Tuan– A Vietnamese Perception of US Foreign Policy

I spent my first afternoon as an expat exploring the area between my new apartment (near Hoan Kiem Lake) and my new employer (the Center for Economic Development Studies). Moments after stepping out onto Tho Nhuom Street, I was hailed by a vivacious motorbike driver – a common experience for anyone who wanders the city by foot. Knowing that the university was a good distance away, I donned my helmet, introduced myself as an American researcher, and hopped onboard.

Motorbike drivers in Vietnam are similar to taxi drivers in Washington (where I spent last summer) – outspoken, intelligent, good-humored, and always willing to share their opinions with Westerners. Tuan was no exception. Our 25-minute adventure featured nonstop conversation, encompassing my reasons for returning to Vietnam, his ambition to open a business in Hanoi, Vietnam’s visionary leaders, and Vietnam-U.S. relations.

As we meandered through the cosmetically antiquated street system, Tuan summoned my attention to several government buildings and historical monuments along the way. About ten minutes in, we came upon the premises where the mausoleum and estate of Ho Chi Minh – the most venerated statesmen in Vietnamese history – are located. My corresponding enthusiasm was met with a list of Vietnamese political luminaries.

“Ho Chi Minh; very good! Vo Van Kiet (former Prime Minister credited with inventing and implementing liberal economic reforms); very good! Phan Van Khai (former Prime Minister who signed the U.S.-Vietnam Bilateral Trade Agreement); very good! Vo Nguyen Giap (Vietnam’s George Washington, who defeated the French at Dien Bien Phu and engineered the Tet Offensive); very good!”

Believing that Tuan’s mentioning of Vo Van Kiet and Phan Van Khai, both considered economic progressives, insinuated a certain appreciation for economic liberalization and international integration, I asked his opinion of relations between the United States and Vietnam.

“Bill Clinton (who normalized American relations with Vietnam); very good! Barack Obama; very good –young and very intelligent. America’s economy is now very good because of President Obama. But George Bush… [significant hesitation]; very bad! When George Bush was President, the American economy was very bad – and America went to war in Iraq, [which] was very bad for the American economy. Yes, I think George Bush was very bad.”

Now, it doesn’t take a PhD to know how most people (including myself) feel about the presidency of George W. Bush. One positive outcome, however, of the last eight years was a warming of relations between the United States and Vietnam, based upon heightened diplomatic and economic exchange. America now ranks as Vietnam’s number one export market, and American multinationals are poised to surpass their Taiwanese, Japanese, and Korean counterparts to become the largest direct investors in the Vietnamese economy. Vietnam now belongs to the World Trade Organization and holds a rotating seat on the United Nations Security Council – testaments to the success of economic liberalization as well as indications of American support.

None of this is meant to imply that ordinary Vietnamese weren’t just as outraged by the Bush Administration’s foreign policy mistakes, failures, and atrocities as everyone else was. Vietnam’s foreign policy, after all, prizes international stability and abhors conflict. A Vietnamese colleague of mine told me, “Bush threatened the entire international community as well as international peace and stability when he invaded Iraq.” But surveys of Vietnamese public opinion, combined with the aforementioned bilateral achievements, indicated to me that the Vietnamese did not consider the Bush Administration as terrible as everyone else around the world apparently does.

What was I missing?

I’ve come up with some explanations, and I invite readers to post other possibilities.

1. The animosity created by America’s invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan exceeds the goodwill created by expanded bilateral engagement.

Even though the international community fancies Vietnam Asia’s next emerging market, most Vietnamese still consider peace, stability, and national sovereignty more valuable than economic development. In fact, many actually worry that economic liberalization has increased Vietnam’s vulnerability to foreign enemies. An America that invades sovereign nations and sanctions torture is not the sort of America that ordinary Vietnamese citizens want, even if it promises greater trade and investment.

2. The financial collapse of 2008 undermined the economic successes of 2001-2007.

An unintended consequence of economic deepening was that Vietnam’s developmental fortunes became intertwined with the vagaries of the American financial system. When Lehman Brothers collapsed, Vietnam, already facing an inflationary crisis of its own, saw economic growth stagnate and then dissipate. Vietnamese newspapers were not shy to underscore the parallels between systemic mismanagement in the United States and moribund economic conditions in Vietnam. People like Tuan were, perhaps correctly, led to believe that the Bush Administration’s mishandling of the economy was to blame for their personal economic misfortunes.

3. Ordinary Vietnamese don’t realize how helpful the Bush Administration actually was.

It’s easy to attach an American flag to every bag of food disbursed by USAID; it’s almost impossible to do the same with trade and investment treaties. The Bush Administration opened America’s market to Vietnamese exporters and facilitated American investment in Vietnam – but it failed to make these policy achievements known among ordinary Vietnamese citizens. When Intel moved into Vietnam, thousands of Vietnamese rejoiced – but how were they supposed to know that the Administration was instrumental in ensuring the conditions for that deal?

And, with that, it’s back to the grindstone!

Tagged as: financial crisis, Hanoi, investment, public opinion, soft power, Southeast Asia, trade, Vietnam, Vietnam-US relations