Introduction
The U.S. was in a challenging position in the middle of 1970 as it went through the Vietnam War and civil discontent. It was a time when American society was pushed beyond its limits and was, on different sides, facing greater dissatisfaction with the war conduct and with the government’s credibility. The appearance of the Pentagon Papers in 1971 and the succeeding Watergate case essentially recalled the attitude of Americans towards the leaders and the institutions entrusted with their government afresh. The Pentagon Papers, a Prime Department of Defense secret study that exposed and unveiled the dark reality of political-military deception by the government dating back to 1945, exposed the heavy nature of deceit in the government. Subsequently spilled by the then-military analyst Daniel Ellsberg, the material disclosed that the Washington administration had acted in a misleading, not-in-open-view manner about the size of the Vietnam War and the cost of the support for it and dramatically disguised the fight’s possible positive outcome. Coupled with their self-esteem, this was a quickening start to a more profound national trauma that had resulted from years of social turmoil. However, the Watergate scandal was the next event to take place to elevate further the public’s mistrust of governmental institutions, which were then revealed to be ridden by a vast network of illegal activities made to the top of power and, eventually, President Richard Nixon resigned. This instigated the unmasking of public officials’ malevolent behaviors and misdeeds, which was evidence of the mature constriction of democracy, thus challenging the very ideals upon which America was built. The disgraceful conduct of these scandals sparked a public debate on problems such as openness, responsibility, and equal rights between the government and the country’s citizens. It resulted in the adoption of existing amendments to the legislation aimed at ensuring these issues are adequately resolved.
Moreover, they brought many Americans together by making them have a strong desire for better governance and to make their leaders accountable, altering American politics. The Pentagon Papers and Watergate legacy will live for long: not a single year of democratic institutions being under pressure can erase their powerful message about being extra careful with keeping these institutions protected. As history retrospect sheds light on these paramount episodes in the United States, we are reminded that openness, the central role of the press, and the citizens’ inherent ability to bring about change are crucial to democracy.
The Whistleblower’s Dilemma
Daniel Ellsberg’s move from being a committed member of the government’s actions towards the Vietnam War to being a whistleblower has the plot of moral dilemmas and individual change. However, Ellsberg, like many senior leaders at that time, saw the war as the best possible way to accomplish the U.S. and the world’s general goals. On the Pentagon papers, The revelation of government deception and the exposure of its disregard for the public trust brought him to a different place than he had been before. Besides the tons of classified files, the gap between what the government used to tell the people during that period and the actual problem indicated in the papers did emerge more clearly when he carefully went through them. He realized that he had a midlife crisis, and he saw that on his path of leading a criminal lifestyle, he could never acquire true happiness (Colazzo et al., 2020). When Ellsberg came face to face with the gravity of the government’s untruthfulness, his arrogance regarding the basis for the war, coupled with his actions inside the very system that fostered these lies, caused him to reconsider the war’s legitimacy and his obligations within it. That he preferred to disclose the Pentagon Papers rather quickly does not mean it was an impulsive decision; it resulted from a reflective thought process and moral dilemma. Although he was aware of the seriousness of a national security breach, he understood that the general public deserves the truth and that the risks to him and national security are outweighed by the needs of the media, which warrants the disclosure of the government’s misdoings and failings.
The aftermath of Seymour Hersh’s revelation of the Pentagon Papers was instant and recklessly devastating, illustrating the precarious position of whistleblowers. The New York Times’s publishing of the documents, a bullying campaign by the Nixon administration aimed to denounce Ellsberg as a traitor and security risk, followed the release. These personal insults were on top of legal prosecution, whereby he was not sure of facing life imprisonment if the Espionage Act prosecuted him to the maximum. These presented a high burden on his area, prompting him and his family to undergo surveillance, harassment, and threats. Despite these pressures, Mr. Ellsberg’s conviction remained unwavering, and his decision was encouraged by the recognition that democracy and transparency are the pinnacles of the necessary moral principles (Guo et al., 2021). This receiving commitment to self-indulgence for the public interest certainly made him a symbolic figure for selflessness and righteousness.
The Revelation
The revelation of the Pentagon Papers was a tremendous puzzle of lies penned in secret that eventually shattered the American people’s beliefs and understanding of what had taken place during the Vietnam War. The papers narrated not only the constant military operations and covert ones in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia but also the mechanisms of succession governments using exaggeration in lying to the public and Congress about the size, costs, and prospects of winning the war. The testimony showed that high-ranking government officials had questionable assessments about the war even as far back as the 60s, Yet they still felt driven to intensify their presence in the conflict without disclosing their reservations, tentative assessments, and the scope of their military activities (Health- Kelly et al., 2020). The individuals knew on one end that the authorities were telling them about the live battle and desire for success. At the same time, the classified documents starkly contradicted this reality. This unorthodox, shocking occurrence of multi-perspective-based warfare was something that the individuals had not imagined before. The truthfulness and appalling nature of such a representation have destroyed a part of the American people’s trust in their government, causing an intensified analysis of the U.S. foreign policy and, therefore, a boost in the antiwar sentiment. The leaks are more than just revealing the facts regarding the war in Vietnam; they exposed the shred politics and the deep-rooted manipulation within the policymakers and leadership of the USA, raising questions of whether Americans as a nation are ready to confront some of those issues.
The underlying objectives of the Pentagon Papers, including the secret initiation of the war into neighboring countries and the management of the media to deceive public opinion, revealed the clear divide between government actions and democratic principles. The papers showed that the Johnson administration, through the authorization of the bombing of North Vietnam and the deployment of U.S. ground troops without congressional approval, despised the trust of the American people in violation of their oath of office, which they swore in taking office. Besides that, the papers brought to light the very controversial incident in the Gulf of Tonkin, which refers to the event the Johnson administration misrepresented and used as a pretext to escalate the involvement of the U.S. forces in Vietnam (Manikandan et al., 2022). Such distortion of the facts and keeping the public in the dark at all costs reflects the government’s absolute determination to use any means—good or bad—to have the people’s support of its policies in place. The public was deeply affected by these Headlines, which started national discussions on four key questions: how far presidential authority should go, whether Congress should have more responsibilities for foreign policy, and if the press is necessary to check against misuse of government power. The emergence of the Pentagon Papers turned out to be a trigger towards the adoption of the measures of the reforms of legislation, which, among others, was the War Powers Act, meant to break the power of the executive branch to involve the country in wars or international conflicts without specific legislation by the Congress, leading to a significant change in governance transparency and accountability in the United States.
Fallout from the Leak
The opening phase of publishing of the Pentagon Papers, right after their release, was marked by an intense debate at the national level, spearheaded by a media scrum, looking to disentangle the vast flow of information and implications of the leaked documents. Governed by the New York Times with the Washington Post following up and others, it takes the courage of newspapers across the nation to publish some parts of the papers while still being pressured by the government and the administration of Nixon that accuses the act of it of endangering the country. This era was the turning phase in American journalism when the press accepted its sole responsibility to not only perform official duties but also keep an eye on the government and provide the public with the necessary information that may be of national importance. The press’s insistence on counting and going against the force of the law, even with sanctions made, underscores the role of freedom of the media as the key to democracy.
The public’s response to the Pentagon Papers also came in priceless forms. For the Americans, the news only provided them with a strong affirmation that their fears over the Vietnam War and the government were based on reality. That could probably be the reason for the increasing number of anti-war protests and the change of a significant fraction of public opinion. The demonstrations got even more acute in the nation, and protesters both sought for the war to be over with and sought for those involved in the lies and deceits that the leak exposed revealed to be accountable (Nigam et al., 2020). The massive public outpouring of discontent had a profound impact on the political environment, and together with the growing loss of public confidence in the Presidency and general governmental institutions, it created a crisis of confidence that profoundly affected the lives of many Americans. Apart from this, the leak led to a thoughtful reckoning on the part of Americans about whether the kind of democracy they have is the kind they want, whether the president should be accorded such power, and whether the citizenry has a responsibility to hold their leaders accountable. In addition to clearing the lie behind the war in Vietnam, the Pentagon Papers initiated a discussion on the essential ideals of governing, openness, and the social contract between its citizens and the government, subsequently leading to an incestuous modification of the American political consciousness.
The Nixon Administrative Response: Secrecy and Retaliation
The actions foreign policy took during the Nixon administration in response to the leaking of the Pentagon papers were immediate, with both public condemnation and the hidden scheme to curb the damage and purge those involved. The creation of the leak was considered a direct interference with the executive branch and a threat to national security by President Nixon and his advisors, so a multi-prong strategy was invented to contain the damage (Roszko et al., 2020). One of the administration’s strategies to stall the revelations was to mount legal challenges to prevent further publication of the documents and a public relations campaign that attempted to cast Ellsberg as a traitor to his country. Ultimately, the administration’s attempts to control the release of those papers represented a profound aversion to transparency and a desire for absolute control, stemming from Nixon’s broader craving for secrecy and hatred of leaks and his adversarial worldview towards the press. The administration’s legal wrangling with The New York Times, which led to the temporary suspension of publication, took up the baton of freedom of the press in the Supreme Court, and the controversial issue of governmental transparency vs. the public’s right to know was simmering.
However, prosecution was one of many courses of action the National Council took. Instead, the “Plumbers” unit, which specializes in surveillance and illegal actions, was set up to prevent leaks and gather information about political rivals. These Covert Operations groups living in the White House started these illegal bathroom activities that eventually led to the cry of the Watergate scandal. The administration not only moved against private leaking of the damaging details, but they also went on to rig a break-in at Ellsberg’s psychiatrist’s office in search of the information that could backlash him (Stevenson et al., 2021). They were like a wave of the riot that caused illegality and moral inversion, illustrating how he willingly did all the possible things to protect his administration from being wrecked politically. The attack on Ellsberg and the engagement in press suppression demonstrated Nixon’s disrespect and rejection of dissent as well as was an evident indication of a trend that was shifting towards authoritarianism. What exacerbates the aftermath is the capacity of the public to reject these tactics in the long run and the impending Watergate uncovered, a situation that sets the precedence on the must-occur encroachment of executive long claws by the American democracy.
Watergate
Watergate Gate and the leaking of the Pentagon Papers are two separate events. However, they are linked with themes of secrecy, deception, and abuse of power, which were characteristic of the North administration. The Pentagon Papers not only laid bare the government’s lies about the US-backed war in Vietnam but also created a stage for the administration is later increasingly paranoid and outright illegal attempts to control information and retaliate against the administration’s perceived enemies, including anti-war activists, media figures, and researchers like Riesman. The Watergate emerged by forming the “Plumbers,” who were initially responsible for blocking leaks like Ellsberg’s (Stephen et al., 2022). However, their well-known work, which culminated in the Democratic National Committee’s headquarters break-in in the Watergate complex, was initially treated as a benign “third-rate burglary.” This incident, as many thought, if truth to be told, was The administration’s efforts to obstruct the search over the Watergate break-in as well as the fact the secret White House recordings would pin Nixon in the cover-up, and he did not put the rule of law above his head. Like the Pentagon Papers, Watergate was a symbol that indicated governmental overreaching and the fault of that time. This led to a constitutional crisis that put American democracy to the acid test of its resilience.
The Impact of Watergate was widely devastating, leading to the flagrant dismissal of a United States President, the only one in history. The Watergate affair was evidence of the historic descent of U.S. President Richard Nixon. This gravitation process was not limited to the faults of the Watergate break-in and the cover-up process but also to the unethical and unscrambled leadership style. The incident seriously affected American politics and governance, resulting in a complete overhaul of how the executive powers must be used and new laws and regulations to prevent similar acts of abuse in the country later. It has also bolstered the critical function that investigative literature and a vigilant press play in purveying truth and bringing those in power to account in society (Whitefield et al., 2022). The events at Watergate and the Marine Corps Papers highlighted the need for the governmental system to have values such as transparency and limits to the executive branch’s power.
Parallel Narratives
The Pentagon Papers and the Watergate scandal, though distinct in their origins and specifics, unfold as parallel narratives that converge on a common theme: the heightened threat to American democratic values embedded in disclosure, secret-forming, and governmental wrongdoing. The revelation of the Pentagon papers spelled out the magnitude of the fraud practiced by the U.S. government regarding the evidence from the Vietnam War in the sense that they misinformed the public and Congress about the real motives behind the war. This revelation, furthermore, not only undermined trust between the governing authorities and the governed but also emphasized the very essence of transparency and accountability of the senior administrative positions’ exponents. Similarly, just like the Watergate scandal, which kick-started with a break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters and unveiled a complex web of illegal activities masterminded by the Nixon administration, it served as a reminder about the consequences of unholy red powers of the Presidency and the vital role of the press to unmask the truth. The public was given an image of a government in dissension with its central objective to the point that it deemed a nationwide discussion of the processes of power and the means to protect democratic governance necessary.
The revelation of the Pentagon Papers and Watergate scandal, at first glance, may seem to be a separate event in the chronicle of American history, but if one pauses over, the two become conjoined themes of government secrecy, abuse of power, and the erosion of public trust. The films show very clearly that democratic institutions become vulnerable when there is no check on the power and only secrecy around is used. These checks and balances, which also tend to show the robustness and adaptability of the press, judiciary, and legislative branch in correcting such anomalies, are also highlighted. The Pentagon Papers gave rise to a milestone court decision in support of the position that the press is a crucial part of society in democracy, while Watergate led to the only happening in U.S. history where the president had to resign, brought about by interventions from Congress, court, and judiciary. This dual-narrative subsequently provoked serious debates about the limitations of presidential power and the responsibilities of government, and the key reforms such as the War Powers Act, and Freedom of Information Act were introduced, all of them illustrating the shared push for more democracy. However, when you think about the articles on Pentagon Paper and Watergate, it becomes clear that what America during those times had to deal with were not only political issues of that moment but also, the challenges to the core pillars of democracy.
Climax and Resolution
The culmination of the Pentagon Papers and Watergate scandals became one of the turning points in American political and legislative history, denoting unprecedented events that would transform the law of the land and the collective consciousness of the nation. By publishing the Pentagon Papers and the Watergate case, the nation witnessed a constitutional crisis of great magnitude that threatened to forward the pillars of the American government. The Supreme Court ruling in New York Times Co. v. United States (1971), which protected the circulation of the Pentagon Papers, confirmed that an unflinching free press would remain in place even if the government attempted to conceal data that counters the public interest. This was an important judgment from the judiciary, which emphasized its role as one of the main pillars of the democratic system and its part in maintaining the controls and limits for the government. On the other hand, the Watergate scandal had an ultimate resolution, with President Nixon’s resignation in 1974, being the first time in American history that a president stood down from the office due to the scandals. Nixon’s resignation from his office with the looming impeachment proceedings as a stark reality is a clear sign of the realization that the high office of the land is accountable to the rule of law and public scrutiny.
The result of these co-scandals has been the initiation of major reforms with the purpose of preventing these forerunners of power and abuse. Congress then passed a range of legislative laws, which included the War Powers Act, the Privacy Act, and amendments to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) as well. This helped the executive branch to be sighted and simultaneously enhanced the authoritarianism and transparency of the government. Such reforms were designed to rehabilitate the public faith in government institutions by ensuring greater checks on presidential power and providing citizens with more means to obtain access to official records. Apart from that, the Federal Election Campaign Act was amended to fleece the issue of transparency in political campaign contributions, which was one of the key reasons that resulted in the Watergate scandal. The resolution of the unrest during the Pentagon Papers and Watergate scandals – which not just marked the ending of a period of political agitation but rather set a course for a new governance era based on the principles of accountability, transparency, and public oversight – was largely driven by the reforms implemented after these two circumstances. The legacy of these debates is still the subject of the discussions that revolve around government secrecy and press freedom, as well as the division of power in the USA, and that leads to the powerful reminder that there is a need for vigilance regarding democratic values.
Conclusion
Two whistleblower events, the Pentagon Papers and Watergate, represent a corruption crisis in American politics, reemphasizing the central value of transparency, accountability, and the rule of law in politics, on which democracy relies. The insurgence of these events brought about a “national questioning” regarding the amount of authority that the government should rightly hold and the architectural apparatus that checks that authority. In the process, not only did the depilation of a massive issue like defiance of public trust by the people at the high level of the government, but it also caused the reformation for perfect openness and moral governance.
In light of the role of the Pentagon Papers and Watergate in shaping the political frameworks, it is apparent that the consequences of the happenings were not restricted to the political breakdown of the era. They have steered the political dialogue, and thus, nowadays, generations perceive the main idea of the political process via media far more. To unite our citizens, we must remember that democracy is not perfect. Nevertheless, it is resilient and requires our citizens to be alert and active to keep it thriving. In an era where information acts as both the catalyst for enlightenment and subjugation, the lessons of these chapters appearing in American history textbooks convey their ageless message to the present generation.
References
Colazzo, I., Jespers, E., & Kubat, Ł. (2020). Set-Theoretic Solutions of the Pentagon Equation. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 380(2), 1003–1024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220-020-03862-6
Guo, H., Lin, H., & Zhao, Y. (2021). A spectral condition for the existence of a pentagon in non-bipartite graphs. Linear Algebra and Its Applications, pp. 627, 140–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.laa.2021.06.002
Heath-Kelly, C. (2020). Designing the Pentagon Memorial: Gendered statecraft, heroic victimhood, and site authenticity in War on Terror commemoration. Critical Military Studies, 6(3–4), pp. 269–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/23337486.2019.1677041
Manikandan, B., Muneeshwari, P., Sathya Sofia, A., Karthikeyan, G., & Athilingam, R. (2022). Modified microstrip fed of pentagon shape aperture coupling with RDRA for 5G wireless application. Materials Today : Proceedings, p. 60, 1665–1669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.12.221
Nigam, N., Siudeja, B., & Young, B. (2020). A Proof via Finite Elements for Schiffer’s Conjecture on a Regular Pentagon. Foundations of Computational Mathematics, 20(6), 1475–1504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10208-020-09447-y
Puckett, K. (2022). How to Read The Pentagon Papers. Novel : A Forum on Fiction, 55(3), 501–517. https://doi.org/10.1215/00295132-10007547
Roszko-Wójtowicz, E., & Grzelak, M. M. (2020). Macroeconomic stability and the level of competitiveness in E.U. member states: a comparative dynamic approach. Oeconomia Copernicana, 11(4), 657–688. https://doi.org/10.24136/oc.2020.027
Stevenson, J. (2021). Whistleblowers, Wokeness, and the CIA. Survival (London), 63(5), 235–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2021.1982213
Stephen J. Whitfield. (2022). The Pentagon Papers as History. LISA (Caen, France), 20.
Whitfield, S. J. (2022). The Pentagon Papers as History. LISA (Caen, France), 20(vol. 20-n°53). https://doi.org/10.4000/lisa.13939
write