Monday, January 10, 2011 - 12:30 PM

Two news items emanating from Vietnam in the past few days show the considerable challenges this promising nation still faces. The stories at first glance would seem to have little in common. The first, from the Washington Post, relates an appalling incident in which Vietnamese security thugs attacked a U.S. diplomat attempting to visit the dissident and Catholic priest, Father Nguyen Van Ly, under house arrest. The second, from the New York Times, describes the economic turbulence besetting Vietnam as its state-run industries and unstable currency face the harsh reality checks of international finance and market forces. Undergirding both stories is a common theme: the liability of one-party rule by Vietnam's Communist Party and its decrepit authoritarianism.
Much of the prevailing debate about the Chinese model of authoritarian capitalism (and its Russian cousin) overshadows the fact that other nations, such as Vietnam, are trying to follow a similar path. It is a mixed record. Since Vietnam's Politburo inaugurated the "Doi Moi" economic liberalization reforms in 1986, the country has experienced substantial growth averaging around 7 percent per year. Behind these impressive numbers are the countless Vietnamese citizens whose lives and livelihoods have been considerably improved over the past two decades.
Yet as the late economist Herb Stein declared in his eponymous law: "if something cannot go on forever, it will stop." Such is the case with the hopes for enduring growth in a brittle system such as Vietnam's, where the Communist Party still plans much of the economic activity and vainly tries to insulate its state-owned enterprises from market discipline. The Times story includes a statistic that dramatizes the inefficiency of Vietnam's government-owned companies: they absorb 40 percent of the capital invested in the country but produce only 25 percent of its gross domestic product. Such capital misallocations are having deleterious consequences, such as inflation, credit rating downgrades, rising interest rates, and a stagnant stock market.
Father Ly's case puts a more vivid face than economic figures on the maladies of Vietnam's one-party rule. Along with the Buddhist monk Thich Quang Do (who has been confined to pagoda arrest -- yes, pagoda arrest -- for years), Father Ly is one of the country's most prominent religious dissidents and human rights activists. The plucky cleric has been imprisoned and released (usually on account of international pressure) numerous times over the years, and his brash criticisms of the government continually provoke the Communist Party into foolish displays of its most unsavory traits. Such as this most recent appalling episode, where Vietnamese security agents attacked U.S. Embassy officer Christian Marchant simply for attempting to visit Father Ly in his home. Were the brutish police responding to the fulminations of a Politburo member invoking Henry II and bemoaning "who will rid me of this meddlesome priest?" Or were these the actions of, as the boilerplate excuse would put it, "overzealous local officials?" Either way, this assault on an American diplomat is a damning indictment of the Vietnamese Government.
Somewhat ironically, these two setbacks for both human rights and economic growth come in the midst of an otherwise growing strategic convergence between the United States and Vietnam. These improving ties, begun under the Clinton administration and furthered under the Bush and Obama administrations, are a welcome trend and should continue as part of U.S. grand strategy in Asia. But a wise geopolitics encompasses all aspects of a relationship. As the Bush administration in particular demonstrated, it is both possible and prudent to press Vietnam strongly for human rights improvements while still strengthening overall bilateral ties. Even more so, over time a Vietnam that respects the economic, political, and religious freedoms of its people will make a more reliable partner for the United States and perhaps even become another successful chapter in Asia's freedom story.
The Times article closes with the optimistic observation that Vietnam will weather these latest economic challenges because of the resilience, dynamism, and dedication of its citizens. As anyone who has visited or lived in Vietnam in recent years will attest, the Vietnamese people are indeed a marvel: personable, hard-working, optimistic. Which is why Vietnam will never reach its full potential under an unaccountable government that tries to silence its most creative, courageous citizens, such as Father Ly.
Vietnam's problems are at least partially due to the fact that it doesn't have close relations with either of the two great powers in its vicinity, the U.S. and China. Let's not forget that Japan, Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan all grew very well under one party rule. As a matter of fact, Vietnam is growing fairly well also considering the turbulent economic times we're in. However, for a small country like Vietnam, it'll need to join up with at least one of the great powers(best if it can play one off the other) to achieve long term success.
"Let's not forget that Japan, Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan all grew very well under one party rule". OMG, this is the most hilarious comment I have ever heard in a lifetime!!! Please do not insult Japan, S.Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan by comparing them with Communist Vietnam!! LOL All those countries you mentioned were and still are pro-West, major US allies and not a stooge of the USSR or Red China. Those countries are not by any stretch of the imagination a one party, Leninist dictatorship that followed an equally retarded ideology of Marxism Leninism as worshipped by the Hanoi leadership. Opposition political parties have always existed in those countries and have never been outlawed outright such as the case of Communist Vietnam. Those countries respect freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and universality of human rights. One can argue the authoritarian nature of S. Korea, Singapore and Taiwan in the early stage of its development but to make the case that somehow they are the same as present day Communist Vietnam regime is a laugh. The source of those countries' authoritarianism can be directly linked to the ideological struggle of the past century between communism and capitalism. The Communist threat was very real in those countries and in times of emergency, drastic measures are required to safeguard the emergence of communist totalitarianism in those countries. The Communist threat and its ideology have been discredited thus ensuring the viability and emergence of democratic governance in those countries. It is the cult of Ho Chi Minh and their descendants who are lost in this post Communist world. The Hanoi regime only exist for its own survival and not for the well being of the national good of the country. Do not try to rationalize Hanoi thuggish regime for what it truly is!! It is nothing more than a dictatorship without a viable ideology. People who rule Vietnam are only looking out for themselves and not for the benefit of the people of that country.
Shadow Government is a blog about U.S. foreign policy under the Obama administration, written by experienced policy makers from the loyal opposition and curated by Peter D. Feaver and William Inboden.
Read More
(2)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE