Flocculencio
Donor
In the late 1940s and 1950s, British forces fought a war against Communist guerillas in the jungles of Malaya. This Malayan Emergency as it was called was very different from the later american experience in Vietnam.
The Communists in Malaya were recruited mainly from the Chinese who were a large minority. the majority of the population who were Malays did not really support the guerillas.
'In 1949, an intense campaign was mounted against the guerrillas, hundreds of whom were slain or captured. One effect of the jungle warfare was to bring leaders of the various ethnic and religious communities closer together with more mutual understanding. The communists waged a violent and ultimately unsuccessful struggle supported by only a minority of the Chinese community. The British struggled to suppress the insurgency by military means, including an unpopular strategy that the government-implemented entitled Briggs plan (1950) that resettled so-called "squatter" Chinese farmers, who were easy prey for raiding guerrillas, in protected Malay areas, basically a controlled scheme of New Villages. Although this policy isolated villagers from guerrillas, it also increased the government's unpopularity. Also in 1950 Britain, as leader of the Commonwealth, requested Australian and New Zealand assistance in countering the communist terrorists. Unlike the American policy in Vietnam of "search and destroy" and then return to base, the British and Commonwealth soldiers in Malaya played the guerrillas at their own game by living out in the jungle for weeks on end and ambushing them' (1).
In addition to this, the British authorities addressed the concerns of the Malayan people, fighting a propaganda war to claim their hearts and minds.
If the US authorities had followed a pattern something like this might they have been able to win in Vietnam or were the two situations too different?
What would South-East Asia look like today with an existing communist North Vietnam and a democratic South Vietnam?
(1) quoted from http://www.myfareast.org/Malaysia/emergency.html
The Communists in Malaya were recruited mainly from the Chinese who were a large minority. the majority of the population who were Malays did not really support the guerillas.
'In 1949, an intense campaign was mounted against the guerrillas, hundreds of whom were slain or captured. One effect of the jungle warfare was to bring leaders of the various ethnic and religious communities closer together with more mutual understanding. The communists waged a violent and ultimately unsuccessful struggle supported by only a minority of the Chinese community. The British struggled to suppress the insurgency by military means, including an unpopular strategy that the government-implemented entitled Briggs plan (1950) that resettled so-called "squatter" Chinese farmers, who were easy prey for raiding guerrillas, in protected Malay areas, basically a controlled scheme of New Villages. Although this policy isolated villagers from guerrillas, it also increased the government's unpopularity. Also in 1950 Britain, as leader of the Commonwealth, requested Australian and New Zealand assistance in countering the communist terrorists. Unlike the American policy in Vietnam of "search and destroy" and then return to base, the British and Commonwealth soldiers in Malaya played the guerrillas at their own game by living out in the jungle for weeks on end and ambushing them' (1).
In addition to this, the British authorities addressed the concerns of the Malayan people, fighting a propaganda war to claim their hearts and minds.
If the US authorities had followed a pattern something like this might they have been able to win in Vietnam or were the two situations too different?
What would South-East Asia look like today with an existing communist North Vietnam and a democratic South Vietnam?
(1) quoted from http://www.myfareast.org/Malaysia/emergency.html