Hello and welcome to today's history lesson.

My name is Mr. Merrett, and I'll be guiding you through today's lesson.

So by the end of today's lesson, we're gonna be able to explain the importance of the Gulf of Tonkin incident.

And in order to do that, we're gonna need to use some key terms. And our key terms for today are gulf, patrol, and Congress.

So a gulf is a deep inlet of a sea, which is almost surrounded by land, but has a narrow mouth.

And a patrol is a repetitive journey aimed at keeping watch over a particular area.

And Congress is the group of elected representatives that decide laws in the United States, and it's made up of the Senate and the House of Representatives.

So now that we understand those, let's get going with the lesson proper.

So today's lesson, looking at the Gulf of Tonkin incident, it's gonna be split into three different learning cycles.

And our first learning cycle is looking at the buildup.

So events in Vietnam escalated dramatically after the death of Diem on the 2nd of November, 1963.

South Vietnam experienced a revolving door of governments with no one able to gain control for long before being removed from power.

There's lots of what's called coups, which are generally speaking, in South Vietnam, anyway, they're led by the military and they enabled generals from ARVN to be placed in power.

And so the next set of generals came along and thought they could do a better job.

And they removed that set of generals, and this kept going and going and going in Vietnam for quite some time.

And, naturally, that destabilises the government, it destabilises the country, and understandably, North Vietnam took full advantage of all this confusion and they sent small numbers of troops and later on, whole battalions South to support the Viet Cong and engaged the demoralised South Vietnamese army to engage ARVN.

And then when President John F.

Kennedy was assassinated on the 22nd of November, 1963, his vice president, Lyndon B.

Johnson, who's on the screen in front of you there, he automatically became president.

And obviously he takes control in Vietnam of an absolute mess of a situation.

He felt obliged to continue supporting South Vietnam against communism because this is what Kennedy had done.

There is debate as to whether Kennedy would've continued to support Diem's regime, whether he would've actually pulled troops and a complete American support out of South Vietnam.

There are some people who believe that, but we don't have evidence to say that that is exactly what was gonna happen.

It's all speculation.

All we can say for certain is that after he died, Johnson felt as though he needed to continue supporting the South Vietnamese government.

So that's exactly what he did.

People have voted for Kennedy.

This is, therefore, probably what definitely what Kennedy had said he was going to do.

This is therefore probably what the people of America wanted them to do.

So Johnson felt he had to do it.

As well as that, he also thought that he couldn't be seen to be soft on communism.

Domino Theory still dominated the USA's foreign policy in Southeast Asia.

And, therefore, a lot of decisions being made regarding communism is based upon this idea of Domino Theory that if one country falls to communism, then its neighbours will continue to do so as well and so on and so forth until the whole world is communist.

So Johnson increased the level of US support, the level of US involvement in Vietnam.

But he did it quietly.

So the South Vietnamese army, ARVN, had been launching surprise raids on North Vietnamese islands and on the North Vietnamese coastline, but they were organised and supported by American intelligence gathering missions, which are code named OPLAN 34A.

And it was US ships, generally speaking, who enacted OPLAN 34A by listening in on radio transmissions and being able to find that exactly where troops were from North Vietnam and how they were responding to ARVN raids and they can feed that information to ARVN.

US ships, in order to do that though, had to operate very, very close to North Vietnamese waters.

They had to be close in order to pick up the radio signals.

So that obviously means that although the US is not at war with North Vietnam, they are supporting an ally who was at war with them.

But US proximity to North Vietnam is now making the communist country very, very anxious and kind of understandably so.

Right, our first knowledge check for today.

I want you to think, where did OPLAN 34A raids strike within North Vietnam? Were they along, A, coastlines and islands, B, forests and jungles, or, C, towns and cities? Make your choice now.

All right, if you chose A, then congratulations.

Exactly right.

OPLAN 34A raids took place along coastlines and islands.

Another knowledge check for you now.

I want you to choose two reasons why Johnson continued to involve the US in Vietnam.

Did he do so because, A, he had a personal interest in supporting communism, B, he felt he had to continue with Kennedy's plan, C, he wanted to distract people from problems in the US, or D, he did not want to seem soft on communism.

So choose two of those now.

Alright, if you chose B and D, then very well done.

That's exactly correct.

Right, let's go for our first task for today then.

So why do you think Johnson felt he could not withdraw support for South Vietnam? What might have happened if he had done so? It's a little bit of what-if history here.

So what if Johnson had to removed US support for South Vietnam, what might have happened? It's quite a useful exercise sometimes in figuring out significance.

Why is something important? What might have happened if something had or had not have happened? So do a little bit of what-if history, why did Johnson continue to provide US support for South Vietnam? What might have happened if he had removed his support? Right, I want you to write a short paragraph explaining your answer.

So pause video now and I'll see you once you've done that.

Okay, welcome back.

Hopefully you've got on fine with that task.

I've got an answer up on the screen here, so hopefully yours is somewhat similar to what I've got as well.

So I said that Johnson could not withdraw support from South Vietnam as this would've gone against the policy of containment and accept the outcome predicted by Domino Theory.

The USA had promised to do everything it could to stop communism from spreading, and if the USA stopped supporting and stopped helping South Vietnam, the North Vietnam and the Viet Cong would've quickly taken over the country, united North and South Vietnam and they would've made it communists.

So that's that kind of what-if history there.

So if the US had pulled out, then the North certainly would've steamed in and taken over the South and they would've made the whole country communist.

Right, let's move on then to our second learning cycle, which is looking at the incidents.

So on July 30th, 1964, ARVN launched surprise raids on islands just off the North Vietnamese coastline.

And in close proximity was the USS Maddox, which is a destroyer, that's a fast warship, that was supporting the raids by gathering intelligence.

They're operating in the Gulf of Tonkin.

And I've got a map up on the screen there for you.

I just highlighted exactly where the Gulf of Tonkin actually is.

So all of that area, all of that coastline we are looking at there, that is that darker shade of yellow, that's North Vietnamese coastline.

So the US ships are certainly within areas which North Vietnam would feel, understandably feel though that they don't really have any right to be in.

So although the Maddox took no active part in the raids, its presence was enough for North Vietnamese patrol boats to respond aggressively.

Three patrolling torpedo boats chased the Maddox.

And on the 2nd of August, 1964, a confrontation broke out between them.

The Maddox fired warning shots, and in reply, the North Vietnamese fired torpedoes and machine guns.

But these were easily evaded.

The patrol boats were chased away with the help of nearby planes and damage was done to the American ship.

Damage was caused to American ship, but it amounted to just a single bullet hole.

That's the only damage they received.

One bullet entered the hull, nothing else was damaged.

In comparison, four North Vietnamese sailors were killed and six were injured.

So the US certainly came out on top of that particular encounter.

In terms of how should the Americans respond.

Well, Johnson chose not to retaliate.

So I'm guessing he felt that the damaged cause was not justification enough to launch a response.

So he didn't retaliate, but also he didn't retreat so he didn't remove his ships from the area.

And instead, actually, a second US destroyer, the USS Turner Joy, actually joined the USS Maddox on its patrols.

Two days later, on the night of the 4th of August, 1964, the Maddox and Turner Joy both reported that they were once again under attack and for two hours the Americans fought in stormy seas with zero visibility.

It was really, really nasty conditions at late at night that they were fighting in.

So over 350 shells are fired by the US ship.

So they fired a lot of of big guns.

However, once again, no damage was sustained to either of the destroyers this time.

And the reason for that was clear to the pilot who was flying overhead and he was supporting the destroyers.

There were no North Vietnamese ships in the vicinity.

They were fighting nothing at all.

Overeager radar operators were mistaken large waves for attacking boats.

So this is it, the second incident.

The Americans were quite literally just fighting a storm.

They were not fighting the North Vietnamese.

Despite this, the initial report that American ships were once again under attack, convince Johnson that an aggressive response this time was necessary.

So let's go through a very quick knowledge check right now then.

So true or false, on the 2nd of August, 1964, the American ship fired at the North Vietnamese ships first.

Is that true or is that false? Choose now.

Alright, if you chose true, then well done.

That is indeed correct.

The Americans fired first, but let's justify this answer now.

Did they do so because, A, the USS Maddox fired warning shots at the NVA patrol boats who responded with torpedoes and gunfire? Or is it because of B? The USS Maddox launched an unprovoked attack on the NVA patrol boats, who responded by fleeing.

So choose A or B now.

If you chose A, then very well done.

That is indeed correct.

Let's have a go at an activity now then.

So I want you to imagine that you were part of Johnson's government.

What would you do with reports that your ship had been fired upon? So I want you to choose from the options below and explain your reasoning.

So I come up with four possible responses.

I want you to choose one of them.

So could you: Launch an immediate attack on North Vietnam, even though it could be viewed as an excessive response? Would you wait to see if North Vietnam attack again and that would justify an aggressive response? Would you ignore it in order to try and calm things down? There's no real damage done after all.

Or would you acknowledge that US ships in the area is a provocative move and just remove them to try and calm things down? So choose one of those four options that you would advise Johnson to do.

So which one you've chosen, explain why you've chosen it, pause the video and I'll see you once you're done.

Okay, welcome back.

Hopefully you got on fine with that task.

So let's look at a couple of potential responses that you might come up with or something along those lines anyway.

So on the screen in front of you, I've said that if I was in Johnson's government, I would choose to wait and see if North Vietnam attacked again.

I would choose this because the USA was much stronger than North Vietnam, so if North Vietnam attacked again, the American ship could probably defend itself quite easily.

The USA could also point to the fact that North Vietnam had attacked them repeatedly, which would mean the USA could fight back without the rest of the world hating them.

So it's important to think about how is the rest of the world going to respond to any actions.

And, certainly, that was in the back of the mind of many Americans as well.

Could also have said, if I was in Johnson's government, I would launch an immediate attack on North Vietnam.

I would do this because the US was much stronger than North Vietnam, so they should be able to defeat them quickly and easily, which would end communism in Vietnam and unite the countries again.

This would send a message to other communist countries not to provoke the USA, or even make some countries reconsider turning to communism in the first place.

So that's certainly a potential response that Johnson's government could have made.

Right, let's look then at the third of our learning cycles, the third and final of our learning cycle today, which is looking at the aftermath.

So Johnson responded swiftly without waiting for a full report as he was concerned that if he hesitated, it'd be seen as soft by the American people, and they would not have voted for him in the upcoming presidential election.

Unfortunately, this was a consideration that Johnson had to bear in mind.

What do the people of America perceive to be the right course of action, whether it's right or not, how does it look? What are the optics like? And if he had waited for a report, he would've found out that there'd been no attack, but by waiting it would've made him seem soft on communism.

And it's not acceptable in America at that point in time to be soft on communism.

Therefore, on the 5th of August, 1964, just the next day, Operation Pierce Arrow commenced in retaliation for the attack the night before.

And this was a bombing raid on a petrol storage facility and North Vietnamese naval vessels, which was inside North Vietnam.

And that is significant because this marked the first time that US troops directly attacked North Vietnam.

So that is a significant escalation from President Johnson.

On the 7th of August, 1964, so just a couple of days later, the Tonkin Gulf Resolution was passed almost unanimously by Congress.

There was very, very few senators, I think there's only two senators that voted against it.

And this granted the president authority to take all necessary measures to repel any armed attack against the forces of the United States and to prevent further aggression, as well as to take all necessary steps, including the use of armed force to assist South Vietnam in defence of its freedom.

Now, just to kind of translate that, this is essentially a declaration of war without it being a formal declaration of war.

Congress has given the president the authority to do basically whatever he wants in Vietnam in order to protect the US and in order to protect South Vietnam.

So without officially declaring war, the US is essentially now at war with North Vietnam.

Now, in terms of how that was received within America, opinion polls from the time suggests that Americans actually agreed with Johnson's decision regarding the Gulf of Tonkin incident.

One survey showed that 85% of Americans approved the way he handled the events.

So 85% of people said, "Yep, that's exactly what he should have done." And that was also supported a few months later when Johnson won the 1964 presidential election in a landslide.

However, there is evidence to suggest that Johnson's government knew that there was no attack on the 4th of August, and they deliberately deceived Congress to make sure that the Tonkin Gulf Resolution was passed.

Both the pilot in the air and then later at least one of the captains of the destroyers sent secondary reports saying that we don't actually think there was an attack.

But by that point, the wheels were already in motion.

Operation Pierce Arrow was already being organised and I think in one of the cases, the reports had already commenced.

So effectively it was too late.

I say it was too late.

Johnson could at that point have told Congress, "Look, we've had these secondary reports," but he didn't.

And that's where, for some people, this is where an issue lies.

Johnson's government also misinformed Congress about the reasons for American ships being in the area in the first place.

So they didn't necessarily tell Congress that they were supporting ARVN in these raids upon North Vietnamese islands and on the North Vietnamese coastline so that they didn't let Congress know that America was arguably taking an aggressive action.

If you believe that assisting somebody who's being aggressive as aggressive in itself, then America's being aggressive.

If you think that they weren't, they were just there offering information that's not aggressive, then America wasn't being aggressive.

But certainly from a North Vietnamese perspective, the fact that these raids are happening on their islands, on their coastline, and American ships are in the area helping that to happen, that certainly would've been viewed as aggressive from a North Vietnamese perspective.

Many people now regard the Gulf of Tonkin incident as the formal beginning of the Vietnam War, and that resulted in the loss of 58,000 American lives and roughly 3 million Vietnamese lives.

And most of those were civilian lives lost.

It wasn't until 2005 that declassified documents showed that Johnson's justification for the war was a lie.

Okay, let's look at a very quick knowledge check now then.

So what percentage of the American people approved of Johnson's actions during the Gulf of Tonkin incidents? Was it 25%, 45%, 65%, or 85%? Make your choice now.

Alright, if you chose D, then congratulations.

85% of the American public supported Johnson's response to the Gulf of Tonkin incidents.

So what can you infer from this source about the signing of the Tonkin Gulf Resolution? I want you to pick out two things you can see and explain what they tell you.

So if you are doing an inference, if you are inferring something, then you are thinking about something which is not necessarily right there.

So you're using your own knowledge, using your powers of reasoning to come up with some conclusions.

So let's try and come up with two conclusions about the Tonkin Gulf Resolution from this particular source.

So pause the video now, have a go at that task, and I'll see you in just a moment.

Okay, welcome back.

So I've got a model, or I've got an answer up here on the screen in front of you.

Hopefully yours is somewhat similar to mine, but if it's not, hopefully it's just as fine as well.

But here's what I've got.

So in the source I can see that President Johnson is signing the Resolution in front of TV cameras.

I can infer from this that the Resolution was of national importance, as the TV cameras were there to capture and broadcast Johnson's actions.

I can also see lots of people standing behind and around Johnson as he signs the Resolution.

I can infer that these member, probably members of Johnson's government or important members of Congress, as only important people would've been allowed to be there for this event.

This suggests that Johnson had a lot of support from Congress and his government for signing the Resolution.

Okay, one more task for today that we have then.

So I have an interpretation up on the screen here, and I want you to think to what extent, how far do you agree with this interpretation of the extension of US bombing to North Vietnam in 1964? So the interpretation reads: It is clearly the case that if the three torpedo boats hadn't launched an attack on the USS Maddox, then there would've been no reason for the USA to bomb North Vietnam in the first place.

It is true that the USA was quick to seize the opportunity presented by the Gulf of Tonkin incident, but the USA was in Vietnam to protect its ally from a communist invasion, and bombing North Vietnam was in many ways inevitable if the USA was to achieve this aim.

So to what extent do you agree with that interpretation? So have a little think about that question, have a go at answering it, pause the video, and I'll see you once you've finished.

Okay, welcome back.

So let's look at the answer that I have here on the screen then.

So I've said I disagree with this interpretation.

The USS Maddox should not have been near North Vietnam when ARVN was attacking North Vietnamese islands: North Vietnam was justified in thinking that the Maddox was part of the attacks.

A second reason why the bombing was unjustified was that the second attack used by the US to justify the bombing never actually happened.

US radar operators mistook large waves for attacking boats.

The pilot supporting the US destroyers confirmed there was no North Vietnamese ships in the area, but Johnson chose to rush ahead with retaliation decision anyway.

So that's my answer.

Hopefully yours is similar to that or at the very least, if it's not, which is fine, you've got some justification for your answer as well.

So to summarise the lesson then, US president, Lyndon B.

Johnson, continued US involvement in Vietnam.

An American ship was attacked by North Vietnamese patrol boats in the Gulf of Tonkin.

American ships thought they were attacked a second time, but they were mistaken.

The USA launched air strikes on North Vietnam in response.

And the US did not officially declare war on North Vietnam, but Congress authorised aggressive action to be taken.

Thank you very much for joining me today.

Hopefully you enjoyed yourself.

Hope you've learned a lot, and hopefully I'll see you again next time.

Bye-bye.