Forget about Le Thanh Tong...why go that far back?
http://blog.freedomhouse.org/weblog/2008/0...in-pr.html#moreCrackdown in Progress in Vietnam
Rapid economic growth in countries like Vietnam and China has fed the debate regarding the tradeoff between democracy and development. Although not free, citizens of these nations have benefited from significant wealth increases and poverty reduction. Yet not only has the expansion of freedom been slow, but the gains are often quite fragile. Indeed, facing setbacks to economic growth, undemocratic governments may quickly reverse advances in liberty. This appears to be the case in Vietnam. Like neighboring China, Vietnam has experienced impressive economic growth after pursuing market-oriented reforms. Yet Vietnam also shares with China a profound reluctance to permit political reforms. And now, in the face of recent financial reversals, Vietnam’s government has once again moved to stifle outcroppings of freedom and democracy in the country.
As the 2006 Countries at the Crossroads report on Vietnam notes, the government is run by the Vietnam Communist Party (VCP). The VCP is the only true political party permitted, and it jealously guards its power. Indeed, the government brooks little dissent. Freedom of speech is harshly limited. Citizens are incarcerated for expressing independent political views or belonging to opposition political parties. Religious leaders are harassed for not affiliating with state-controlled committees. The state owns or controls all media.
For a long time, however, rapid economic growth – combined with the VCP’s legacy as the winners of Vietnam’s independence – has helped suppress pressure for more freedom. But Vietnam has lately faced serious economic problems. The trade deficit has soared and the booming stock market and property prices have dropped. Inflation is a serious concern. The economy had grown at about 8% annually for the past decade, but the rate for 2008 will be lower. This combination has created widespread pessimism about the government’s ability to manage the situation. After all, the cost/benefit calculation of challenging an authoritarian government changes considerably when such a regime’s signature achievement is tarnished.
Not coincidentally, the VCP is now in the midst of an intensified crackdown on political expression. On September 10, prominent blogger Nguyen Hoang Hai, known as Dieu Cay, was sentenced to over two years imprisonment for alleged tax fraud after leading protests against corruption and human rights abuses that annoyed the VCP. The police arrested him in April after he lodged protests against China for claims over disputed islands in the South China Sea. Last week’s trial was closed to the public and had grave procedural irregularities. Human Rights Watch notes that “Dieu Cay’s imprisonment fits a wider pattern of harassment and arrest by Vietnamese authorities of independent journalists, human rights activists, cyber dissidents, religious freedom advocates, and farmers protesting confiscation of their land.” The conviction also sparked protests by Reporters Without Borders and the Committee to Protect Journalists.
Following Dieu Cay’s trial, the police continued the crackdown with the arrest of various activists. Among the arrested are activists who evidently sought to join a Hanoi land dispute being waged by Catholics over church land seized by the government for a private company. Land protests are common in Vietnam, as the government has been inclined to take advantage of climbing property prices by confiscating land. The government’s crackdown also seeks to limit public objections to land disputes. In general, the current counterattack against dissent may be tied to the desire to stop dissent in its tracks, before economic pressures bring the urge to protest to a wider section of society.
As in many systems as opaque as Vietnam’s, corruption is also an important theme. For governments that prioritize growth above all else, corruption can act as a damper by scaring foreign investors and decreasing citizens satisfaction, which can lead to instability. However, in closed systems, the mechanisms for combating graft are almost invariably feeble. Vietnam is no exception. The government realizes that public disgust with corruption is very high and constitutes a challenge to its legitimacy. Yet the government lately has reversed the leeway allowed to the media in covering major corruption cases. In essence, the government has gone after those exposing graft even while it claims to be fighting public corruption. In May 2008, two anti-corruption journalists were picked up. The journalists, Nguyen Van Hai and Nguyen Viet Chien, reported in 2006 on a scandal involving public funds used by public officials to bet on soccer matches. The government arrested high-level officials and generally praised the press. However, in March 2008, one of the accused was cleared of wrongdoing, and the two journalists were soon detained. The press has been pressured to refrain from coverage, although the journalists’ papers are top sellers and the story remains in public conversation.
As Vietnam reconciles the ups and downs of capitalism and the accretion of freedoms, it might look beyond autocratic China at healthier nearby models: Taiwan and South Korea. Those countries transitioned from one-party dictatorships to multi-party democracies while still increasing national income. While the very different histories of these countries make such a comparison highly superficial, the point is that the China/Singapore model is not the only one available to emulate, even in Vietnam’s own neighborhood. At the very least, a good start for the VCP would be to stop, even in the face of economic uncertainty, the current crackdown on civil and political liberties.