What's new

Vietnam Defence Forum

Sadly, no. And i think the VPAF focus a lot on its interception force and simple maintain than purpose - design for ground support so we are less likely to include either the Su 34 or the Mig 29K. The Su-30SM is a good fall back position though since its a two seater aircraft which ease the pilot burden and no need for serious conversion program while SU-35 is a single seater.
 
Sadly, no. And i think the VPAF focus a lot on its interception force and simple maintain than purpose - design for ground support so we are less likely to include either the Su 34 or the Mig 29K. The Su-30SM is a good fall back position though since its a two seater aircraft which ease the pilot burden and no need for serious conversion program while SU-35 is a single seater.

I also feel the SU-30SM is the natural follow on to the SU-30MK-2 and since VN pilots are training in India with the SU-30MK-1, there must be something planned about that I would think.

Oh well, there is only so much money to go around.
 
Alarming Escalation in the South China Sea: China Threatens Force if Vietnam Continues Oil Exploration in Spratlys
A new pattern of Chinese bellicosity?

carl-thayer-36x36.jpg

By Carl Thayer
July 24, 2017

http://thediplomat.com/2017/07/alar...ietnam-continues-oil-exploration-in-spratlys/

On July 15, well-informed sources in Hanoi privately reported that Vietnam directed a subsidiary of Spain’s Repsol to suspend oil drilling in block 136-03 in the South China Sea. Nine days later a report by the BBC’s Bill Hayton finally confirmed this.

According to the BBC, Vietnam informed Repsol executives last week that “China had threatened to attack Vietnamese bases in the Spratly Islands if the drilling did not stop.” Vietnamese government officials directed Repsol to leave the area.

While there has been some dispute among observers about the commercial viability of block 136-03, the BBC reported that Repsol confirmed the discovery of a major gas field only a few days ago.

For the past two and a half years Vietnam has moved cautiously in its oil exploration activities in the Spratlys following the HD 981 crisis in mid-2014. Early this year there was a marked change. Vietnam signed its largest gas exploration contract with ExxonMobil to develop the Blue Whale project and Vietnam lifted restrictions on exploration in block 136-03.

The ExxonMobil deal was given much publicity, while the go ahead to Repsol was kept under wraps.

Vietnam’s actions aroused China’s ire. General Fan Changlong, deputy chair of the Central Military Commission, visited Madrid in June and raised Repsol’s drilling activities according to private reports. Then General Fan flew to Hanoi to discuss plans for the fourth friendly border exchange activities. In his meeting with Vietnam’s top leadership General Fan requested a halt to oil and gas exploration. He stated both sides should “abide by the important consensus reached by the leaders of the two countries and the two parties.”

Vietnam’s leaders reportedly pushed back and defended Vietnam’s right to sovereign jurisdiction in their Exclusive Economic Zone. This angered General Fan, who cancelled China’s participation in the border exchange activities and abruptly left the country.

The BBC report that China threatened to attack Vietnamese-occupied features in the South China Sea if the drilling did not stop is an alarming escalation of Chinese assertiveness and forms part of an emerging pattern of increased Chinese bellicosity.

On 19 May, for example, Reuters reported the following conversation between presidents Rodrigo Duterte and Xi Jinping in Beijing four days earlier:

“We intend to drill oil there, if it’s yours, well, that’s your view, but my view is, I can drill the oil, if there is some inside the bowels of the earth because it is ours,” Duterte said in a speech, recalling his conversation with Xi.

“His response to me, ‘we’re friends, we don’t want to quarrel with you, we want to maintain the presence of warm relationship, but if you force the issue, we’ll go to war.”

In July, China publicly protested when Vietnam extended India’s ONGC’s lease in Block 128 in the South China Sea.

China’s threat to use force against the Philippines and Vietnam has major ramifications for energy security in these two countries. Both need to develop hydrocarbons to meet growing domestic energy demand.

China’s threat to use force also raises the risks for foreign oil companies currently operating in the South China Sea. If they cannot count on the host country to provide protection, they are likely to cut bait and run because of the increased risks.

China’s threat raises a nightmare scenario in particular for Vietnam’s leaders because it would be a test of its policy of cooperation and struggle with China. Vietnam’s leaders will quickly come to learn that giving in to China on one point will lead China to press on another.

Any attack on a Vietnamese-occupied feature in the South China Sea would result is a massive eruption of anti-Chinese sentiment in Vietnam. This could seriously undermine the political authority of the current regime and an anti-China leadership would result in a prolonged estrangement in bilateral relations.

In the midst of the HD 981 crisis in 2014, for example, sixty-one retired senior Vietnamese officials called on their leadership to take legal action against China, to exit China’s orbit (thoat Trung) and to abandon the policy of three nos (no foreign alliances, no foreign bases, and no use of Vietnam to harm the interests of a third country).

Any Chinese attack on Vietnam would set off alarm bells all over the region. Regional states would split between those willing to accommodate to China and those who would seek the support of external powers to maintain the balance of power.

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) would find it difficult to mount more than a diplomatic response calling on the parties concerned to settle the dispute peacefully. Capitulationists like Duterte could seriously impair ASEAN consensus. One of the first casualties would be the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea.

The U.S. could have its hand forced if China threatened ExxonMobil. When Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc met President Donald Trump at the White House on 31 May, they issued a joint statement that included a long paragraph on the South China Sea that said in part:

The two leaders underscored the importance of freedom of navigation and overflight and other lawful uses of the seas, and noted with concern the destabilizing impacts that unlawful restrictions to the freedom of the seas have on peace and prosperity in the Asia–Pacific region. The two sides also affirmed full support for the peaceful resolution of disputes without the threat or use of force or coercion, in accordance with international law… President Trump stressed that the United States will continue to fly, sail, and operate anywhere international law allows.

Any Chinese attack on Vietnam would be like throwing down the gauntlet to the United States, Japan, and other maritime powers. They would face some tough questions: do they really to protect Vietnam’s oil industry or go to war with China over a few little rocks in the South China Sea?

China’s threat to use force against Vietnam will accelerate the ongoing strategic debate in the United States and other allied capitals about how to halt if not reverse China’s continued militarization of the South China Sea.
 
Well, that's 3.9 million per tank, that sounds right, but for 4.5 million I think the T-90MS offers a lot more capability. Oh well, have to start somewhere.

The 4 S-400 was already expected, but I think the article has a typo when it first said Mig-35 and later SU-35. As I understand, it should be the SU-35. What do you think @Aqsuperman ?

The MIG-35 just came out, too soon to be selected and since its basically A MIG-29 on steroids and the MIG-29Ks that India is receiving have a lot of problems, I don't think VN would be rushing to select that aircraft. On the other hand, I've seen very reliable intel about the selection of the SU-35 from Russian sources.
We need more than 64 T90 tanks, so whatever version the first batch is purchased, the second batch could be different.

I believe Mig35 is under consideration for the Mig21 replacement. Su35 is good too, at the end no matter what fighter aircraft, we need more in numbers. The Russians now need to put an attractive offer on the table then we go.
 
Means little. It's just a tactical halt and the drilling can continue by tomorrow.

It appears that indeed, that may be the case.

Repsol General Director confirmed that the PVN-Repsol joint venture is halting operation at Block 136-Tu Chinh, the reason given is due to safety reasons because of the weather / typhoon season.

The drilling will start again in November 17 or sooner.
 
It appears that indeed, that may be the case.

Repsol General Director confirmed that the PVN-Repsol joint venture is halting operation at Block 136-Tu Chinh, the reason given is due to safety reasons because of the weather / typhoon season.

The drilling will start again in November 17 or sooner.
perfect. the chinese should rather cooperate with vietnam instead of seeking confrontation. how about buying the evil US properties? last year 2016, Vietnamese nationals bought for $3 billion US homes, surpassing the Japanese. Remarkable because the Japanese are rich, while Vietnamese are not poor but not rich either. The second remarkable thing is the Chinese bought $31 billion US properties although they condemn the US every day, lobprising the communist Chinese paradise.

a stats of foreign buyers (US Residential Real Estate 2016)

IMG_3102.JPG
 
Sadly, no. And i think the VPAF focus a lot on its interception force and simple maintain than purpose - design for ground support so we are less likely to include either the Su 34 or the Mig 29K. The Su-30SM is a good fall back position though since its a two seater aircraft which ease the pilot burden and no need for serious conversion program while SU-35 is a single seater.
Having two operators does not mean it is preferable.

I know...I know...The F-15E Strike Eagle which is a two-seater.

When the USAF wanted a heavier ground strike aircraft, the F-15 platform was the logical choice. But the problem was that the platform was already 'locked in', meaning it would take a lot of money and time to modify the existing single seat version to perform strike missions while keeping the single seat. The less expensive choice, believe it or not, was to stretch the airframe a little bit and slightly modify the avionics to allow a second operator to perform additional duties. The more expensive alternative was to actually make an entirely new strike aircraft.

The goal of avionics is to remove as much flying burden from the pilot as possible and allow the pilot to be the decision maker and killer. It is contrary to decades of aviation. But if you look at civilian airliners, you will see that evolution. Today's airliners can practically take off and land themselves, leaving the aircrew more managers and less pilots.

This is not to say that the 30SM is a 'bad' fighter. Am only pointing out the fact that in combat aviation, the two-seater is not always the way to go.
 
Having two operators does not mean it is preferable.

I know...I know...The F-15E Strike Eagle which is a two-seater.

When the USAF wanted a heavier ground strike aircraft, the F-15 platform was the logical choice. But the problem was that the platform was already 'locked in', meaning it would take a lot of money and time to modify the existing single seat version to perform strike missions while keeping the single seat. The less expensive choice, believe it or not, was to stretch the airframe a little bit and slightly modify the avionics to allow a second operator to perform additional duties. The more expensive alternative was to actually make an entirely new strike aircraft.

The goal of avionics is to remove as much flying burden from the pilot as possible and allow the pilot to be the decision maker and killer. It is contrary to decades of aviation. But if you look at civilian airliners, you will see that evolution. Today's airliners can practically take off and land themselves, leaving the aircrew more managers and less pilots.

This is not to say that the 30SM is a 'bad' fighter. Am only pointing out the fact that in combat aviation, the two-seater is not always the way to go.

Obviously you are the expert on this, but I wonder, if the aircraft is tasked with the extra burden of locating and attacking ground targets in a contested environment, would that be taxing the pilot quite a bit, or can be handled quite ok? The Indians are very happy with the 2 seater and they also want to change their upcoming PAK-FA fighter from the 1 seater Russian configuration to a 2 seater. Just wondering.
 
Vietnam says Indonesian navy shot its fishermen in disputed water
By Reuters/Mai Nguyen July 24, 2017

Four Vietnamese fishermen were shot on Saturday night, two of them seriously wounded.
Indonesia's navy shot and wounded four Vietnamese fishermen aboard a fishing boat in the South China Sea (which Vietnam calls the East Sea) aat the weekend, Vietnamese authorities said.

The Vietnamese boat was about 132 nautical miles (245 km) southeast of Vietnam's Con Dao Island when the fishermen were shot on Saturday night, the Binh Dinh provincial search and rescue committee said on its website.

Disputes over fishing rights and oil drilling have stoked tension in the East Sea, through which about $5 trillion in goods is shipped each year.

China claims almost the entire sea, but Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Vietnam and Taiwan also have claims.

Although Indonesia says it is not a party to the dispute, it recently renamed the northern reaches of its exclusive economic zone, asserting its own maritime claim.

The coordinates given by the Vietnamese indicated that the shooting happened close to the area Indonesia now calls the North Natuna Sea.

The Vietnamese authorities said two of the fishermen had been seriously wounded. They were taken to Con Dao Island for treatment.

Sahono Budianto, an official at Indonesia's ministry of marine affairs and fisheries, said he was not aware of the alleged shooting.

Indonesia's navy did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Indonesia has sunk hundreds of mostly foreign boats caught illegally fishing in its waters since President Joko Widodo launched a battle against the poaching of fish in 2014.

Indonesia and Vietnam said in May they would launch a joint investigation after reports that Vietnamese coast guards had tried to forcibly free five fishing boats and their crew detained in waters near Indonesia's Natuna Islands.
 
Indonesian navy denies it shot and wounded four Vietnamese fishermen
http://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se...it-shot-and-wounded-four-vietnamese-fishermen

JAKARTA - The Indonesia navy has refuted claims by Hanoi that it shot and wounded four fishermen aboard a Vietnam-flagged fishing boat in the South China Sea last weekend.

Navy spokesperson Colonel Gig Sipasulta said a patrol on Sunday (July 23) intercepted two Vietnamese fishing boats suspected of poaching in Indonesia's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), north of the Natunas, and chased them away by firing warning shots in the air.

"As such, there is no truth to Vietnam's statement," Col. Gig told The Jakarta Post in a report out on Tuesday (July 25).

"The navy always provides a measured response in accordance with protocol."

The officer was responding to news reports quoting the disaster and relief agency of Vietnam's central Binh Dinh province that four Vietnamese fisherman were shot and wounded by Indonesia's navy over the weekend during a stand-off in disputed waters off the South China Sea.

According to reports out of Hanoi, their fishing boat was brought back to Vietnam's Con Dao island early Monday morning and the wounded men were rushed to hospital.

"Two seriously injured sailors were sent to the Con Dao district's medical centre and their situation is improving," the agency reported.

The incident apparently took place on Saturday, about 245 km southeast of its Con Dao island.

According to The Jakarta Post report, there were at least two other similar skirmishes between the Indonesian navy and Vietnam-flagged vessels last week.

They include an incident on Sunday when Indonesian patrol vessel Kapitan Pattimura made only contact with the Deepsea Metro rig just outside the Indonesian EEZ, as well as an earlier incident on Friday which resulted in the detention of another fishing boat, the TG-92816-TS for poaching.

These events follow a clash on May 21 between a Vietnamese coast guard vessel and an Indonesian maritime security patrol craft that was escorting five Vietnamese fishing boats that had been caught poaching earlier. Both sides have since resolved the incident through diplomatic channels, and had said they hoped to prevent further future incidents in the South China Sea.

They also come just a week or so after Indonesia on July 14 revealed a new map depicting an expansion to its maritime territory with the naming of the waters off its northern perimeter North Natuna Sea.

Although it lies in Indonesia's EEZ, the waters north of the Natuna Islands bordering the South China Sea have no name and are often designated, albeit loosely, as part of the latter.

Indonesia, however, is not a party to the territorial disputes in the waterway, marked by overlapping claims by Brunei, China, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and Taiwan.
 
Indonesian navy denies it shot and wounded four Vietnamese fishermen
http://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se...it-shot-and-wounded-four-vietnamese-fishermen

JAKARTA - The Indonesia navy has refuted claims by Hanoi that it shot and wounded four fishermen aboard a Vietnam-flagged fishing boat in the South China Sea last weekend.

Navy spokesperson Colonel Gig Sipasulta said a patrol on Sunday (July 23) intercepted two Vietnamese fishing boats suspected of poaching in Indonesia's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), north of the Natunas, and chased them away by firing warning shots in the air.

"As such, there is no truth to Vietnam's statement," Col. Gig told The Jakarta Post in a report out on Tuesday (July 25).

"The navy always provides a measured response in accordance with protocol."

The officer was responding to news reports quoting the disaster and relief agency of Vietnam's central Binh Dinh province that four Vietnamese fisherman were shot and wounded by Indonesia's navy over the weekend during a stand-off in disputed waters off the South China Sea.

According to reports out of Hanoi, their fishing boat was brought back to Vietnam's Con Dao island early Monday morning and the wounded men were rushed to hospital.

"Two seriously injured sailors were sent to the Con Dao district's medical centre and their situation is improving," the agency reported.

The incident apparently took place on Saturday, about 245 km southeast of its Con Dao island.

According to The Jakarta Post report, there were at least two other similar skirmishes between the Indonesian navy and Vietnam-flagged vessels last week.

They include an incident on Sunday when Indonesian patrol vessel Kapitan Pattimura made only contact with the Deepsea Metro rig just outside the Indonesian EEZ, as well as an earlier incident on Friday which resulted in the detention of another fishing boat, the TG-92816-TS for poaching.

These events follow a clash on May 21 between a Vietnamese coast guard vessel and an Indonesian maritime security patrol craft that was escorting five Vietnamese fishing boats that had been caught poaching earlier. Both sides have since resolved the incident through diplomatic channels, and had said they hoped to prevent further future incidents in the South China Sea.

They also come just a week or so after Indonesia on July 14 revealed a new map depicting an expansion to its maritime territory with the naming of the waters off its northern perimeter North Natuna Sea.

Although it lies in Indonesia's EEZ, the waters north of the Natuna Islands bordering the South China Sea have no name and are often designated, albeit loosely, as part of the latter.

Indonesia, however, is not a party to the territorial disputes in the waterway, marked by overlapping claims by Brunei, China, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and Taiwan.

Tuesday July 25, 2017, 07:00 pm
Explanation of the Navy About Vietnamese Fishermen in North Natuna Sea Incident
Andhika Prasetia - detikNews

Jakarta - The Indonesian Navy denies accusations by Vietnamese authorities of shooting four fishermen in the South China Sea or North Natuna Sea. The Navy asserted that it was only a warning shot into the air and no one.

This was conveyed by the Commander of the West Armada Fleet Command (Pangarmabar) Rear Admiral Aan Kurnia in the information given by Kadispenal First Admiral Gig Jonias Mozes Sipasulta, Monday (7/24/2017). On Sunday (23/7) at 19:45 pm, KRI Wiratno-379 detected the presence of 2 KIA Vietnam at 4 Nm (nautical mile) position which entered the waters of the Indonesian contents land.

"Chronology of the expulsion of the two KIA Vietnam, started when KRI Wiratno-379 conducted patrols in the waters of North Natuna, ZEEI, within the Indonesian continental shelf detected the presence of 2 KIA Vietnam at 4 Nm position into the territorial waters of the continental shelf of Indonesia," said Aan .

However, all of a sudden the two KIA Vietnam are about to carry out embezzlement and the matter leads to Wiratno-379 KRI bow at a distance of 30 meters. Because it is considered dangerous, the Navy releases 1 bullet into the air.

"Silhouettes are still visible and the point leads to the KRI Wiratno-379 dirt at a distance of 30 meters which endanger KRI Wiratno-379 so given a warning shot of a bullet into the air using SS 1 type weapons," said Aan.

Shortly thereafter, the two KIAs of Vietnam changed the hammer and the Navy expelled them to leave the continental shelf of Indonesia. Meanwhile, Gig said it was not true about Vietnam's claims regarding 4 of their fishermen who were injured by being shot.

"It is not true that the statement of the Vietnam Navy always performs actions according to the provisions and measurable," said Gig.

As reported earlier, Vietnam said the fishermen are located about 132 nautical miles southeast of Con Dao Island. Vietnamese authorities claimed the fishermen who were shot were taken to Con Dao Island to undergo treatment.
(Dkp / ibh)
https://news.detik.com/berita/d-357...ntah-klaim-vietnam-tembak-4-nelayan-di-natuna

kapal-perang-tni-al-e1492710354709.jpg

KRI 379
gunakan-ss1-v1-tni-al-jebol-rompi-antipeluru-marinir-as-YM7.jpg

SS1 assault rifle Pindad
 
Well things around this corner of the sea has not always been the most peaceful of all, better sit tight and wait for a clearer picture then.

Considering that the arms embargo is no longer in effect, its high time for the VPAF to bring these guys back into active service: The UH-1s. Light, mobile and good range. While not that robust to act as a gunship anymore, its can be an effective transport or med evac platform. In an emergency, UH-1 can even bring its formidable firepower to bear if the situation require.

22LBpuo.jpg


zing-uh-1-10_2k8qassmjkb04_2k8qb6flp30sr_2k8qclcje31sa.jpg


XMZKROG.jpg


JoYaYSz.jpg
 
Tuesday July 25, 2017, 07:00 pm
Explanation of the Navy About Vietnamese Fishermen in North Natuna Sea Incident
Andhika Prasetia - detikNews

Jakarta - The Indonesian Navy denies accusations by Vietnamese authorities of shooting four fishermen in the South China Sea or North Natuna Sea. The Navy asserted that it was only a warning shot into the air and no one.

This was conveyed by the Commander of the West Armada Fleet Command (Pangarmabar) Rear Admiral Aan Kurnia in the information given by Kadispenal First Admiral Gig Jonias Mozes Sipasulta, Monday (7/24/2017). On Sunday (23/7) at 19:45 pm, KRI Wiratno-379 detected the presence of 2 KIA Vietnam at 4 Nm (nautical mile) position which entered the waters of the Indonesian contents land.

"Chronology of the expulsion of the two KIA Vietnam, started when KRI Wiratno-379 conducted patrols in the waters of North Natuna, ZEEI, within the Indonesian continental shelf detected the presence of 2 KIA Vietnam at 4 Nm position into the territorial waters of the continental shelf of Indonesia," said Aan .

However, all of a sudden the two KIA Vietnam are about to carry out embezzlement and the matter leads to Wiratno-379 KRI bow at a distance of 30 meters. Because it is considered dangerous, the Navy releases 1 bullet into the air.

"Silhouettes are still visible and the point leads to the KRI Wiratno-379 dirt at a distance of 30 meters which endanger KRI Wiratno-379 so given a warning shot of a bullet into the air using SS 1 type weapons," said Aan.

Shortly thereafter, the two KIAs of Vietnam changed the hammer and the Navy expelled them to leave the continental shelf of Indonesia. Meanwhile, Gig said it was not true about Vietnam's claims regarding 4 of their fishermen who were injured by being shot.

"It is not true that the statement of the Vietnam Navy always performs actions according to the provisions and measurable," said Gig.

As reported earlier, Vietnam said the fishermen are located about 132 nautical miles southeast of Con Dao Island. Vietnamese authorities claimed the fishermen who were shot were taken to Con Dao Island to undergo treatment.
(Dkp / ibh)
https://news.detik.com/berita/d-357...ntah-klaim-vietnam-tembak-4-nelayan-di-natuna

kapal-perang-tni-al-e1492710354709.jpg

KRI 379
gunakan-ss1-v1-tni-al-jebol-rompi-antipeluru-marinir-as-YM7.jpg

SS1 assault rifle Pindad

Well, the warning shots to the air statement is not very credible, shots to the air don't wound people. Vietnam has no reason to lie and create a conflict with Indonesia, actually, that would be the last thing that VN wants. This is obviously an intent to cover up.
 
Well, the warning shots to the air statement is not very credible, shots to the air don't wound people. Vietnam has no reason to lie and create a conflict with Indonesia, actually, that would be the last thing that VN wants. This is obviously an intent to cover up.
Yes, I also agree Indonesia want to hide the incident and deny for that. Frankly, If they admit I will give them more respect than :) Dont forget they can shot Chinese ship, so Vietnam is not a matter, Dont need to deny
 
Vietnam is a Promising Partner for the Trump Administration
East-West Center, Contributor Promoting better understanding and relations between the nations and peoples of the U.S., Asia and the Pacific.
By Huong Le Thu, Visiting Fellow at Strategic and Defence Studies Center, Coral Bell School of Asia Pacific Affairs, Australian National University (ANU)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...mp-administration_us_597612afe4b0545a5c3101eb

Note: this analysis originally appeared in the East-West Center’s Asia Pacific Bulletinpolicy brief series on July 11, 2017. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the policy or position of the East-West Center or any organization with which the author is affiliated.

Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc was the first Southeast Asian head of state — and the third from Asia (after Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and Chinese President Xi Jinping) — to meet with President Donald Trump since he took office. During his late May three-day visit, he also visited New York to commemorate the 40th anniversary of Vietnamese membership in the United Nations before traveling to the White House. Phuc’s mission was to forge a personal relationship with President Trump, who has yet to form any consolidated view on policy towards Southeast Asia, including the South China Sea.

President Trump, during the May 31 meeting with Prime Minister Phuc, said that he is glad to see a more “balanced” trade relationship with Vietnam. This new trend of seeking what Trump considers to be more fair trade relationships might be challenging for any Southeast Asian state with smaller size and capacity. However, Vietnam aims to demonstrate goodwill by meeting the White House halfway on such expectations.

Almost exactly a year ago, the bilateral relationship reached a new high, with then-President Obama’s visit to Vietnam where he announced the total annulment of the arms embargo that had been in place since the war. In fact, Vietnam’s relations with the United States had been warming significantly over the past few years, coinciding with China’s increasing assertiveness in the South China Sea and with the Obama administration’s rebalance policy.

Trump’s victory in the presidential election last November generated some unease in Hanoi that the promising momentum could be lost. Just like other Southeast Asian states, Vietnam rarely figured in Trump’s campaign speeches if at all. He put Vietnam in the same category as China – unfair traders that were dumping their cheap products into the American market. Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) posed an existential challenge to the whole project and was a hard hit for Vietnam. Vietnam — the least developed economy of the 12 TPP members — was widely predicted to benefit the most from the trade agreement. More importantly, TPP served as a tool for Vietnamese policy makers hoping to “escape China’s orbit” by reducing economic dependency on Chinese trade. The Trump administration’s declaration that the rebalance is dead only further exacerbated Vietnam’s strategic anxiety.

But Vietnam is no stranger to such difficult circumstances. The visit can be seen as Vietnam’s proactivity in seeking engagement with the United States. With a mission to seek US continuity in its commitment to regional affairs – especially regional maritime disputes – Phuc aimed to lay out benefits for Washington to induce it to keep ties with Hanoi strong. The prime minister tailored his economic agenda for Trump’s business mindset. Phuc – who is viewed domestically as a hands-on economic reformer – was a better fit for the role than conservative party Secretary General Trong or President Quang, who is a former Minister of Public Security.

Despite Hanoi’s strategic concerns, bilateral economic relations have been doing well. America remains Vietnam’s largest export market; however, it ranks sixth among trade partners with which the United States has the largest trade deficits. Bilateral trade from January through May 2017 amounted to $16 billion, which constitutes an increase of 9.9% over the previous year. US exports grew by 22% compared to last year. The visit aimed at alleviating some of the Trump administration’s concerns about the growing deficit with Vietnam, which totaled $32 billion last year, a fraction of the deficit with China – $347 billion. Among the deals Phuc signed was a $15-17 billion agreement on the exchange of technological goods and services. President Trump described this win-win outcome as “more jobs for America, more equipment for Vietnam.” In contrast to the US-Vietnam leaders’ exchange one year ago, this meeting avoided values-based talk and was highly transactional in nature. Leaders in Hanoi have taken note of this shift. With such transactional gestures to generate good will, Vietnam hopes not only to boost bilateral relations, but also to draw Trump’s attention to geoeconomic and geostrategic regional developments.

During the Obama administration, Vietnam — along with other Southeast Asian neighbors — was considered a major beneficiary of American engagement in the region, both strategically and economically. The TPP was seen as a “carrot.” Under this administration, countries like Vietnam may need to come up with their own “carrots” to attract Washington’s attention, or at least ameliorate the perception of relative loss.

A New Model for Great Power-Small Power Relations?

Vietnam remains Southeast Asia’s most vigilant actor thus far during the first months of the Trump administration. Despite the apparent challenges – particularly the White House’s low level of engagement in the region – Hanoi can look to a number of advantageous factors. First of all, Southeast Asia’s US treaty allies — Thailand and the Philippines — are growing increasingly distant from Washington and closer to Beijing. Manila’s shift under Duterte is consequential, particularly for Vietnam, because of its role in the South China Sea disputes. The recent 30th ASEAN Summitshowed Manila’s reluctance to even raise the maritime issues publicly. Under these changing regional circumstances, Washington should reconsider modes of strategic cooperation beyond the traditional treaty ally framework. While Singapore also remains a US-reliant regional partner, Hanoi will be more hard-pressed to get the relationship right. This means that Vietnam might be the keenest regional actor to invest in this relationship and become Trump’s “America First” connection in Southeast Asia.

Moreover, while the issue of human rights represented an enduring obstacle for the Obama administration, Trump’s less values-based approach means that the government in Hanoi is likely to be more comfortable with Washington’s new foreign policy direction.

For America this could be a golden opportunity to engage with Hanoi. Despite previous efforts, domestic responses to American defense engagement in Vietnam still encounter a level of resistance. At this juncture, however, there seems to be consensus among Hanoi’s domestic leadership that the region cannot afford America’s absence. Thus, Phuc’s trip — as well as his reciprocal invitation for Trump to visit Vietnam — signals more openness than ever before, and certainly a better negotiating position.

The Trump administration needs to realize that the previous lasting investments in this relationship should not be sacrificed for short-term business gains. In fact, it is the Trump administration that is likely to harvest the fruits that previous administrations carefully seeded. Vietnam is now a key actor in the region, and if the United States wants to retain its position in Asia, it should understand that long-term gains from this relationship are worth more than revenues. If Trump’s “Make America Great Again” slogan has a global meaning, then securing the support of partners should come first. And a promising partner is Vietnam.
 
Back
Top Bottom