Facing China threat, Vietnam seeks American balance

[Viet]

Facing China threat, Vietnam seeks American balance


C. Raja Mohan : New Delhi, Sat Jun 01 2013, 15:46 hrs
Indian Express

Vietnam's Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung gives the keynote address at the 12th International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) Asia Security Summit: The Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore on May 31, 2013


As India struggles to make sense of the recent military tensions on the border with China, Vietnam, at the receiving end of Beijing's muscular approach to maritime territorial disputes in the South China Sea, is embracing the United States.

Although Vietnam and China share an ideology—they are the last of the communist governments in Asia—Hanoi wants to preserve its strategic autonomy by moving closer to Washington.

Outlining Hanoi's strategy at the prestigious annual gathering of Asian defence establishments in Singapore Friday night, the prime minister of Vietnam Nguyen Tan Dung, underlined the current trust deficit between a rising China and its neighbours.

In a not so veiled reference to China, Dung said, "Somewhere in the region, there have emerged preferences for unilateral might, groundless claims and actions that run counter to international law and stem from imposition and power politics".

He also emphasized the importance of the United States in providing security to China's neighbours. While Beijing describes Washington as an interloper in Asia, Dung insisted that the United States is a 'Pacific power'.

"No regional country would oppose the strategic engagement of extra-regional powers if such engagement aims to enhance cooperation for peace, stability and development," Dung said.

Vietnam's Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung with Singapore's Prime Minister


Organised by the London-based International Institute of Strategic Studies, the annual Shangri La dialogue has become a major vehicle for defence diplomacy in Asia. In inviting the Vietnamese premier to deliver the key-note address to this year's Shangri La dialogue, the IISS was highlighting the growing strategic importance of Hanoi in Asian geopolitics.

As Dung dined at the high table with the U.S. Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel, the irony of Asia's new strategic realignments were too stark to miss. Four decades ago, Hagel was a U.S. Army Sergeant fighting the war against Vietnam; Dung was on the other side of the combat line trying to defeat the American occupation. Today, U.S. and Vietnam have shared interests in promoting a new balance of power system that cope with China's rise.


Facing China threat, Vietnam seeks American balance - Indian Express

 

[Viet]

Interesting move from the Vietnamese government...I believe that is the first time Vietnam openly critizes China and promotes closer cooperation with America on an international forum.

Beijing´s latest moves in the SC Sea (e.i. endless wargames and firing/chasing Vietnamese fishing boats, etc..) have brought all of us to an dead end.

 

[Fsjal]

Vietnam is a backstabber. China once support Vietnam, but Vietnam, like a spoiled, rebellious brat, sees China as an enemy.

Anyway, a country cowering to America are a bunch of cowards who can't even stand up for themselves.

 

[Hellraiser007]

Right move by Vietnam, seems off late things are heating up around China.

First Japanese are coming closer to India , Now Vietnam also wants to work with anti China forces

Win-win for all who are against China.

 

[EastSea]

Vietnam is a backstabber. China once support Vietnam, but Vietnam, like a spoiled, rebellious brat, sees China as an enemy.

Anyway, a country cowering to America are a bunch of cowards who can't even stand up for themselves.

China didn't helped, she did her dirty policy business in back of Vietnam. When US air force is bombed in Vietnam, in Peking 1972 backstabbers has her party.

 

[Soryu]

Interesting move from the Vietnamese government...I believe that is the first time Vietnam openly critizes China and promotes closer cooperation with America on an international forum.

Beijing´s latest moves in the SC Sea (e.i. endless wargames and firing/chasing Vietnamese fishing boats, etc..) have brought all of us to an dead end.

_ It's not first time, defense minister Mr. Phung Quang Thanh was mention about it in same conference at once.
_ Vietnamese Government also protest any move violate Vietnam's sovereignty by China in official way in many years.

_ I don't agree with some part of article, exam: "is embracing the United States" was wrong term in here, moving closer with USA, not meaning Vietnam become enemy of China or something like that.
_ Vietnamese just see USA's power like balance for the power rising so fast from China.

Vietnam is a backstabber. China once support Vietnam, but Vietnam, like a spoiled, rebellious brat, sees China as an enemy.

Anyway, a country cowering to America are a bunch of cowards who can't even stand up for themselves.

Get lost yourself, false flagger, nobody care about your bullshjt.

 

[NiceGuy]

China never can be our worthy opponent in history,China only dared to attack VN when we have serious internal problems.We defeated mighty Mongol when China was totaly crushed by them.1979 war proved again that China army is alway poor trained and coward.

We just simply dont wanna be US's enemy,coz we have some dispute with US's allies in SCS (east sea)thats all,nothig more.

 

[INDIC]

Vietnam is a backstabber. China once support Vietnam, but Vietnam, like a spoiled, rebellious brat, sees China as an enemy.

Anyway, a country cowering to America are a bunch of cowards who can't even stand up for themselves.

Even Chinese took the massive help of Americans during world war 2 to get their country freed from the Japanese.

Now, Chinese hate both the Japanese and the western powers who helped them getting freed from the Japanese.

 

[visom]

Vietnam is a backstabber. China once support Vietnam, but Vietnam, like a spoiled, rebellious brat, sees China as an enemy.

Anyway, a country cowering to America are a bunch of cowards who can't even stand up for themselves.

Are you really Filipino? You've done nothing but kiss up to China and criticize your own people, false flagger.
China has never really supported Vietnam, just the corrupt government that are selling out their own country for chump change.

 

[ChinaToday]

Instead of earning a honest living lazy Viets prefer to copy the pinoy trick to get aid from uncle sam using the china threat, how low can one get?

 

[visom]

Instead of earning a honest living lazy Viets prefer to copy the pinoy trick to get aid from uncle sam using the china threat, how low can one get?

China received plenty of aid from US as well as copying many US technology and even had to depend on the US to save them from the Japanese. What makes you qualify to use that insult against us?

 

[longyi]

Two paths for US-Vietnam ties



The success of the United States in Southeast Asia and its "pivot" policy in the Asia-Pacific will be built on the strength of its partnerships with strategic allies. Longstanding allies such as Japan, South Korea and Australia have provided the US with strong support in the region, but to implement the "pivot" Washington needs to expand its pool of reliable strategic partners.

Vietnam has the potential to serve as one of those partners: under the current ruling Communist Party of Vietnam or a different future political regime, there always has been and always will be concern in Hanoi about the influence and intentions of its giant northern neighbor, China.

Whether it was the Soviet Union during the Cold War or perhaps America today, Vietnam has always looked towards a great power alliance to counterbalance China. As such, Vietnam's geopolitical reality and mounting strategic concerns provide the US with a golden opportunity to bolster its position in a significant way in Southeast Asia and the wider Asia-Pacific.

Though Vietnam and China are both ruled by nominally Communist parties, these organizations are now largely divorced from ideology. The similarities end there, however. While both regimes maintain uncontested one-party rule over their respective countries, Vietnam is far from a guaranteed ally of China, evidenced by past conflicts and current maritime and territorial disputes.

For the US to capitalize on Vietnam's current "gray", neither-friend-nor-foe status, it must first resolve several concerns, including Hanoi's abysmally poor human rights record, lack of democracy, and managing China's fears of the emergence of a potential US-proxy next door.

The US cannot easily overlook Vietnam's human rights transgressions, including a mounting crackdown on political dissidents that began in 2009. However, neither can it push Vietnam's communist rulers into a corner.

The challenge for Washington is to determine how much it is willing to give up for increased access to Vietnam's markets, ports, and strategic position vis-a-vis China. Given how much the US is likely to ask - respect for the rule of law and a significant improvement in human rights - the two sides will find it difficult to strike a mutually acceptable compromise.

China is also unlikely to turn a blind eye to any potential reforms in Vietnam that will threaten Beijing's level of influence in Hanoi. Vietnam and China are currently embroiled in territorial disputes over the potentially oil-and-gas rich Paracel and Spratly Islands - high-stakes rows that are both fluid and increasingly volatile.

Beijing's concerns may be assuaged by the fact that Vietnam's Communist Party leaders are unlikely to usher in any political reforms, including a loosening on political dissent, that could facilitate their eventual demise. Moreover, Beijing may rest easy in the belief that any forceful attempt by the US to effect political change in Vietnam will push the country's leaders closer to China.

For the US, Hanoi's strategic dilemma presents Washington with an opportunity to play a long game in which political reform is not immediate but eventually assured. Where power is absolute and unchecked in Vietnam, leaders are unwilling to implement changes that would result in a diminishment of their influence and control.

Diplomatic tightrope

The US strategy in Vietnam must not only satisfy the Vietnamese leaders' sense of self-preservation but also act to improve human rights. It's a diplomatic tightrope where compromise broadly benefits the Vietnamese regime, including through desired military-to-military engagement, while at the same time weakening its control over the grass roots population.

For this to work, Washington must come to terms with the reality that human rights reform cannot come before political reform in Vietnam. To this end, the US should engage in a messaging campaign designed to politicize and organize the Vietnamese public in a way acceptable to the Communist Party. Efforts to change Vietnam should not come from outside the country's borders, for such initiatives would inevitably have diplomatic fallout. Instead, change should be promoted at the grass roots.

By shifting the struggle for human rights reform to the Vietnamese people, the US can maintain a fairly "hands free" policy towards Vietnam's leaders. Although the struggle for democratic and human rights reform has been championed by numerous Vietnamese individuals, tacit American support for the people's struggle could pave an eventual path towards real reform.

It must be the people's fight, to succeed or fail on their own. But there is reason to hope for success given the recent emergence of Petition 72, which, among other things, calls for an end to one-party rule in Vietnam. The petition, drafted by local scholars, was drawn up in response to the constitutional revisions currently being undertaken by the Communist Party, which aim broadly to further strengthen the government's powers.

Rather than intervening directly, the US would be well-served in allowing the Vietnamese people to chart their own course towards reform, and in doing so establish some necessary goodwill. The US should refrain from pushing too hard on the current Vietnamese government and focus its energy instead on supporting the people's struggle through political support.

To this end, the case for democracy and human rights is best fought through the dissemination of knowledge. Although activists have talked about the need for democracy in Vietnam, for people born and raised in a country that is overtly undemocratic, it is still mostly an alien concept - difficult to imagine and even more difficult to implement.

In order to better educate the Vietnamese people on democracy, human rights, and the rule of law, the US could establish a type of learning center in Vietnam, perhaps with assistance from the United Nations and/or non-government organizations, dedicated to these liberal issues. The US ran a similar center in military-ruled Myanmar before that country's recent transition towards quasi-civilian democracy.

Washington could also provide for select Vietnamese individuals to travel abroad and experience democracy first hand. By allowing Vietnamese citizens to witness what it means to live in a country that is democratic, where government is accountable to its people, they would ideally be inspired to fight for the same at home. Rather than a top down approach to advocating reform, which ultimately will require the Communist Party government to act in good faith, the US should concentrate instead on cultivating Vietnam's next generation of leaders from the ground up.

Conservative resistance

To be sure, any attempt to introduce such a democracy center in Vietnam will face stiff resistance from elements inside the Communist Party who fear it will serve to undermine their position and authority. Such a US-linked center would no doubt also be seen by some as a US attempt to insert itself in Vietnamese internal affairs and subvert the government. As the US and Vietnam expand and deepen bilateral ties, there are conservative elements within the Communist Party who remain suspicious of the US's intentions.

That said, Vietnam's military would benefit immensely from deepened ties with the US. Military-to-military cooperation is seen by many as a stepping stone towards the sharing of ideas and bridging past and present divides. The fact that the US has so far refused to export lethal arms to Vietnam is a matter beyond the consideration of the average soldier, sailor, or airman eager to learn from and exchange with their US counterparts.

US-supported modernization of Vietnam's military would no doubt be warmly welcomed by many Vietnamese generals. Vietnam's military leaders no longer worry about American aggression and are instead focused on a potential clash in the South China Sea or along its land border with China. On the other hand, Vietnam's internal security apparatus - the one charged with squashing internal dissent - will likely be less receptive to Washington's overtures.

For the US, growing closer to Vietnam without being seen as overbearing or subversive will require a delicate balancing act. The US is unlikely to lift its restrictions on the export of lethal weapons to Vietnam without clear evidence of an improvement in human rights, lest the weapons be pointed against the Vietnamese people rather than positioned to deter China. Conversely, Vietnam is unlikely to compromise if it believes the US is attempting, directly or indirectly, to weaken the Communist Party.

In courting Vietnam, the US can play either a short or long game. In the short scenario, the US will compromise on core values like human rights and democracy to quickly develop a China-balancing strategic partner in Hanoi. In the long game, the US will invest in the Vietnamese people to one day reclaim control of their country and look towards America as that democratic beacon not on Capitol Hill but across the Pacific.

By Khanh Vu Duc is a lawyer and part-time law professor at the University of Ottawa who researches on Vietnamese politics, international relations and international law.

Asia Times Online :: Two paths for US-Vietnam ties


What about Russia?

 

[VietHome]

What about Russia?

This article discusses the potential cooperation between Vietnam and the US, with their relationship with PRC at the back drop. Russia, Japan (and soon to be India) have always been a factor that helps Vietnam keep balance to the enormous weight up North that is PRC. Introducing the US as a major player in Vietnam can only boost its internal strength.

The Russia-US conflicts are elsewhere in the world (Europe and Middle East) but not in this region where everyone understands that PRC is the only real threat here. The ideological conflict with America can only ease by time due to, again, the giant threat from PRC. Most Vietnamese knows and supports the closer tie with US.

 

[Snomannen]

China never can be our worthy opponent in history,China only dared to attack VN when we have serious internal problems.We defeated mighty Mongol when China was totaly crushed by them.1979 war proved again that China army is alway poor trained and coward.

We just simply dont wanna be US's enemy,coz we have some dispute with US's allies in SCS (east sea)thats all,nothig more.

I don't really think that a country that have been taking control of your whole country for thousand year can not be considered a worthy opponent, also don't forget that that was also your suzerain. Please don't take excuse from "serious internal problems".

Besides Ancient Mongol never ever conquered a country called "China", just like Mughal never ever conquered a country called "India".
And they do have excuses too:
The First Invasion.
1. (The weather is) so hot, retreat. 熱不能堪，班師;
2. Nha Tran already tributed to concede defeat;
3. The objective of the operation was to attract Song, Nha Tran was an optional target.
The Second Invasion.
1. Too hot too humid, solders were sick, 盛夏霖潦，軍中疾作，死傷者眾;
2. Many solders were Han (or minorities from the south of China), they were not really willing to fight for Mongolian.
The Third Invasion.
1. Also because of the goddamn weather;
2. "serious internal problems", people were standing against Yuan Dynasty.
However, that was a great victory then. Just like how Finish fought with the Soviet Union (but the difference is that Finish lost the war)

Moreover, I hope some of you my beloved forum members can stop talking non-pointed words like "China will crash into Vietnam blahblahblah" or "Chinese people are stupid blahblahblah".

 

[VietHome]

I don't really think that a country that have been taken control of your whole country for thousand year can not be considered a worthy opponent, also don't forget that that was also your suzerain. Please don't take excuse from "serious internal problems".

First of all, Vietnam is a country that had been taken for a thousand year but could still stand up to repel the invaders. Have you ever seen such feat in the world's history? Many Chinese invasions had been squashed by such a small country. You can blame it on Big China's inadequacies or praise Vietnam's resilience. Your choice

Yes. China has been using Vietnam's internal problem as an opportunity to conquer this nation throughout history. The only time they succeed was in 1407 when Ming Dynasty used the struggle between two Vietnamese royalties to take over the country for 20 years. The Ming was eventually kicked out in 1427. 250,000 Ming soldiers (occupying force and mainland's reinforcement) were defeated and 150,000 of that number were killed.

The last major battle were against Qing's Qianlong Emperor troops. The Qing used divided Vietnam again as an opportunity to strike. Vietnam Emperor Quang Trung sweep 200,000 Chinese, and 60,000 treasonous Vietnamese out of the country in 5 days. How's humiliating! That battle humbled the great Qianlong.

In modern history, the time that PRC invaded the Paracel islands was in 1974 when Vietnam was still divided by North and South. Thus, Vietnamese have learnt that opportunistic Chinese can only win when we have serious internal problems.

Besides Ancient Mongol never ever conquered a country called "China", just like Mughal never ever conquered a country called "India".

Claiming Genghis Khan as Chinese again? We have discussed the issue before. This "knowledge" can only be in PRC's history book, since everyone in the world knows the difference.

And they do have excuses too:
The First Invasion.
1. (The weather is) so hot, retreat. 熱不能堪，班師;
2. Nha Tran already tributed to concede defeat;
3. The objective of the operation was to attract Song, Nha Tran was an optional target.
The Second Invasion.
1. Too hot too humid, solders were sick, 盛夏霖潦，軍中疾作，死傷者眾;
2. Many solders were Han (or minorities from the south of China), they were not really willing to fight for Mongolian.
The Third Invasion.
1. Also because of the goddamn weather;
2. "serious internal problems", people were standing against Yuan Dynasty.
However, that was a great victory then. Just like how Finish fought with the Soviet Union (but the difference is that Finish lost the war)

Thanks for showing that. Great skill of talking about defeat All I hear are:

1st invasion: 55,000 troops
1) Can't win, let's talk about the hot weather.
2) Can't win. Objective is to get defeat notification. So nice, we Mongolians are the only ones to claim victory in defeat
3) Can't win. Objective is to attract Song by losing 55,000 for nothing.

2nd invasion: 300.000 troops
1) Can't win, hot weather again. How can a human live in hot weather??
2) Can't win, Han Chinese solider sucks

3rd invasion: another 300,000 troops
1) Can't win, this country must be at the core of hell. Damn, we're out of hot excuses
2) Can't win, Han Chinese solider sucks again. We should have recruited Vietnamese instead

I agree with you that it is a series of great victories

Moreover, I hope some of you my beloved forum members can stop talking non-pointed words like "China will crash into Vietnam blahblahblah" or "Chinese people are stupid blahblahblah".

"China will crash into Vietnam blahblahblah" I'm not sure this is a correct idiom here. Maybe I'm looking at "be crush by" or something

"Chinese people are stupid blahblahblah" I agree that we should not use derogatory language. Can you tell your Chinese posters to do the same?

However, the truth about PRC's government has to be pointed out. So I reserve my right to call the PRC, and CCP any term I see fit.