Miller discussed his recent book, in which he challenges previous scholarship that presents an overly simplistic view of the South Vietnamese president. Diem led South Vietnam as a United States-backed president until he was deposed and assassinated with American approval in 1963.
Two previous schools of thought had described Diem as either an American puppet with no independent agenda, or a "traditional" figure who was not interested in development or modernization, said Miller, who described Diem as a leader with a distinct personality and agenda.
"He had all kinds of ideas about how to pursue political and social change in Vietnam, and he did so," Miller said. "In the long run, his policies were not successful there was definitely more failure than success but he did have an agenda."
Miller's lecture drew from this revised portrait of Diem to construct a more accurate model of the breakdown of the political figure's relationship with the U.S., from his visit to Washington in 1957, when he was treated to a ticker-tape parade, to his assassination six years later. In particular, Miller examined the links between former president John F. Kennedy and Diem, whom Miller described as having "intertwined fates."
While there have been a host of other famous or infamous regime changes in the United States' history, Miller said Diem's is more interesting, as he had just recently been a "model American ally."
Miller's book, "Misalliance: Ngo Dinh Diem, the United States, and the Fate of South Vietnam," which has a broader scope than the lecture, attempts to understand Diem's beginnings, his views on nation-building and why his ideas failed, Miller said. It also covers the "delusions" of the leaders involved, including American policymakers' overestimation of their ability to influence Diem, and Diem's belief that he was winning his war against the North Vietnamese.
Lessons learned from the experience of America with Diem and regime change can still inform policy decisions today, Miller said.
"The groups and governments and leaders with whom the United States seeks to partner will always have their own agendas," he said. "They will always have their own ideas about development, about nation building, about how to transform their countries. Too often, the United States discounts the ideas that the other groups and leaders are bringing to these relationships."
In the question-and-answer session after the talk, history professor Michael Ermarth said that former president Franklin D. Roosevelt's stance toward Nicaraguan president Anastasio Somoza, whom he called "our S.O.B.," was similar to America's relationship with Diem.
Miller agreed that this sentiment applied to Diem's saga, adding that the U.S. chose to ignore Diem's oppressive government because the countries shared an opposition to communism.
Lulu Carter '17 said the lecture gave her a perspective that she had not previously experienced.
"The way that different leaders construe the meaning to be a state is so relevant, and applying it now to a lot of the cultural and international issues that we are facing today is something that we should really be thinking about," Carter said.
Phil Schaefer '64, another attendee, saw the Vietnam War was unfolding during his time at Dartmouth. He audited Miller's class on the Vietnam War last fall and recently edited a collection of essays by his classmates, who served in the war.
"It is an otherworldly experience to sit in a class a history class talking about an event through which you lived," Schaefer said. "It's a little bit different."
To compile research for his book, Miller, who teaches a class on the war, visited Vietnam twice and reviewed South Vietnamese government archives in Ho Chi Min City, France and the United States.
The lecture, titled "Misalliance: Ngo Dinh Diem, the United States, and the Fate of South Vietnam," was hosted by the Rockefeller Center.
