The author with Ngyuen Van Tuan in 2015. Tuan was 20 at the time. He died in 2018 from hemofilia, associated with dioxin poisoning.

What lies ahead for caregivers like Mai Thi Loi and their families? What does this review of people to people engagement tell us about Agent Orange? Why should Americans even care about a war that finished fifty years ago?

The answer to the first question seems simple enough. Agent Orange reminds us that for those directly affected, wars never end with the fighting. The fifteen families profiled in these blogs, together with their children and grandchildren not yet born, will suffer from Agent Orange for years to come. 

But if they are the victims, these families are also on the front line of advocacy.

Consider the following (slightly abridged) reflections of Angie Zheng, our 2025 Peace Fellow after meeting Nguyen Huu Phuc, a veteran, and his wife Nguyen Thi Thanh last summer. The couple produced eight children. Two died and three were poisoned by dioxin. They include Nguyen Thi Nam, now 36, paralyzed by cerebral palsy:

“Before we leave, I ask if we might take a photo of the family together. They agree. Mrs. Phuc leans over Nam and begins adjusting her blouse, smoothing the wrinkles with her hand. She murmurs something, low and rhythmic, as if just for her daughter. Her daughter laughs, her grin stretching across her face.

“It is such an ordinary gesture, but I find myself holding my breath as I watch. This is a kind of love that does not need an audience (or) a camera. It is the love that sustains this house every single day. As we leave, I think about everything they have told me: the history of the war, the cow they once kept, the roof they hope to repair, the chickens roaming the yard. I think about Mrs. Phuc’s hands smoothing her daughter’s shirt, the softness of that gesture.

“It is tempting to turn this into a story about resilience and about the triumph of the human spirit. But that feels too tidy. Their lives are ongoing. There will still be chickens to feed, a daughter to care for, a roof to fix before the next flood. (But) for a few hours at least, I was allowed to sit with them, get to know them, and hear their stories. This, I (will) hold close.”

This simple connection between a family managing severe disability in Vietnam and a compassionate American student, is people to people engagement at its most powerful. It also shows why families are such good advocates. The reason is simple: they are motivated and they are in for the long haul.

Consider Nepal, another Asia country that is struggling to recover for a war that ended many years ago. If Agent Orange parents in Vietnam are relentless in keeping their children alive, children of the disappeared in Nepal are equally relentless in demanding to know how their parents died. Few movements have done more to shape international human rights than families of the disappeared.

Vietnam is of course different from Nepal and I am not suggesting that Agent Orange families are advocates in the conventional sense. Some, like Le Thanh Duc, are natural communicators. But most, like the Phucs, have no interest in preaching to others and are often isolated within their own communities. If asked, they would probably expect AEPD’s outreach workers to speak for them, just as AEPD expects our organization to speak for them outside Vietnam.

Telling their stories will remain our main contribution to advocacy, and the last sixteen years have shown that no one does this better than students. As a result, we hope to double down this year and pair two or three American students with affected families in Vietnam. Speakers at the Stimson seminar expressed the hope that foundations will be looking to fill the void left by USAID. If this is the case we hope they will consider our students.

*

What role lies ahead for advocates in Vietnam and the US?

Here in the US, is it realistic to try and rebuild the partnership between civil society and government that put Agent Orange on the map back in the 1980s? This seems unlikely. As the Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said at the recent Davos meeting, nostalgia does not make a strategy.

Could the US government once again be a reliable partner? The Trump Administration seems to have little interest in humanitarian aid but it is keenly interested in trade and in containing China. This may account for the agreement last September to continue supporting victims of Agent Orange that I referred to in an earlier blog.

The agreement was drawn up between the Vietnamese government and the US Embassy in Hanoi. If implementation of the new program is also left to the Embassy that is where American NGOs will have to make their case. They should explain that USAID’s model of institutional care holds out the best hope for the stricken children of veterans. An assessment of USAID‘s program in the eight provinces would be a good place to start.

It may also be that advocates for Vietnam still have allies in the US Congress, even if they are currently keeping their heads down. It is surely encouraging that other advocacy campaigns are building bipartisan support for issues a lot less close to home than Agent Orange, such as the Burmese Muslims, or Rohingyas.

When all is said and done, however, any long-term solution will have to come from Vietnam rather than the US.

I cannot imagine that this suggestion will be controversial. Vietnamese are united when it comes to Agent Orange, and the tragedy is central to modern Vietnam’s identity as well as a symbol of Vietnam’s resistance in the war. As long as veterans are alive and respected it will remain that way, and they will have a powerful advocate in The Vietnam Association for Victims of Agent Orange/dioxin (VAVA).

The question is how much financial assistance the government will provide.  As Tim Reiser, Senator Leahy’s former aide, pointed out during the Stimson seminar, Vietnam is approaching the status of a wealthier middle-income country. It should be better able than most governments to cover the cost of expanded health care as US aid dwindles.

But like any government, Vietnam must weigh spending priorities and an ageing population that will put an increasing drain on the economy. The fifteen families profiled in these blogs barely have enough money as it is, and the government does not provide compensation to second and third generation Agent Orange victims.

*

Taking a step back, can we expect Americans to remain interested in a war that ended fifty years ago? The short answer is – absolutely. And Agent Orange offers a compelling and relevant case study.

Students of peace will be amazed that such a cruel weapon could help to build a bridge and promote reconciliation between two former bitter enemies, as discussed in my third blog. Agent Orange shows that peace-building is rich in possibilities and gets there in the end. That has to be heartening.

Students of war will find something very different – a war strategy gone haywire. It is, for example, astounding that the US military unleashed Agent Orange on its own soldiers and Vietnamese without thinking through the possible consequences.  In today’s world, the US government (and maybe even Dow Chemical, which manufactured the herbicide) would have been found guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity if they had had so much as an inkling of what the herbicide would do to civilians and non-combatants.

The fact that the US accepted responsibility for the damage to its own soldiers from Agent Orange but not Vietnamese is hypocrisy of the first order.

Agent Orange is also a poster child for a particularly vicious type of weapon that is indiscriminate and remains active until it is detonated, which can be years after the fighting ends. These are attributes that Agent Orange shares with anti-personnel landmines, UXO, and cluster bombs. The main difference, for our purposes, is that landmines can be removed and destroyed. Once dioxin poisoning kicks in, it cannot be reversed.

There is much to learn from these deadly remnants of war. At the very least they give us a reason to pause before rushing into the next generation of weapons. Yet the arms manufacturers, dealers and policy-makers never err on the side of caution.

Witness the war in Ukraine. I understand that Ukraine is fighting for its very existence, but the use of drones by both sides seems about to produce a new generation of drones guided by artificial intelligence. This is a terrifying prospect.

*

Finally, there remains the nagging question that I raised at the start of this series. Why should we continue to care about a war that ended half a century ago when there are so many other crises in the world today and so many other demands on our time and generosity?

This is, of course, a personal question and everyone will have their own answer. We all have our causes and one of mine is Agent Orange in Vietnam. Personal contact will do that for you and I have never forgotten meeting caregivers like Mai Thi Loi and victims like Tuan, the young craftsman who passed away in 2018 and is shown in the photo above.

But it could just as easily be Afghan refugees or the homeless center close to where I live in Washington. Of course, there are degrees of awfulness and a homeless shelter cannot compete with Agent Orange or the massacre of innocents in Gaza. But compassion is not measured by statistics. You either feel it or you don’t.

Compassion is not fashionable or respected in today’s world. Refugees and migrants are treated with contempt and cruelty, and advocates for social justice are derided as “deranged” and “woke.” We are told by those in power that “might is right.” This is worse than compassion fatigue. It is compassion denial.

It is not easy to stand up to such cynicism, but we must try. Our task at The Advocacy Project is to make the case that Agent Orange families in Vietnam still deserve our compassion for resisting one of the most devilish weapons ever devised by man.

After following their journey over the past decade this is not difficult.

*

MORE READING

Peace Fellow blogs: Our thanks to past Peace Fellows who have volunteered at AEPD since 2008 and laid the foundation for our work with Agent Orange caregivers: Chi Vu (2008); Gretchen Murphy (2009); Simon Klantschi (2010); Ryan McGovern (2011); Jesse Cottrell (2012); Kelly Howell (2013); Seth McIntyre (2014); Armando Gallardo; (2015); Ai Hoang (2016); Jacob Cohn (2017); Marcela de Campos (2018); Mia Coward (2019); Angie Zheng (2025).

Fellowships: Apply for a peace fellowship in Vietnam: AP is offering fellowships to students to volunteer at AEPD in 2016 and work with affected families.

Photos: View our photos of Agent Orange from Vietnam.

All there is to know about the AEPD – AP partnership: including profiles and resources 

Reading: Most material referenced in this article and accompanying blogs is linked in the text. For more detailed information we rec0mmend the following:

From Enemies to Partners – Vietnam, the US and Agent Orange by Le Ke Son and Charles R. Bailey (G Anton Publishing, 2017). The definitive account of how two former bitter enemies found common cause in cleaning up Agent Orange.

The Long Reckoning by George Black (Alfred Knopf, 2025). The inspiring story of how US veterans helped to launch a movement to heal the wounds of war.

The Agent Orange in Vietnam Program (The Aspen Institute). A rich online resource that includes maps of areas sprayed and other background material.

The War Legacies Project. An international network dedicated to exposing and ending the long-term health and environmental impacts of the use of Agent Orange and unexploded ordnance (UXOs), together with Agent Orange Record.