Translated by Nam Việt
Theo chúng tôi biết, GS Lê Xuân Khoa đã viết một bài tương tự bài ông viết cho BVN, bằng tiếng Anh, để công bố trên các phương tiện truyền thông tại Hoa Kỳ. Trong khi chờ đợi bài viết Anh ngữ của ông, để đáp ứng kịp thời nhu cầu của nhiều bạn đọc nước ngoài, BVN xin đăng bản dịch bài viết này, được chuyển ngữ bởi cộng tác viên Nam Việt.
Bauxite Việt Nam
On May 31, 2013, at the 12th Asia Security Summit of the “Shangri-La Dialogue”, Vietnam’s Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung was invited as the keynote speaker. His address’s main topic was “Building a strategic trust for peace, cooperation and prosperity for the Asia-Pacific region”.
This is the first time that Vietnam outlined a strategic view aiming at a comprehensive solution to the political crisis which may potentially lead to wars between China and some countries in the region. This view is built on a key notion – strategic trust – which is a terminology used in discussions for political or business cooperation purposes, to distinguish from moral beliefs or simply trust between the individuals who are very close or trustworthy to each other in the same family or organization. Most recently, during his 2012 visit to the United States in his capacity as the Vice President of China, Xi Jinping was referring to “strategic trust” as a foundation for the mutually beneficial cooperation between the two countries.
At this Shangri-La Dialogue summit, strategy trust was especially emphasized and advocated by Vietnam’s Prime Minister as a sine qua non (indispensable) in the cooperation between the concerned countries in order to benefit each and every party and contribute to a lasting peace in the region. Marites D. Vitug, a reporter at the Summit, mentioned that Vietnam’s Prime Minister had used the terminology “strategic trust” up to 40 times. Dr. John Chipman, one of the organizers of the Shangri-La Dialogue, said in the closing session that “Strategy Trust” has become the theme of this Dialogue.
With regard to the East Sea issue in particular, Prime Minister of Vietnam, based on the notion of strategic trust, has delivered three political messages:
- With China: Although not mentioned by name, Mr. Dung obviously targeted China when he listed a series of reasons that have caused an alarm status for regional security: “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 urged China, together with the ASEAN, to “uphold their responsibilities and mutually reinforce strategic trust”, and redouble efforts to soon finalize the Code of Conduct (COC) on the East Sea that conforms to international law and in particular, the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
- With ASEAN countries: Mr. Dung emphasized the need of an ASEAN that has consensus, unity and plays a central role in multilateral cooperation mechanism”. He indirectly criticized Cambodia, in this country’s capacity as the chair of the 2012 ASEAN meeting in Phnompenh, manipulated by China and for the sake of their own interests, made that ASEAN meeting a failure in which a joint statement could not be issued as expected. He believed that thanks to solidarity, ASEAN and its partners “could work together to develop a feasible mechanism that would guarantee maritime security and safety and freedom of navigation in the region and facilitate the resolution of disputes “.
- With the United States: When recognizing the U.S. as a “Pacific power,” Mr. Dung pointed out that the United States, though not a member of ASEAN, naturally also has a strategic role in the region. In stressing that the United States and China as “two powers having largest role and responsibility for the region and the world, he highlighted the contrast images between these 2 powers in terms of responsibility and actions “conforming to international law and respecting the independence and sovereignty of nations….., contributing to our common peace, stability, cooperation and prosperity”.
In brief, through his key note address at the Shangri-La Dialogue, Prime Minister of Vietnam has shown a significant turning point in the foreign policy of Hanoi that sought to escape the influence of Beijing and to increase cooperation with Washington. It would be said that this is a policy of “pivot to the U.S.” of the Vietnam government. It does not mean that Vietnam is looking for a military alliance against China. Instead, it is only a prudent decision to protect the country’s independence and sovereignty. In the end of his speech, Prime Minister Dung reaffirmed that “Vietnam will not ally itself with any country to counter another”. This was unfolding a possible trend of “neutral status” that can be adopted by ASEAN countries as a suitable option for “a more central role in the multilateral cooperation mechanism”.
The US strategic engagement
Also at the Shangri-La Dialogue, probably not by chance that U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, in a manner that cannot be more clear, reconfirmed the U.S. strategy in Asia-Pacific region is to “increase cooperation for peace, stability and prosperity” as the Prime Minister of Vietnam expected. Mr. Hagel talked about the specific investments in the humanitarian assistance and development programs, especially the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) which is in the making and the “Lower Mekong Initiative” that was introduced in 2009. Like Vietnam’s prime minister, Mr. Hagel expected a Code of Conduct on the East Sea will soon be finalized and a collaborative environment will be established that benefit all parties and facilitate the settlement of disputes without the use of power. Secretary Hagel also called on China to work with the United States and ASEAN countries in setting up a security structure that serves as a common basis for resolving differences effectively.
Mr. Hagel criticized those who are skeptical about the long-term involvement commitment of the U.S. in the Asia-Pacific region. He described them as “unwise and short-sighted.” He stressed that even in the case that the budget for defense is at the lowest level, spending for defense of the U.S. is still approximately 40 percent of the total defense spending of the world. In addition to the transfer of 60 percent of its naval forces to the Pacific Ocean, the United States also mobilized 60 percent of its Air Forces to the bases that were already established in the area. Moreover, the latest technologies developed by U.S. defense industry will enhance significantly the capability of the U.S. military in deploying rapidly and undertaking strikes more effectively. This shows that the establishment of U.S. military bases in Vietnam is no longer necessary, especially when the U.S. battleship and aircraft carriers have become the mobile bases, from time to time visiting the strategic locations in the region. This is the most convincing guarantee for Vietnam to switch its foreign policy. Indeed, Nguyen Tan Dung made a wise decision and at the right time.
It is also reasonable to mention a deep concern of China regarding the policy of “pivot” or “rebalancing” of the United States in the Asia-Pacific region, as stated by China’s major general Zhu in the Q & A session after the speech of U.S. Secretary of Defense. The female general who is director of the Center for Sino-American Defense Relations candidly told the U.S. Secretary of Defense that she did not believe that U.S. rebalancing activity, with the deployment of 60% of the navy and 60% of the air force in area, is not against China as ever explained. Mr. Hagel replied, the United States “has been a Pacific power for more than 200 years”, so rebalancing activity of the U.S. is normal, not a new story, nothing more than the actions of China and Russia and the other countries in the regions that they have interests. He wanted to emphasize an important point in the efforts to maintain peace that the United States and China to expand and promote cooperation and share information directly between the two countries’ armed forces. This will help avoid misunderstanding and miscalculation.
Back to Vietnam’s story, the real problem that Vietnam has to face is how to get increased specific support programs from the United States, the consensus and solidarity from the ASEAN and the support from the international community in dialogues with China on the basis of equality and mutual benefit? This question will be answered in the upcoming US-Vietnam talks, summit as well as meetings and conferences at all levels, regional or international, of the countries in the region and beyond, that will take place in the coming months.
Domestic policy needs a significant change
One of the biggest challenges of Vietnam is how to persuade China to respect international law, to give up the policy of “power politics” and to be prepared to solve the East Sea issues on the basis of peace, cooperation and development.
The support from the United States will be necessary but not sufficient, because the help from the United States alone will be insignificant if Vietnam is not poised to set free herself from China’s orbit of influence and to integrate into the democratic world. As a matter of fact, Vietnam has put herself into the subordination under China since 1990 when Nguyen Van Linh and Do Muoi secretly met Jiang Zemin and Li Peng in Chengdu, Sichuan province, and signed the meeting proceedings that normalize relations between the two countries. To date, the content of this Chengdu Conference and the secret agreement have not been disclosed because it consists of several commitments and concessions detrimental to Vietnam. Over the past 23 years, China has been using “soft power” to gradually deprive Vietnam of her rights and sovereignty and realizing the conspiracy of sinicizing the Vietnamese. Vietnam’s government is facing the risk of a worrisome economic downturn and a decline, at an alarming level, of confidence by the people. In addition, the internal power struggle in the leadership has never been so fierce before and become openly visible, not hidden anymore.
Facing this danger, Nguyen Tan Dung has decided to take a diplomatic breakthrough to restore just cause for Vietnam and to save his personal prestige which is declining dramatically. His address on strategic trust at the Shangri La Dialogue has received some positive reactions internationally. The Vietnamese, including overseas ones, in general, have also given his speech some positive response because he has criticized the policy of power politics of China and expressed confidence in the responsibility and constructive inputs of the United States.
Some criticized Dung because he dared not to target directly against the hegemonic ambitions of China in the East Sea and its conspiracy of annexation of Vietnam. This criticism has good basis, but it is not appropriate for diplomatic language and for the constructive purpose of the Shangri-La Dialogue. As described by Roy Metcalf of the Washington-based Brookings Institution, this forum has the “high standards of civility and friendly Asian-style protocol”. Of course, Prime Minister Dung would have earned higher credit if still in an appropriate diplomatic language, he had referred to China’s strike and cruelty with the poor and innocent Vietnamese fishermen in the East Sea.
An important issue that Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung has to face now is apart from the above mentioned breakthrough in foreign policy, what changes he would anticipate in domestic policy. As noted above, the United States cannot help Vietnam develop and maintain stability if the Vietnamese government continues maintaining totalitarian regimes, cracking down patriotic voices and peaceful demands for real implementation of human rights and democracy, elimination of corruption and social injustice. At Shangri-La forum, Mr. Dung called for building strategic trust for peace, cooperation and development in the region. He emphasized the responsibility, mutual respect and observance of international law. As such, he would be considered as being guilty of cheating if he goes against those highest legal and ethical rules for his own people in the country.
In the opening of his address at the Shangri-La Dialogue, Dung quoted a Vietnamese saying that “if trust is lost, all is lost”. Facing the risk of being ousted by his hard line, dogmatic and pro-China rivals in the leadership to maintain their power and interests, Dung would need to regain the faith that has been lost among the people and even in the patriotic members of the ruling party. The Shangri-La forum is not just an opportunity for him to build strategic trust with international partners but also an opportunity for him to regain the necessary support from his people, including those who had strongly opposed him and could forgive his wrongdoings in the past. To this end, Dung would need to make a second act of breakthrough which is to turn domestic policy from dictatorship to democracy.
In his Shangri-La speech, even talking about foreign affairs, the prime minister also mentioned the case of Myanmar “as a vivid example of the success of persevering with dialogue on the basis of building and reinforcing trust, respecting the legitimate interests of each other, which has helped open up a bright future not only for Myanmar but also for our whole region”. In Myanmar, the dialogue was mainly between the government and the opposition parties that resulted in an agreement on the process of democratization. The basis of that dialogue was trust and mutual respect. The benefit of that dialogue is a bright future not only for Myanmar but also for the entire region. In only one sentence, Mr. Dung clearly demonstrated the need and specific benefits of a dialogue based on trust and mutual respect. Regardless of intentionally or not, the Prime Minister gave everyone an obvious impression that he would change domestic policy, and like Myanmar, this would start with the release of jailed peaceful dissidents and open talks with the dissidents about a democratization process. Every Vietnamese and international observers are waiting in hope.
Pessimistic or Optimistic?
Nearly three weeks have passed since the Shangri-La forum, one has not seen any sign of the expected change in domestic policy as pioneered by Myanmar. In contrast, one only sees more arrests of the democracy, human rights activists, and the authorities continue to ignore calls from inside the country and from international human right organizations demanding abolishing unjust and severe sentences imposed on democracy activists, or at least improving the treatment over prisoners of conscience remaining in jail. Despite the fact that the political nature of the communists is “saying something in one hand, but doing something else another hand”, but Nguyen Tan Dung’s stated breakthrough in foreign policy before an international forum is an event that should be considered carefully and viewed from different angles. The core issue here is that in the midst of fierce internal power struggles and conflicting policies within Vietnam’s leadership, whether or not a switch of policy toward China and the United States is an agreed stance inside the communist party’s Politburo? If it is not, Mr. Dung should have anticipated the intense though discreet opposition from his rivals and Beijing. He also must have had plans to deal with such negative reaction. In any case, each side needs time to act.
Vietnam’s situation is so complicated. No one could predict the reckonings of Prime Minister Dung, his political rivals and China. But one thing is certain: internal information of the leadership will be secured than ever before. It is possible that some bloggers who are thought to have access to the reliable sources have been arrested in efforts of the security forces to silence and to intimidate others.
The waiting time to see winners or losers of this process may be extended. If the conservatives win, Vietnam would completely fall into China. If Dung wins, Vietnam would have chance to escape the influence of China and could rapidly catch up with nearby advanced countries like South Korea or Taiwan. In the meantime, Vietnamese people and intellectuals must continue to promote the campaign against the aggression of China, to increase the movement for democracy and human rights. Efforts to fight for independence, freedom and happiness of the nation would become more necessary even if Dung could eliminate his opponents. But from the recent events with the various dictatorships in the world, there would be no guarantee that Mr. Dung will not return to his dictatorship once his power has been consolidated.
Nobody expects to see misfortune things for the nation, but it is always necessary to prevent bad things from happening.
Now, let’s pray to God for Nguyen Tan Dung to become a Gorbachov of Vietnam.
Nguồn bản gốc: https://boxitvn.online/bai/16922 và: http://boxitvn.blogspot.com/2013/06/viet-nam-se-ra-sao-sau-bai-dien-van.html