↑ Bộ Ngoại giao, Hiệp định Giơnevơ 50 năm nhìn lại, Nhà xuất bản Chính trị Quốc gia, Hà Nội, 2008, tr. 52
1 2 Wilson Center. Cold War International History Project Bulletin, Issue 16: The Geneva Conference of 1954. New Evidence from the Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China. Pp.7
↑ United States – Vietnam Relations, 1945–1967: A Study Prepared by the Department of Defense/III. B. Role and Obligations of State of Vietnam. The Pentagon 1967, cite "Not until 4 June, did the French National Assembly finally ratify the two treaties.3 By the Treaty of Independence, Vietnam was recognized "as a fully independent and sovereign State invested with all the competence recognized by international law." Vietnam agreed to replace France "in all the rights and obligations resulting from international treaties or conventions contracted by France on behalf or on account of the State of Vietnam or of any other treaties or conventions concluded by France on behalf of French Indochina insofar as those acts concern Vietnam." In other words, the GVN assumed responsibility for all agreements executed prior to ratification of the independence treaty. Under the accompanying Treaty of Association, Vietnam's status as an equal in the French Union was acknowledged for the first time, and with it the right (subsequently re-confirmed) to determine its extent of participation in the Union. The State of Vietnam was, therefore, a fully independent entity by ngày 4 tháng 6 năm 1954. France's international obligations in or for Vietnam as of that date were freely taken over by the GVN. This was in contrast, it might be added, to the DRV's abrogation of agreements concluded in Vietnam's behalf by France when Ho's regime took power on ngày 2 tháng 9 năm 1945.4"
↑ The Pentagon Papers Gravel Edition Volume 1, Chapter 5, "Origins of the Insurgency in South Vietnam, 1954-1960" (Boston: Beacon Press, 1971)Lưu trữ 2017-06-23 tại Wayback Machine Trích: "France, as the third party in Vietnam, then became pivotal to any political settlement, its executor for the West. But France had agreed to full independence for the GVN on ngày 4 tháng 6 năm 1954, nearly six weeks before the end of the Geneva Conference. By the terms of that June agreement, the GVN assumed responsibility for international contracts previously made on its behalf by France; but, there having been no reference to subsequent contracts, it was technically free of the Geneva Agreements. It has been argued to the contrary that the GVN was bound by Geneva because it possessed at the time few of the attributes of full sovereignty, and especially because it was dependent on France for defense. But such debates turn on tenuous points of international law regarding the prerogatives of newly independent or partitioned states. France speedily divested itself of responsibilities for "civil administration" in South Vietnam."
↑ Bernard B. Fall, The Two Vietnams: A Political and Military Analysis (New York: Praeger, 1964)
↑ The Indochinese Experience of the French and the Americans: Nationalism and Communism in Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam. Arthur J. Dommen. Indiana University Press, 20-02-2002. P 240. Trích: The question remains of why the treaties of independence and association were simply initialed by Laniel and Buu Loc and not signed by Coty and Bao Dai… Many writers place the blame for the non-signature of the treaties on the Vietnamese. But there exists no logical explanation why it should have been the Vietnamese, rather than French, who refused their signature to the treaties which had been negotiated. Bao Dai had arrived in French in April believing the treaty-signing was only a matter of two or three weeks away. However, a quite satisfactory explanation in what was happening in Geneva, where the negotiations were moving ahead with suprising rapidity.… After Geneva, Bao Dai’s treaties was never completed
↑ Wilson Center. Cold War International History Project Bulletin, Issue 16: The Geneva Conference of 1954. New Evidence from the Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China. Pp. 12
1 2 Bộ Ngoại giao, Hiệp định Giơnevơ 50 năm nhìn lại, Nhà xuất bản Chính trị Quốc gia, Hà Nội, 2008, tr.286
1 2 Wilson Center. Cold War International History Project Bulletin, Issue 16: The Geneva Conference of 1954. New Evidence from the Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China. Pp.6
↑ Why Vietnam, Archimedes L.A Patti, Nhà xuất bản Đà Nẵng, 2008, trang 730
↑ Washington had indicated at Geneva that "it would view any renewal of the aggression in violation of [the agreement] with grave concern and as seriously threatening international peace and security". Nguồn: Duiker, William, Ho Chi Minh - A Life, Hyperion, 2000, tr. 470
↑ Bernard B. Fall, The Two Vietnams: A Political and Military Analysis (New York: Praeger, 1964) . Theo Fall thì phái đoàn Quốc gia Việt Nam không có quyền tham gia ký do lực lượng quân sự của chính quyền này quá nhỏ và nó vẫn ở trong Liên hiệp Pháp
↑ Pierre Asselin, "The Democratic Republic of Vietnam and the 1954 Geneva Conference: A Revisionist Critique," Cold War History 11, no. 2 (May 2011): 155-195
↑ Nguyễn Quang Ngọc 2006, Chương XI – Việt Nam trong chín năm kháng chiến chống thực dân Pháp và xây dựng chế độ dân chủ mới (1945-1954), Tiến trình Lịch sử Việt Nam, Hà Nội, Giáo dục, Tr.315-324
↑ Đảng Cộng sản Việt Nam. Điện biên phủ - Hội nghị Giơ-ne-vơ. Văn kiện Đảng. Nhà xuất bản Chính trị quốc gia. Hà nội – 2014, tr.614
↑ Hansen, Peter (2009). “Bắc Di Cư: Catholic Refugees from the North of Vietnam, and Their Role in the Southern Republic, 1954–1959”. Journal of Vietnamese Studies. 4 (3): 173–211. doi:10.1525/vs.2009.4.3.173.
↑ The Reunification of Vietnam, PRESIDENT NGO DINH DIEM'S BROADCAST DECLARATION ON THE GENEVA AGREEMENTS AND FREE ELECTIONS (ngày 16 tháng 7 năm 1955), page 24, Vietnam bulletin - a weekly publication of the Embassy of Vietnam in United States, Special issue No.16, Available onlineLưu trữ 2017-05-01 tại Wayback Machine Trích: "Our policy is a policy for peace. But nothing will lead us astray of our goal, the unity of our country, a unity in freedom and not in slavery. Serving the cause of our nation, more than ever we will struggle for the reunification of our homeland. We do not reject the principle of free elections as peaceful and democratic means to achieve that unity. However, if elections constitute one of the bases of true democracy, they will be meaningful only on the condition that they be absolutely free. Now, faced with a regime of oppression as practiced by the Viet Minh, we remain skeptical concerning the possibility of fulfilling the conditions of free elections in the North." dịch là "Chính sách của chúng tôi là chính sách hoà bình. Nhưng không có gì có thể khiến chúng tôi đi chệch khỏi mục tiêu của chúng tôi là sự thống nhất đất nước, thống nhất trong tự do chứ không phải trong nô lệ. Vì dân tộc, chúng tôi sẽ đấu tranh hết sức mình cho sự thống nhất đất nước. Chúng tôi không từ chối nguyên tắc tuyển cử tự do để thống nhất đất nước một cách hoà bình và dân chủ. Tuy nhiên nếu những cuộc bầu cử tạo thành một trong những nền tảng cơ bản của nền dân chủ thật sự thì chúng chỉ có ý nghĩa với điều kiện chúng hoàn toàn tự do. Hiện nay, thực tế phải đối mặt với chế độ áp bức của Việt Minh, chúng tôi nghi ngờ về việc có thể bảo đảm những điều kiện của cuộc bầu cử tự do ở miền Bắc."
↑ Duncanson, Dennis J. Government and Revolution in Vietnam. New York: Oxford University Press, 1968. tr 223, trích "But Diem set his face against even the preparatory discussions about elections which the Final Declaration had enjoined (its force, if any, was uncertain); his behaviour was put down in the West most commonly to obstinacy and avidity for despotic power". Trích "yet the truth was more complicated then either these critics, or the drafter of the agreement, may have realized. Obstinate and avid for power Diem may also have been, but the decisive factor for him was the balance of population between North and South: before the cease-fire the Commumists had had under their control barely a quater of the total population of the country, and perhaps not that; the cease-fire had awarded them, with their slightly smaller half of the national territory, a clear majority (even taking account of their transfer of population) of close on 2 millions". Trích:"In the circumstances prevailing in 1955 and 1956 - anarchy of the Sects and of the retiring Vietminh in the South, terror campaign of the land reform and resultant peasant uprising round Vinh in the North - it was only to be expected that voters would vote, out of fear of reprisals, in favour of the authorities under whom they found themselves; that the ICC had no hope of ensuring a truly free election at that time has been admitted since by the chief sponsor of the Final Declaration, Lord Avon."
↑ Woodruff, Mark (2005). Unheralded Victory: The Defeat of The Viet Cong and The North Vietnamese. Arlington, Virginia: Presidio Press. page 6. ISBN 0-8914-1866-0. trích "The elections were not held. South Vietnam, which had not signed the Geneva Accords, did not believe the Communists in North Vietnam would allow a fair election. In January 1957, the International Control Commission (ICC), comprising observers from India, Poland, and Canada, agreed with this perception, reporting that neither South nor North Vietnam had honored the armistice agreement. With the French gone, a return to the traditional power struggle between north and south had begun again."
↑ Clark Clifford. Set a date in Vietnam, Stick to it, Get out. The Life, 22nd May, 1970. P. 38
↑ Pentagon Papers, Evolution of the War. U.S. and France's Withdrawal from Vietnam, 1954-56, The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, page 5-6 available onlineLưu trữ 2012-04-05 tại Wayback Machine
↑ Pentagon Papers, Evolution of the War. U.S. and France's Withdrawal from Vietnam, 1954-56, The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, trang IV-V available onlineLưu trữ 2012-04-05 tại Wayback Machine
↑ Bernard B. Fall, The Two Vietnams (New York: Praeger, 1964) pp. 153-4
1 2 Why Vietnam, Archimedes L.A Patti, Nhà xuất bản Đà Nẵng, 2008, trang 739
↑ Why Vietnam, Archimedes L.A Patti, Nhà xuất bản Đà Nẵng, 2008, trang 740
↑ Trích tại The CIA: A Forgotten History; All other actions: The Pentagon Papers, Document No. 15: 'Lansdale Team's Report on Covert Saigon Mission in '54 and '55,' pp. 53-66.
