↑ 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
↑ Sách: Bảo Đại, hay là những ngày cuối cùng của vương triều An Nam; Tác giả: Daniel Grandclément, trang 150
↑ "Origins of the Insurgency in South Vietnam, 1954-1960" Trang 242-69.
↑ Clark Clifford. Set a date in Vietnam, Stick to it, Get out. The Life, 22nd May, 1970. P. 38
↑ From Prologue To Epilogue In Vietnam, Mortimer T. Cohen, 1979, p.227 and 251. Trích: But Eisenhower knew then that 80 percent of the people in a free election would vote for Ho Chi Minh over Bao Dai. Would Diem do any better than Bao Dai? Why should he? No one in Vietnam could beat Ho Chi Minh in an open election. He was the George Washington of the nation... The reason Diem did not hold unification elections was that he thought he’d lose them.
↑ 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 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. 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."
