Ba Cut

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lê Quang Vinh(d. July 13, 1956), popularly known as Ba Cụt (Short Third in Vietnamese, referring to a shortened third finger), was a military commander of the Hoa Hao religious sect in the Mekong Delta. The sect fought the Vietnamese National Army, the Viet Minh, and the French Union forces in Vietnam in the late 1940s and early 1950s. In 1956, Ba Cut was captured by the forces of President Ngo Dinh Diem of South Vietnam and sentenced to death.

Contents

[edit] Career

Ba Cut was feared by his enemies, described as "a sort of lean Rasputin".[1] In 1948 he lead his own faction of the sect after its various military leaders took their own separate policies towards the French and Ho Chi Minh's Vietminh. He repeatedly made treaties with the French colonial forces and broke them. The French gave the Hoa Hao money and arms, and Ba Cut used them to fight the Vietminh, the French as well as the rival religious sect, the Cao Dai. He submitted to the French five times in this way, agreeing each time to fight the Vietminh and each time turned again.[2] According to Bernard Fall, "The hapless farmers who were under the rule of the maniacal Ba Cut fared worse [than those under other military leaders], for the latter was given to fits of incredible cruelty and had no sense of public duty."[3]

He broke again from the Hoa Hao leadership in August 1954 with 3000 men, when he refused to join with the national army and began resisting it with force.[4] An attempt by the army to defeat him failed, speculated to be due to the fact that the planned attack on his forces were leaked to him by Hoa Hao member of the National Defense Committee.[5]

Aged seventeen, he had cut off the top of his third finger to remind himself to always fight the French. When the Geneva Conference was settled in 1954 and handed North Vietnam to Ho Chi Minh's Vietminh, he vowed never to cut his hair until Vietnam was reunited. His principal criticism of Diem's government was that he believed it to be too passive in rejecting the partition of Vietnam, having led the fight against the Vietminh since 1947 in the Mekong Delta.[6]

In 1955, with Ngo Dinh Diem becoming the Prime Minister of the State of Vietnam (later to become South Vietnam /Republic of Vietnam), an attempt was made to integrate the Hoa Hao's private army into the Vietnamese National Army. Ba Cut was one of four Hoa Hao military leaders who refused the offer on April 23.[7] As a result, a battle between government troops under General Duong Van Minh and Ba Cut's men began in the Mekong Delta city of Can Tho on June 5. Five Hoa Hao battalions surrendered immediately and Ba Cut and the three leaders fled to Cambodia by the end of the month. The others eventually surrendered, but Ba Cut's fanatical loyalists continued to the end, when he was trapped and arrested in April 1956.[5]

[edit] Trial and execution

During the trial, Ba Cut theatrically removed his shirt so that the public gallery could see how many scars he had taken while fighting the communists and the French. He challenged any other man to show as many wounds as he had suffered. Diem's judge was unimpressed and sentenced him to death. Diem's adviser, Colonel Edward Lansdale from the CIA, was one of many who protested the decision. He felt that the execution would tarnish Diem's image and antagonise Ba Cut's followers.[5] He was executed on July 13, 1956 in Can Tho.[7] Ngo Dinh Nhu, Diem's younger brother and chief adviser said that a reprieve was not possible, since the army, in particular Minh, was opposed to it. Ba Cut had garnered sympathy from some sections of the southern public, who compared him to a character from the Wild West.[8] Later, many of the Hoa Hao members joined the National Liberation Front, fighting against Diem alongside the communist Vietcong which their leader had fought. A hardcore deputy Bay Dom and some followers retreated to the Cambodian border, where they swore not to rest until Ba Cut was avenged.[6]

[edit] Notes

  1. ^ Buttinger, p. 654.
  2. ^ Buttinger, p.1064
  3. ^ Fall, pp. 153–157.
  4. ^ Buttinger, p. 1104.
  5. ^ a b c Jacobs, p. 84.
  6. ^ a b Warner, pp. 105–107.
  7. ^ a b Buttinger, pp. 888–889.
  8. ^ Hammer, p. 74.

[edit] References