JohnT:
Either way, or both ways, the North Vietnamese Communists needed the Red Chinese in the early 50s. They could not have won without them.
One of the things Hanoi's War shows is the masterful way the North Vietnamese Communists played the Red Chinese and the Soviets off one another in order to get maximum benefit. Very very shrewd.
They were equally good at public relations, getting the world and most importantly, an influential portion of the Americans, to view them as the good guys. George J. Veith, who wrote Black April ( http://www.amazon.com/Black-April-So.../dp/1594035725 ) is going to pay a lot of attention to that and how the Northern Communists worked closely with anti-war Americans in his next book. I thought Black April a very good book by the way.
Given the way they played the ChiComs, the Soviets and the world, the North Vietnamese Communists didn't have to be very bright militarily to win the war against South Vietnam. The big strategic picture was stacked entirely in their favor, Communist help would keep coming and the South would be cut off. All the Communists had to do was keep going and things would eventually fall their way.
One of the things we always forget is how critical outside support is to so many of the forces we have fought since WWII. The NVA could not have done it without the ChiComs and the Soviets. In Iraq, the Shiites could not have gained the influence they had without Iran. AQ in Iraq could not have done what they did without money from rich Saudis (my understanding anyway.) In Afghanistan, Taliban & Co would not even hardly exist without the Pak Army/ISI. AQ central maybe wouldn't exist at all without Pak Army/ISI forbearance. We seem to get preoccupied with the image of the plucky resistance fighter and forget who is feeding him and buying the ammunition.
Bookmarks