I agree that this is much too soon; I thought that when BJ Clinton basically pretended the war never happened. Until the Hanoi government gives the South Vietnamese people the freedoms they enjoyed before the fall of Saigon, there is no reason to engage them in diplomatic relations. This sends a horrible message to the people who fought there, the families of those who died there, and the American public in general about fickle we are about our foreign policy. Right now we have troops around the world fighting, and they can’t disregard the possibility that the people they are fighting might be “friends” in 10 years.
Red China resents North Vietnam because their slaves are even cheaper for “American” companies than those in Red China.
It would hardly be a new development - politics makes strange bedfellows. In the Revolutionary War, France and Spain were allies - just 15 years later we found ourselves at war with the French. In the First World War, Japan and Italy were our allies, and in the Siberian Expedition, the Soviets our enemies. In the Second War, 23 years on, the former friends were our enemies, and the Soviets and Chinese our allies. Two years after the war’s end, the Soviets had become our dire foe, and another three years after that the Chinese were as well, while the Japanese were slowly becoming our valued ally in Asia. Just 30 years ago, India was a Cold-War foe, and Pakistan an ally. Now India is becoming rapidly aligned with the US, and it is Pakistan that has become more and more an enemy.