Why did SEATO fail?

oreocruncher

(from Wiki)
SEATO was an attempt to form a southeast Asian equivalent of NATO apparently, but unlike NATO it didn't last, dissolving in 1977. Why was that so, and how could it have succeeded?
 
Maeglin

Maeglin

It failed because (amongst other things) there were only two countries from South-East Asia in SEATO, which made it rather hard to take seriously, and because there was never any formal organisation in terms of command. Most of its members were either more interested in NATO or pretty much ignored it, hence the famous "zoo of toothless tigers" criticism.
 

oreocruncher

Maeglin said:
It failed because (amongst other things) there were only two countries from South-East Asia in SEATO, which made it rather hard to take seriously, and because there was never any formal organisation in terms of command. Most of its members were either more interested in NATO or pretty much ignored it, hence the famous "zoo of toothless tigers" criticism.
Click to expand...

I see, but is it possible to even have an Asian NATO? Because I think it isn't that likely...these countries have lots of grudges against each other, and trade ties don't diminish them (unlike with European countries).

And ASEAN isn't really oriented towards common defense anyway. I think one of their precepts is to not interfere in other countries' affairs (which is one that Asians in general, particularly China, regard as an important principle).

Anyway, is there any possibility for SEATO to work out? Maybe having a joint command may help...:confused:
 

Readman

I don't know if it has anything to do with or not, but, something I think possible is that while NATO was to be a bulwark against the Warsaw Pact in Europe, SEATO had no real comparable analogue AFAIK, and also, when you consider the 1970's rapprochement between the USA and China, maybe the need for it kinda went away? :confused: Thats my thought anyways
 
Michel Van

Michel Van

intrinsic was SEATO Doom from the begin

There founding member were in 1954 Australia, New Zealand, Pakistan, the Philippines, Thailand, France, Britain and the United States.
in 1955 began decolonize of France Indochina, with the new nation Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia.
also Britain decolonize Burma, Malaysia, Singapore. In 1963 Britain had only Hong Kong in asia

Those new and other regional countries like Indonesia were far more minded with domestic internal stability rather than concern of communism threat
They even refuse joining SEATO, now there members were not located in Southeast Asia!
Then came Vietnam War with USA attack North Vietnam what cloy even more the Southeast Asia Nation and SEATO became a Paper Tiger
on the other hand Ferdinand Marcos dictator of the Philippines consider SEATO as additional cash self-service.
Pakistan pull out after 1971 war with india, were SEATO gave none support to it member Pakistan
also pulle members like France and Britain the fincial support for SEATO

so in 1977 the USA formally dissolved SEATO.
 

oreocruncher

superkuf said:
Well, SEATO and CENTO didn't succed while NATO did, so the question should rather be "Why did NATO succed/survive"?
Click to expand...

I think because that framework is more suited to European countries than elsewhere...it's like why strengthening trade ties in European countries lead to more cooperation and reconciliation, but wasn't the case in East Asia...:eek:
 

zoomar

NATO succeeded because there was a very obvious regional threat, the USSR with massed Divisions behind the Iron Curtain and ICBMs aimed at the US and other western European allies. Who exactly was SEATO directed against? the USSR? China? What was the direct threat on the ground in SE Asia? the Viet Cong?
 

jahenders

Banned
I think you've hit the nail on the head -- no single, common threat. The US worried about a host of threats in Asia, but many of the countries only worried about individual direct threats.

zoomar said:
NATO succeeded because there was a very obvious regional threat, the USSR with massed Divisions behind the Iron Curtain and ICBMs aimed at the US and other western European allies. Who exactly was SEATO directed against? the USSR? China? What was the direct threat on the ground in SE Asia? the Viet Cong?
Click to expand...
 

CthulhuFhtagn

Banned
Pakistan, Cambodia, and South Vietnam were two key members. Those countries all sort of collapsed in one way or another during the Cold War.
 

Deleted member 6086

CthulhuFhtagn said:
Pakistan, Cambodia, and South Vietnam were two key members. Those countries all sort of collapsed in one way or another during the Cold War.
Click to expand...

This was obviously a diverse group of US-aligned regimes bunched together for convenience's sake. Its failure was inevitable. Why would Cambodia fight for Pakistan against India, or Pakistan against North Vietnam?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top