Talk:1954 Geneva Conference

message: Saying that "some move[ing] north and some move[ing] south" is not showing the whole picture.  Most migrants moved south to escape the repressive communist regime. DHN 17:56, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If we want the whole picture, we should also take account that the Vietnamese Catholics who moved south were largely seen as collaborators with the French colonial occupation (analogous to "Tories" during the American Revolution, with the above caveats), and were mainly urban middle-class and therefore mobile; while the bulk of the Viet Minh's support were farmers whose entire livelihood was tied up in the bit of land they farmed, and urban workers and poor. --Davecampbell 18:14, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Migration 

message: The article currently states:
This was significant because it was also the first time that a western nation was defeated by a South-Eastern Communist country.
First, North Vietnam was not a "Communist" country - or any other kind of country, for that matter - at the time of Dien Bien Phu.  It didn't exist until after, and as a result of, the battle - as a temporary partition accepted by treaty, conditioned upon the holding of a reunifying election in 1956 (scuttled by the U.S. and the RVN).
The Dien Bien Phu page (as of this date) puts it more correctly, "
Dien Bien Phu was "the first time that a non-European colonial independence movement had evolved through all the stages from guerrilla bands to a conventionally organized and equipped army able to defeat a modern Western occupier in pitched battle."
Secondly, I think you mean "Southeast Asian" rather than "South-Eastern".
--Davecampbell 18:25, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: no this stuff has nothing to do. the idea before this line was with "it was the first time" was to point out that the algerian war started in 1954 because of the issue of the indochinese war. it was preceded by uprising in morocco as well. that was the idea (i think).
Second, there was no need for "holding of a reunifying election" since Vietnam was already unified per the State of Vietnam in 1954, it was because of ho chi minh that the country was divided once again, north COMMUNIST and south FREE (I guess). Paris By Night 01:50, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

text: No it's not an error. The referendum was rigged. See 1955 State of Vietnam referendum. Blnguyen  (bananabucket) 06:45, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background 

message: i removed that part. 207.29.128.130 19:37, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: what was that supposed to mean? :) Paris By Night 01:43, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  (even though it was the French) 

message: such phrases like:
*"Communist and freedom fighter were synonymous in the minds of many Vietnamese" ever been in many vietnamese minds?
It was lazy of me not to give a citation previously, but no more lazy than the wording of your comment, which at face value seeks no more than to ridicule a supposed mindreading feat, when in fact, "synonymous in the minds of" is a quite common phrase meaning no such thing. You are free to raise objections about the wording, but it is a neutral appraisal with a basis in recorded fact. In the defense of Vietnam against not only the French, but Japan in WW2, and China following WW2, the Communist Party played a major and conspicuous role. In "The United States in Vietnam - An Analysis in Depth of America's Involvement in Vietnam", by George McTurnin Kahin and John W. Lewis, Delta Books, 1967, the authors repeatedly point to the links, both real and perceived, between Vietnamese nationalism and Communism, and between the defense of Vietnam against the invasions by Japan, China, and France, and the Communists who achieved that defense. Chapter 1, page 16: "The Indochinese Communist Party became the focal point for nationalist resistance against the Japanese occupation"Anarchangel (talk) 13:00, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: not neutral

message: I think you can argue that Haiti, Ethiopia, and the United States were earlier examples of a local force defeating a colonial power.
Roadrunner 16:10, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not the first time 

message: The Conference Final Declaration provides for "General elections to be held in July 1956, under supervision of an international commission composed of representatives of the Member States of the International Supervisory Commission." There is nothing in the accords about a referendum. The 1955 referendum allowed Diem to oust Bao Dai and proclaim a republic, i.e. it was about a set of issues not related to this article.
To state that the cancelled election led to the Vietcong and thus to the Vietnam war is hardly NPOV. The Vietcong was an instrument of the Cold War, directed by Hanoi and Moscow. If you were a Vietnamese frustrated by South Vietnam's imperfect elections, what would be the logic in joining a movement that does not believe in competitive elections of any kind? Kauffner (talk) 16:03, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Referendum 

message: I'm a bit confused, on the page for  April 26th 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_26
It cites that day as the beginning of the conference.
MBVECO (talk) 23:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: MBVECO, the article start date has now been fixed to reflect the proper start of the conference. Before the article didn't address the part of the conference that dealt with the Korean question. That was the cause for the gap in start-dates. 211.228.53.158 (talk) 12:07, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates 

message: The article didn't talk about the first half of the conference, which addressed the Korean question. I've tried correct the omission, but more work may have to be done on it. 211.228.53.158 (talk) 12:04, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: The Korean Question

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Geneva Conference (1954). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090327170814/http://www.wilsoncenter.org/topics/pubs/CWIHPBulletin16_p1.pdf to http://www.wilsoncenter.org/topics/pubs/CWIHPBulletin16_p1.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040912083708/http://www.clemson.edu/caah/history/FacultyPages/EdMoise/1954.html to http://www.clemson.edu/caah/history/FacultyPages/EdMoise/1954.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:23, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Where are the items listed on the Provisions section documented? 
The section starts by citing the following:  
* Paragraph 6 of this document says, "the military demarcation line is provisional", but I can't find where it is described.  
* I also do not find mention of a demilitarized zone.  
* Paragraph 8 allows "everyone in Viet-nam to decide freely in which zone he wishes to live", but I don't find any mention of "free movement of the population between the zone for three hundred days".  
* Paragraph 5 says "that no military base under the control of a foreign State may be established in the regrouping zones of the two parties" and the zones "shall not constitute part of any military alliance".  
* I also do not find mention of any "International Control Commission," nor of Canada, Poland nor India, though an "International Supervisory Commission" is mentioned;  I assume this must be the same thing.  
Also, paragraph 7 says, "free general elections by secret ballot ... shall be held in July 1956, under the supervision of ... the International Supervisory Commission".  I've heard for years that the Geneva Accords promised free and fair elections in 2 years.  This paragraph 7 clarifies when, and I think that's a key provision of these accords that should be mentioned in this article.  I'm adding it now.  DavidMCEddy (talk) 21:51, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Provisions