You are on page 1of 2

Thayer Consultancy

ABN # 65 648 097 123

Background Briefing: Vietnam Trial Slams Door on Dissidents Why? Carlyle A. Thayer January 10, 2013

[client name deleted] Vietnam is holding a big trial of dissidents this week. Why now? Vietnam obviously Has been putting dissidents on trial for years, and especially bloggers over the past few years. But why such a big trial at this time? And any characteristics of the defendants they put on trial (activities they were involved in, geographic location, etc) thats of interest? ANSWER: There are three possible but not contradictory explanations for the timing of trial. First, it is just the result of the bureaucratic process. In other words the Ministry of Public Security (MPS) had followed all the leads, gathered the evidence, and put pressure on the defendants to plead out. Eventually the MPS got what they wanted and the trail was scheduled. The second reason is that all trials are political theater and their timing is politically determined. Last year embattled Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung pledged to take action against bloggers. The trial is a show case to illustrate his word is good. Dung will have to front the next party Central Committee plenum and demonstrate he has taken appropriate remedial action to address complaints against him. It should be recalled that when the last party plenum made its decision not to reprimand Dung it stated it was motivated to prevent hostile forces from taking advantage of Vietnams in-fighting. The third explanation is that the Vietnam Communist Party is experiencing renewed internal debates over how to handle relations with China and the United States. Party conservatives argue that it is possible to resolve the South China Sea territorial disputes peacefully with China in part because China is a socialist state. Party conservatives oppose those in the party who wish to step up defense relations with the United States and thereby exacerbate relations with the China. Party conservatives are behind the push for greater U.S. contributions to address wartime legacies of the Agent Orange and exploded ordnance issues. They are viscerally opposed to U.S. political and diplomatic pressures on human rights. Party conservative argue that the U.S. is behind the plot of peaceful evolution whereby hostile external forces link up with domestic human rights and religious freedom activists to overturn Vietnams socialist regime. Party conservatives have pushed for a removal of U.S. restrictions on military sales to Vietnam. The U.S. has responded that there will be no change unless the human rights situation improves. On the face of it, if Vietnam wants to stand up to China over the South China Sea, it leaders

2 should improve the human rights situation to influence the Obama Administration to modify its restrictions on military sales. Why is Vietnam shooting itself in the foot by making this situation worse? Party conservatives are using the crackdown on bloggers and journalists to sabotage any concessions to the United States. In fact Vietnam is now reviewing Resolution 8 adopted in 2003 that set the scene for improved defense relations with the United States. In 2003, as a result of Resolution 8, General Tran Van Tra made the first visit by communst Vietnams Minister of National Defence to Washington. Also in 2003, Vietnam approved annual ship visits by the U.S. Navy. Resolution 8 essentially argued that Vietnams conceptualization of foreign relations was too simplistic. Foreign partners were divided into two groups, partners for cooperation (China) and objects of struggle (U.S.). Resolution No. 8 concluded that Vietnam has differences with its partners for cooperation, and shared much common ground with the objects of struggle. Resolution No. 8 sanctioned improving relations with the objects of struggle in those areas where their interests in cooperation overlapped. Party members are now debating whether Vietnam may have erred and gone too far in either cooperating with the United States, and struggling against China. As for the defendants, they appear to have crossed well recognized red lines. First and most important, they worked with the Viet Tan party which Vietnam declares is a terrorist organization. Several of the defendants participated in Viet Tan courses on peaceful protest and the use of the Internet. To security authorities this proves that the plot of peaceful evolution is alive and well. Second, the bloggers raised sensitive issues concerning high-level corruption that were fuelling internal party infighting. Third, several of the bloggers raised the regimes handling of the South China Sea dispute. This touches on the regimes claim to legitimacy (upholding nationalism) ad impacts on bilateral relations with China. Fourth, those Catholics associated with the Redemptorist Order have long been a thorn in the side of authorities for disputing land ownership over Church property that was confiscated by the state, and for their support of land rights activists in Vietnam. As is par for the course in these cases, the regime organized a two-day show trial. The defendants were convicted. Those who confessed beforehand were given light sentences, while those who defied the regime were given harsh sentences. This case was held in Vinh in Nghe An province out of the spot light of Hanoi or Ho Chi Minh City. The state media has been relatively quiet on this matter.

Suggested citation: Carlyle A. Thayer, Vietnam Trial Slams Door on Dissidents Why?, Thayer Consultancy Background Brief, January 10, 2013.

You might also like