit<strong>in</strong>g, The Ch<strong>in</strong>ese Calculus ofDeterrence, p. 179.75. Cong J<strong>in</strong>, Quzhe qianj<strong>in</strong> de sh<strong>in</strong>ian, p. 467.
- Page 1 and 2: China's Involvement in the Vietnam
- Page 3 and 4: China in the Vietnam War, 1964-69 3
- Page 5 and 6: China in the Vietnam War, 1964-69 3
- Page 7 and 8: China in the Vietnam War, 1964-69 3
- Page 9 and 10: China in the Vietnam War, 1964-69 3
- Page 11 and 12: China in the Vietnam War, 1964-69 3
- Page 13 and 14: China in the Vietnam War, 1964-69 3
- Page 15 and 16: China in the Vietnam War, 1964-69 3
- Page 17 and 18: China in the Vietnam War, 1964-69 3
- Page 19 and 20: China in the Vietnam War, 1964-69 3
- Page 21: China in the Vietnam War, 1964-69 3
- Page 25 and 26: Table 1: China's Military Supply to
- Page 27 and 28: China in the Vietnam War, 1964-69 3
- Page 29 and 30: China in the Vietnam War, 1964-69 3
- Page 31 and 32: China in the Vietnam War, 1964-69 3
- Page 33: China in the Vietnam War, 1964-69 3