Sideshow: Kissinger, Nixon & the Destruction of Cambodia

by William Shawcross

Although there are many books and films dealing with the Vietnam War, Sideshow tells the truth about America's secret and illegal war with Cambodia from 1969 to 1973. William Shawcross interviewed hundreds of people of all nationalities, including cabinet ministers, military men, and civil servants, and extensively researched U.S. Government documents. This full-scale investigation with material new to this edition exposes how Kissinger and Nixon treated Cambodia as a sideshow. Although the president and his assistant claimed that a secret bombing campaign in Cambodia was necessary to eliminate North Vietnamese soldiers who were attacking American troops across the border, Shawcross maintains that the bombings only spread the conflict, but led to the rise of the Khmer Rouge and the subsequent massacre of a third of Cambodia's population."

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Politics, American History, Military Fiction, Asia, United States

542 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1979

About the author

William Shawcross is a widely renowned writer and broadcaster.

Reviews

[Aaron Million · Rating 3 out of 5]

William Shawcross could just as easily have titled this book “An Indictment of Henry Kissinger” and still have it accurately reflect the book's content. While that is the basic theme of the book, it is much more than that, and Shawcross does not seem to happily indulge in Kissinger-bashing. In fact, the entire tone of the book is tragic: the systematic destruction of a country and its people, helped along mightily by short-sighted policies instituted by President Richard Nixon, but more so by his National Security Adviser and later Secretary of State, Kissinger. The title of the book refers to relegation of Cambodia to the backburner of priorities in the Nixon White House. Ending the Vietnam War was the main goal (officially), and then focus was on the opening up of relations with both China and the U.S.S.R. Nixon unconstitutionally expanded the conflict into Cambodia in an effort to lower American casualty rates by forcing more of the battle responsibilities onto the South Vietnamese while the U.S. Reined bombs down inside the Cambodian border.

Written in 1979, this work both benefits from that fact (the participants were still alive to be interviewed and their memories had not become hazy due to a long passage of time) and is hindered by it in that Kissinger had not yet published any of his memoirs, there were still countless hours of Watergate tapes that had not been released, and not enough time had passed in Cambodia to see the long-term consequences of what had occurred. Certainly Kissinger's (overly) detailed memoirs would have provided Shawcross with much more food for thought. But fortunately Nixon had published his memoirs, and while not nearly as detailed as Kissinger's would turn out to be, Shawcross is able to make use of them.

But this book is not just about Kissinger, his administrative maneuvers, deceits, lies, and secrets. It is also about the dysfunctional and out of the loop State Department. Part of this was due to Nixon's distaste for the department and Kissinger's insatiable appetite for power. But, as Shawcross shows, the embassy in Phnom Penh was continually staffed with people who either didn't care about the Cambodian people or didn't have sufficient influence to be able to change U.S. policy. Reading about the 1975 evacuation of the embassy as the murderous Khmer Rouge moved in was painful – and reminiscent of what happened in South Vietnam.

Even more than the detailings of the failures on the U.S. side, Shawcross examines the history of Cambodia, its relationships with other countries in the region (specifically China and Vietnam), and its political structure. Prince Sihanouk was overthrown in 1970, mainly due to his own misreading of his country and his power. Lon Nol, his replacement, was a bumbling and incompetent leader who the U.S. stupidly continued to back even though he showed no promise whatsoever. The only thing good about him seemed to be that he was an anti-Communist. Unfortunately, that quality was not nearly enough to fight off the Khmer Rouge, a murderous guerrilla organization manned mainly by Communist youths who had no compunction at all in wantonly murdering people.

Ultimately Shawcross shows that, essentially, the U.S. government did not care about the fate of Cambodia or its people. And the few people who did care, either didn't have the ability to fix things or lacked the political pull to keep the Khmer Rouge at bay. His criticism of Kissinger, as well as Nixon, has stood up to the test of time. One area that he could have easily spent more time on is in discussing in greater detail the rise of the Khmer Rouge, and more importantly, why they became so vicious and evil.

[Christopher Saunders · Rating 5 out of 5]

William Shawcross's Sideshow offers an excoriating look at America's "secret war" in Cambodia, one of the Vietnam War's most controversial facets. He places the blame squarely on the shoulders of Richard Nixon and his advisers, arguing that their decision to expand American operations (under the Orwellian guise of "winding down the war") into Cambodia was both cruel and extraordinarily misguided. Shawcross does allow that the NVA's Ho Chi Minh Trail crossed its borders, arguably negating Cambodia's claim to neutrality, but shows that Prince Sihanouk, Cambodia's erratic leader, had little choice but to allow this as pro-American hardliners and Communist insurgents menaced his government, forcing him into a suicidal balancing act. Nixon's secret bombings, increased commando raids and the fatal "incursion" of May 1970, whatever their short-term tactical justifications, wrought untold harm on Cambodia's government, killing tens of thousands, misplacing millions and opening the door for Pol Pot's death regime to take power, all without significantly impacting the wider war. More revealing still are Shawcross's explorations of the Nixon Administration's compulsive secrecy and amoral cynicism in foreign policy, the utter contempt of American officials, soldiers and diplomats for Cambodia (Spiro Agnew's visit to Phnom Penh accompanied by bullying, Uzi-toting Secret Servicemen wins an award for ugly American boorishness) and the gruesome human cost, belying their claims at defending civilization. It's not a pretty book, but neither is its subject: and since America found accommodation with the Khmer Rouge in the name of realpolitik several years later, neither can we claim our meddling gave us any sort of high-ground.

[Andrew · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is not a book a reader should 'love' or even rate as 'amazing.' I guess it rates as amazing because of it's depth, research and integrity which are all above and beyond the call of duty. It puts into massive detail and context all the bits of pieces of information that I've read about (and much that I didn't know) concerning America's atrocities in Southeast Asia, especially in Cambodia. Required reading for anyone interested in foreign affairs, American politics and foreign policy whether it be Vietnam-era or otherwise.
My addendum is that I don't wholeheartedly agree with his implicit (and explicit) conclusions that it was all or primarily the United States' fault. The Khmer Rouge (and their ideology) did exist beforehand. Additionally, the North Vietnamese invaded Cambodia first. The Chinese aided the KR and the Cambodian gov't was (and is) corrupt to the max. The Cambodian people had a lot of forces using and abusing them over a long period - the US being one of them.

[Erik Graff · Rating 4 out of 5]

Until reading this book I had little notion of the place of Cambodia in the postwar struggles in Indochina. I had, however, read Shawcross' book about U.N. peacekeeping and reconciliation programmes in such places as Cambodia, seen The Killing Fields movie and followed Wilfred Burchett's coverage in the old Guardian newsweekly--all of which gave me a rather confused picture of Lon Nol's government and the illegal bombings and invasion of Cambodia conducted by the U.S.A. in the seventies. Consequently, I had a sense of the bad guys, lots of them, from Kissinger and Nixon, to Lon Nol and Pol Pot, but little sense of who was 'responsible' for the mess that led ultimately to the unnecessary deaths of millions. Shawcross takes care of that in this coherent, unsettling narrative. (The 'bad guys' behind it all were Kissinger and Nixon in this account.)

[Thom · Rating 4 out of 5]

First book of the year, southeast Asia again. Added this to my reading list on the death of Kissinger, and it arrived from the library in late December (more on that below). Published in 1979, this is the complete story of Cambodia (up to that point).

This starts in media res with a decision to bomb a nonexistent NV and VC base just outside of South Vietnam and inside Cambodia. This includes plans to announce this as an "accident" and offer compensation to Cambodia if the press asks questions. Primarily this book is a story of cover up and lies, and the background of Watergate is frequently mentioned in the middle parts of the narrative.

After that opening, it falls back to a historical setting (past conflicts between Vietnam, Cambodia, and others) and the plot follows an ordinary timeline throughout the rest of the book. The early part of the Vietnam war and the handoff from the French are barely covered - but then this is a book about Cambodia. And Kissinger. And the dysfunctional state department, kept outside the loop.

Bombing develops into a coup and then an all-out war. The south Vietnamese troops and aviators, looking to settle old scores, were happy to battle Cambodians. The most eye opening part was that both North Vietnam and the US wanted to keep a war in Cambodia going for their own reasons - the US to allow a more graceful exit from Vietnam, the North to keep South Vietnamese troops occupied while they moved south.

The book closes with the eventual exit of America from both conflicts and the takeover of the Khmer Rouge, a story not yet complete at publication time. Arguably not complete until the death of Pol Pot in the 90s, and there are probably more recent accounts that cover this better.

I really enjoyed the book, which came from the library. At least one previous reader liked to dogear, and we're talking 1/3 of the page folds, no just corners. At least one previous reader also enjoyed several meals while reading this - food stains, greasy finger smudges at the normal points of holding and turning pages. In short, I felt as unclean touching the book as I did reading the book. I strongly wish some library patrons had better manners.

[Maureen · Rating 5 out of 5]

Shawcross wrote an absolutely smashing history of the United States' war on Cambodia. I don't think I can describe it better than John LeCarre did in his blurb on the inside of the front cover:

"This is a thrilling book, although a terrible one. It is solid contemporary history, yet asks no foreknowledge of the reader. It teems with anecdotes and revelation. It will unloose bitter debate. It conveys us like a hurtling train towards the inevitable disaster. But the final impression is of something yet more disturbing. We are shown a surreal and cut-off world of high politics where deceit masquerades as virtue, rivalry and mayhem as the iron logic of statesmanship, and where the sanctity of nationhood is a legalistic quibble."

Sound familiar? Kind of like what is going on today? Bush/Cheney? Yeah.

[Umbar · Rating 5 out of 5]

Sideshow is incredibly well researched and a deeply distressing read. I find it quite difficult to find the words to write a review but so many others have explained how this book made them feel so eloquently in other reviews. All I can say is that I highly recommend it.

Many passages will be stuck with me for a while, but I found this one especially heavy:

‘He had been flying B-52s since the end of 1971, but throughout 1972 he found it impossible to ignore the consequences of his work. When he returned home at the end of his first tour he found himself obsessed with the deaths he had inflicted. Watching West Side Story on television one night, he could see nothing but falling bombs and screaming people. In the spring of 1973 he was sent on a second tour to bomb Cambodia; he found each of the twenty-five missions he flew more difficult to reconcile with his conscience. He became particularly upset by a report that a Cambodian wedding party had been "boxed" by B-52s. This made him think constantly of the "rever-ence" in which he held his own wedding-he considered it the most important event in his life, and "having the actual ceremony devastated by a B-52 attack is beyond comprehension." It forced him, he said, to realize that the Cambodians were human beings and to recognize that nonmilitary targets were being hit.’

[NinaRene Soreco · Rating 5 out of 5]

Note: I wrote this in Phnom Penh in 2007.

Sideshow: Nixon, Kissinger, and the Destruction of Cambodia is well documented and offers historical insight into the horrible events of the war in Vietnam/Cambodia/Laos. Some of the inane quotes from our (US) leaders during that time and other events sound similar to that of some of our current leaders (Bush et al), or like they were written for Saturday Night Live. And parallels with the war in Iraq, such as Nixon's cowboy stance after watching Patton three times, and his determination to make a big last-ditch troop surge to save face and show that a third-world country can't beat the US, are tragically ironic.

[Dan · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very good examination, meticulously pulled from primary sources, of the US' illegal invasion and devastation of Cambodia from 1969-1975.

While I have some minor issues with the authors' clear and open dislike for the Vietnamese, his near refusal to acknowledge their liberation of Cambodia from the hypernationalist Pol Pot clique, otherwise this is an excellent history.

Shawcross fully exposes that the US knew it's invasion of Cambodia was illegal and unwanted, was done entirely to preserve the US' image and to try and force Cambodia into the US sphere of influence. The horrors of the Khmer Rouge regime from 75-78 were very real, but they never would have happened were it not for the US' imperialist attacks on the country.

This book also demonstrates why we in the West are rarely if ever told anything about Cambodia, lest we discover the American responsibility for hundreds of thousands of deaths for no reason beyond a fanatical commitment to anti communism and cynical political aims.

Henry Kissinger's long, unpunished life is proof that karma does not exist.

[Ronan Doyle · Rating 4 out of 5]

Meticulously researched and thrillingly told, Shawcross' volume here is among the better cases I've read in a while for putting in the journalistic legwork. His context is broad but never excessive, his structure narratively-inclined without withholding information for drama's sake. His case, delivered with a clarity of fact and no small trace of humanity, is utterly compelling. Anthony Bourdain's thoughts on Kissinger always bear repeating, but never before have they sat so close to mind as throughout reading this:

Once you’ve been to Cambodia, you’ll never stop wanting to beat Henry Kissinger to death with your bare hands. You will never again be able to open a newspaper and read about that treacherous, prevaricating, murderous scumbag sitting down for a nice chat with Charlie Rose or attending some black-tie affair for a new glossy magazine without choking. Witness what Henry did in Cambodia – the fruits of his genius for statesmanship – and you will never understand why he’s not sitting in the dock at The Hague next to Milošević.

[Philip · Rating 4 out of 5]

When we consider Nixon, Kissinger and the Destruction of Cambodia, Sideshow by William Shawcross is probably the main event, if not the last word. On completing the book, it’s hard to imagine that the author has left a single document on the subject untouched, a single actor in the saga un-researched. The level of detail here is forensic, to such an extent, perhaps, that the actors in the story never really develop character, because they are always too busy, apparently, acting out their explicit roles.

Perhaps, it’s easier at the start to say what Sideshow is not, so that its focus can become quite clear. Sideshow is not about the Vietnam War, though of course this almost continually figures, sometimes over the border, sometimes just this side of it. Sideshow is also not a description of the Khmer Rouge government, its attempted genocide or its atrocities, though of course it and its actions do figure large in the final chapters of the book, after it took power following the collapse of the American-backed regime, if this is not an oxymoron.

What Sideshow does describe is US policy towards Cambodia from the late 1960s, its effects on Cambodian society, its attempted manipulation of Cambodian politics and the rationale, if that be a relevant term, that underpinned the involvement. The utter confusion that is described is perhaps best illustrated by the sequence of the start of the book where the first B-52 raids on targets within Cambodia are described. Not only were these missions secret, but it seems that even the aircrew flying them did not know beforehand where they were going, and in the first instance the radio operator aboard acknowledged mission complete still ignorant of his position. In addition, all logs relating to the completion of the tasks were falsified in an attempt to hide from the rest of the world the location of the dropped bombs. Not bad for a start.

A theme in Sideshow is just how thoroughly random the process of making policy was in Washington at the end of the 1960s. You have powerful personalities using platforms to promote themselves and themselves only. You have influential actors more influenced by Hollywood‘s vision of reality than anything they experienced, either via reality or by informed briefing. Somehow the world was always wrong if it did not conform to how it should be. A quote endures relating to how democracy should prevail as a ubiquitous goal alongside how people should not be allowed to be so stupid as to elect socialists, as in Chile.

An instructive and memorable passage describes the Huston Plan, which sanctioned the wire-tapping, mail-meddling and general surveillance of anyone deemed of interest, which included anyone who wanted to question what turned out to be a fallacious orthodoxy. William Shawcross writes: “Nixon approved the plan… (whose) …discovery in 1973 helped enormously to build such Congressional outrage that the legislature was finally able to force the White House to end the massive bombing of Cambodia, which was just beginning to spread as Huston formulated his proposals in summer 1970. It was to become a crucial part of the impeachment proceedings. When, much later, Nixon was asked by David Frost to justify his actions he bluntly produced a new version of presidential infallibility – ‘Well, when the president does it, that makes it not illegal’.” Which just goes to show that other, more recent incumbents were not actually responsible for inventing the concept of infallibility.

And in another passage relating to a different set of events, William Shawcross quotes Senator William J Fulbright saying, “I don’t think it is legal or constitutional. But whether it is right or not, he has done it. He has the power to do it because under our system there is not an easy way to stop him”. Some things, it seems, do not change, no matter how pressing proves the need, nor how many decades have passed in the meantime.

A long way before the end of the book, an ending we now know to have unfolded, the descent into chaos for Cambodia seemed inevitable. It is a small nation and like a thorn in the foot of an elephant, it was toyed with, scraped, pulled out and discarded. The elephant moved on and the thorn was apparently left to its own devices, eventually to prick itself.

[karl levy · Rating 4 out of 5]

An incredibly well researched book with Shawcross choosing to lay much blame on Kissinger and Nixon and as a result America for the bombing of Cambodia. By choosing conclusions that sat well with the Anti War lobby in the USA Shawcross became a superstar. It is interesting that he backed and still does George W Bush and Tony Blair's invasion of Iraq that would seemingly completely contradict his earlier political leanings irrespective of reasons that his readers would certainly not endorse for any reason no matter their rationality. Cambodia had requested the USA to help with bombing as North Vietnam and the Vietcong had actually invaded and had reached Siem Reap and were 20km from Phnom Penh. When the NVA pulled out they handed the lands across to King Sihanouk's backed Pol Pot's forces without his armies needing to fight. The Chinese have much to be blamed for their input regarding the fighting with supplied arms and idealogy though a full description to balance Americas' input of this is avoided. This book is an example of superb research though biased conclusions. 4 stars for the research.

[Stew · Rating 5 out of 5]

Read this, A Bright and Shining Lie by Neil Sheehan,
and Tragic Mountains by Jane Hamilton-Merrit and you will have a complete picture of the U.S. involvement in Southeast Asia.
Sideshow is the first book I read when I arrived in Cambodia and is a must read for anyone heading that way.

[Austin Barselau · Rating 4 out of 5]

Published in 1979, Sideshow is journalist William Shawcross’ original reporting of the Nixon administration’s use of power to spread the Vietnam War over the border to Cambodia. Shawcross, a reporter for The Sunday Times of London and other papers, indicts Nixon and his foreign policy brain trust, centrally his national security advisor and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, for abuses of authority in authorizing an escalatory campaign in Cambodia in secret and without Congressional approval. Woven throughout is the theme of Kissinger’s rising stardom, propelled by outflanking of counteracting bureaucratic checks, and the zealous campaign of prosecuting the war to the last Cambodian. Through ceaseless bombings without regard for civilian casualties, unrealistic expectations on the native government, and the inadvertent rendering of a manic communist insurgency, Nixon and Kissinger spawned a Cambodian “catastrophe,” writes Shawcross, leaving chaos, ruin, and death as the only products of a misguided political adventure. With the perpetrators not held to account, Shawcross writes that “Cambodia was not a mistake; it was a crime,” directly facilitated by executive hubris and callous indifference to the plight of the nation it engulfed into war.

[Wright Smith · Rating 4 out of 5]

One of those great 70s-80s era works of journalism where the level of research, writing, and detail are so high that you forgive errors that later scholarship might uncover. To be clear, I don’t know if any inaccuracies here, just that it does feel very much an early draft of history. Shawcross does a good job of making his case against Nixon and Kissinger while engaging in good faith with arguments that the intervention in Cambodia was justified and necessary because of the war in Vietnam. I think he probably doesn’t give as much credence to the idea that the pressure of ending the war in Vietnam made intervention in Cambodia attractive for a number of reasons, and may have had some effect on North Vietnamese capabilities, but I think overall he makes the case clearly that the gains were fairly minimal, while the losses to Cambodians were vastly disproportionate to any military gains of the United States. Really excellent book for anyone who wants a strong introduction to the war in Cambodia from 1969 to the late 1970s, and makes plain just how devastating American involvement was.

[Simon Dobson · Rating 4 out of 5]

A shocking tale of aggression and duplicity, where a country whose only fault is to be too weak to resist incursions by another is attacked and undermined by a third country still claiming the moral high ground.

Alost every character comes out badly from this story – but especially Henry Kissinger, whose willingness to sacrifice foreign lives while protecting his own reputation and influence are quite breathtaking. It's troubling that Nixon's fall was for reasons other than his orders to bomb Cambodia and his willingness to lie to Congress (whom he was constitution-bound to consult and inform). The fact that the Cambodian leadership of Lon Nol and Sihanouk were also corrupt and self-serving offers no excuse. The US Joint Chiefs stood behind him because it suited them to extend the Vietnam War rather than end it, even after the point that they knew it was un-winnable and were extracting their own ground forces. Together these people all opened the door for the Khmer Rouge and the killing fields that followed, and did so knowing the risks they were running.

[Julio Pino · Rating 5 out of 5]

"The so-called secret bombing of Cambodia was not secret. {Cambodian head of state} Prince Sihanouk knew about it. The North Vietnamese knew about it, the Chinese, the Russians". ---Henry Kissinger, 2023. That's right, Henry, everyone except the U.S. Congress and the American people! And, if it was such an open secret, why did you and Nixon order the U.S. Air Force to alter and falsify log books to prove the U.S. was only bombing South Viet Nam.? The human costs are estimated at one million lives or more. Kisinger was so outraged by the publication of this book that in his second volume of memoirs, YEARS OF UPHEAVAL, he dedicated an appendix of dozens of pages with tightly packed sentences to try and disprove William Shawcross. No chance; not in this universe. For this action alone Nixon should have been impeached, but no, "the president can bomb whoever he wants to".

[Hannah · Rating 5 out of 5]

"In Cambodia, the imperatives of a small and vulnerable people were consciously sacrificed to the interest of strategic design for this reason alone the design was flawed--sacrifice the parts and what becomes of the whole? The country was used to practice ill-conceived theories and to fortify a nation of American credibility that could in fact only be harmed by such actions. Neither the United States nor its friends nor those who are caught helplessly in its embrace are well served when its leaders act, as Nixon and Kissinger as acted, without care.

Cambodia was not a mistake; it was a crime. The world is diminished by the experience."

[Bob Koelle · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this book because of Doonesbury, and had perhaps my first political awakening as a result. This was during the era of Rambo-type films, which kept telling us that the US was stabbed in the back while fighting the Vietnamese. More than one awakening, actually. First I learned how misguided political leaders can act, with the result of so many people killed. Second, I learned how average people willfully ignore the truth of history, and prefer to belief in mythology, fed to them to keep them compliant, and ready to take up arms in the next conflict.

[Conor York · Rating 5 out of 5]

A genuinely absurd and shockingly unknown history. Shawcross's account of the combined, short-sighted actions of the White House, State Department, CIA, and self-interested lone actors, among others, blurs the line between ignorant apathy and downright cruelty. A classic case study in how brutal foreign policy creates an environment that can only fuel the rise of equally brutal villains – in this case, Pol Pot – and the only people who really feel the repercussions of said policy and the monsters it breeds are, by and large, innocent civilians.

[ExtremeBibliophile · Rating 5 out of 5]

A thoroughly detailed account of how US foreign policy short-sightedness combined with regional geopolitics and entrenched cultural influences led to the "secret" bombing of Cambodia during the Vietnam War, and the subsequent rise to power of the infamous Khmer Rouge regime under the horrifically cruel Pol Pot. Not an easy read but essential for anyone who wants to understand-or at least get some enlightenment-into the origins of one of the most appalling genocides in history.

[David · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this when it was first published and couldn't believe the involvement and power that US policy had in changing the face of the world for the worst. Yes, I was young then, but I never forgot it. This incredible retelling of the "breakfast bombings" and what they did to the face of southeast Asia is a must history book, especially since Kissinger's death. Evil, power, corruption and the promises never kept both to the people of America and those whose lives were devastated in Cambodia.

[Cathy · Rating 5 out of 5]

After reading this book, I'm embarrassed by the actions the American government took in the bombing of Cambodia. Henry Kissinger has critics who have said he is not a good person and this book provides details for an assessment of his character, choices and behaviors. This is one I'll read again because the names, places and people involved in this writing help to align what I believe to be the truth of the incidents of Vietnam and Cambodia.

[Christine · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is one of the most important books to me, ever, ever, ever. What was done was criminal on an unthinkable scale. America has been systematically making the rest of the world into hell on earth for generations. This has had personal and devastating repercussions for everyone in my family. I feel like I live with this trauma etched into every cell of my body.

[Whm · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is one I would like to read again.

[E · Rating 5 out of 5]

… woof

[Russell Bittner · Rating 5 out of 5]

“‘I have not addressed such a distinguished audience since dining alone in the hall of mirrors’” (p. 307)

This direct quote by Henry Kissinger, uttered at the historic first meeting of the ambassadors (to Washington) of Israel and Egypt, pretty much sums up Kissinger’s estimation of himself.

Let me say first off that this is a superb bit of journalism – not only superbly written, but also superbly (not to say ‘superhumanly’) researched. It’s also not an easy read. But the difficulty in reading it lies in the length and in the extraordinary detail describing a time, a series of events, a pair of men (even if Nixon and Kissinger are hardly alone in their nefarious actions), and a war that most of us would rather forget.

The problem is – as George Santayana once so knowingly admonished – “he who ignores history is condemned to repeat it.” And because we apparently learned very little from our debacle in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos, we’re repeated the selfsame errors in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Right up until George W. Bush became president, I’d always thought Richard Nixon was the worst we’d ever elected to that office. I’m inclined, after reading Sideshow, to return to my previous judgment. Now, however, I’d like to add Kissinger as an additional stain on Nixon’s original sin.

Much to his credit, William Shawcross doesn’t inject his own opinion into his reporting. Instead, he lets the facts speak for themselves. One exception – and one I think worth quoting at length – is this final paragraph, on p. 299, of Chapter 19, titled “The Bombing”:

“For those men [the Khmer Rouge], 1973 confirmed a historic conviction that survival, let alone victory, could be guaranteed only by absolute independence and astonishing fixity of purpose. They faced an enemy who at least appeared to have enormous support from his sponsor, while they themselves could not trust even their own leader [Pol Pot], let alone their friends. The attack upon Phnom Penh was a madness born of desperate isolation, which bred a dreadful hatred of their enemy and a contempt for the attitudes of the outside world. But for the [American] bombing and their shortages of munitions, they might have won the war that summer. As it was, the indifference of their allies and the assault upon them by the supporters of their enemy stamped out thousands upon thousands of them, and the survivors had neither the men nor the firepower for a final assault upon the capital when, after August 15, 1973, the rains re-inherited the skies.” (The insertions between parentheses are my own, supplied to aid in the understanding of this paragraph out of context.)

On p. 329, we find this personal quote from Kissinger, so typical of the way both he and Nixon thought and acted: “I would like to think that when the record is written some may remember that perhaps some lives were saved and that perhaps some mothers can rest more at ease …. But I leave that to history. What I will not leave to history is a discussion of my personal honor.” Keep in mind that these two men were exclusively responsible for the deaths of thousands of American servicemen and millions of Vietnamese, Cambodian and Laotian civilians while the two of them continuously lied – to Congress, to subordinates, to journalists, and even to each other. “Personal honor” indeed. It’s enough to make one retch.

But the central issue of this book – the real issue, to which Nixon and Kissinger are, themselves, merely a sideshow – is the tragic, and often barbaric, history of Cambodia. After all, and as William Shawcross says in his conclusion (on p. 396), “(n)either the United States nor its friends nor those who are caught helplessly in its embrace are well served when its leaders act, as Nixon and Kissinger acted, without care. Cambodia was not a mistake; it was a crime. The world is diminished by the experience.”

And what, in sum, was that experience? I’ll return to p. 367 to name it. “The nature of Angka was not clear to the evacuees at first, but within hours millions of Cambodians had realized that its orders, transmitted through the fierce young soldiers who supervised their trek, were to be obeyed instantly, and that complaints were often met by immediate execution. As they walked into that first night of April 17, 1975, they were told that from now on only Angka ruled and that Cambodia was beginning again. This was ‘Year Zero.’”

RRB
04/19/15
Brooklyn, NY

[bleak · Rating 5 out of 5]

Having lived through the Vietnam war without serving (too young thank God), I was continually repulsed with Nixon's voice/image on TV explaining why his psychopathic ways were necessary for the freedom of America. Of course, I didn't know what a psychopath was back then. It was pure intuition. We all have an innate sense of right and wrong but "things get confused out there." So after reading Sideshow, I feel like a memory gap has been somehow released back into my consciousness because, if anything, wars are pure traumatic experiences that most people lock away for future referral cuz we can't deal with them in the present.

Although this is more about Cambodians than the Vietnamese, I can't help but think of all victims in that war collectively including Americans. But, it was foreign lands we invaded. We had no rightful business there. And for what reason(s) did we invade these Asian countries? The pure maniacal hubris, arrogance and complete madness of a few madmen. Also, and I only learned this after reading Sideshow... it was said madmens' EXPERIMENT. Mad "Dr No's." Nazis doing what they do best; getting OTHER order-following scapegoats to do their dirty work for them and "test the waters" of social indignation, military capabilities, political blowback and drug running. Yeah. Millions killed and maimed, families and homes destroyed, beautiful and ancient countries left in ruin. All for the satisfaction of a few manipulative criminals; Richard M Nixon, Heinz Kissinger, Robert McNamara, George Bush and assorted blowhard generals/minions etc etc. The "Nixon Doctrine" at it's finest. It seems as though some things never change.

It's clear after reading this book that Lon Nol wasn't the most beneficent ruler of the ages. But somehow he was managing Cambodia and, for the most part, the people liked him. Until the CIA got involved and fomented a coup which thereby exiled Lon Nol to the four corners. Yep, our good ole CIA parasites. That's ALL they are. PARASITES. Squirming little bugs that love to get into peoples' business in order to feed their chaos-ridden brains. While in exile, Lon Nol spoke at Ohio University and, apparently, it wasn't a very "pro US" speech. A short while later, four protesting students were shot dead by police. I don't know if there's a connection but something tells me there is.

Sideshow is an important book. It is documented evidence of the operations of psychopaths and those complicitous minions (whether by choice or by ignorance and mind control) who carry out orders no matter how inhuman and hellish. Everyone should read it because if we don't know the enemy and the types of weapons they use, we don't stand a chance of someday defeating them. With the 2016 election eminent, we face more of the same only on a much grander stage and with nuclear weapons "on the table." What are WE going to do about that?

[Katie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Shawcross provides a detailed, well-documented look at the deplorable actions taken by Kissinger and Nixon in Cambodia, a "sideshow" to the Vietnam war. While very detailed it is still very readable, easy to start an stop again, as he focuses on major aspects of the war in each chapter.

I was familiar with the ravages of Cambodia by the Khmer Rouge, and knew generally about the U.S. involvement and bombing of Cambodia. However, this book used Freedom of Information Act documents to clearly depict Kissinger and Nixon's deceptions, from requiring the filing of false military reports to blatant lies given to the media and the American people, and how the actions they took in many ways laid the foundation for an ineffective government in Cambodia that failed to counter the Khmer Rouge. Sadly, the book also depicts the tragic results of a people caught in the middle of American politics - with Nixon and Kissinger wanting to continue the war and Congress cutting off funding and limiting actions - and the impact that had on the potential for success. (Also interesting, there are many references to John McCain's father and his role in our involvement as well.)

[Mikko · Rating 4 out of 5]

A nicely organized story about a two man's show that lead Cambodia into war. Huge amounts of letters and newspaper articles and other information in the end, which seemed a little bit too much, and much speculation of what would have happened if the initial bombings did not happen. Sometimes hard to keep track on who was doing what, otherwise very nice writing. The brief history of Cambodia was a very educative chapter to a completely ignorant European like me.