The 10th Party Congess
From: David Marr <phanmarr@yahoo.com>
Date: Apr 26, 2006 8:22 AM
Subject: [Vsg] results of 10th Party Congess
Sitting in Hanoi and reading the papers, I'm not seeing any commentary on the just-completed 10th Party Congress. That's par for the course, perhaps moreso this time as some papers really ran with the institutionalized corruption issue before the congress and may now feel it prudent to lie low for awhile. Can anyone point me to a solid foreign analysis? Probably I should have found time to listen to the BBC Vietnamese offerings today.
Looking at the Central Committee and Politburo lists, it looks like `don't rock the boat' was the dominant motto. And why is there not a single Ministry of Foregn Affairs official elected to Central Committee, except for one alternate member? Compare that with the number of Cong An electees.
From: Nhu Miller <trantnhu@gmail.com>
Date: Apr 26, 2006 8:36 AM
Subject: Re: [Vsg] results of 10th Party Congess
The most salient point of this much touted PARTY was when the master of the universe,
Bill Gates came to town -- in the middle of the sacred meeting -- the president, prime minister et alia, all abandonned the congress to attend to Bill. So much for company
business.
Tran Tuong Nhu
From: Stephen Denney <sdenney@ocf.berkeley.edu>
Date: Apr 26, 2006 9:41 AM
Subject: Re: [Vsg] results of 10th Party Congess
I noticed that too, but wonder if it just reflects the bias of western
press coverage (i.e. Americans would be more interested in reading about
Bill Gates visiting Vietnam than the Party Congress), or is this also
indicative of how people in Vietnam feel about the relative importance of
Bill Gates and the Party Congress?
- Steve Denney
From: DRA1333@aol.com <DRA1333@aol.com>
Date: Apr 26, 2006 11:42 AM
Subject: Re: [Vsg] results of 10th Party Congess
Dear David,
There hasn't been any solid foreign analysis as yet, just some not very enlightening accounts from DPA and South China Morning Post. The resignation of Vu Khoan and the failure of "self-nominated" deputy Foreign Minister Nguyen Phu Binh to gain a central committee seat, leaves only Nguyen Duy Nien to represent the Foreign Ministry and no obvious successor.
Best,
Dottie Avery
From: Sidel, Mark <mark-sidel@uiowa.edu>
Date: Apr 26, 2006 11:58 AM
Subject: RE: [Vsg] results of 10th Party Congess
Dear David and colleagues,
There has been virtually no nuanced foreign commentary yet, other than a few brief quotes on the general situation in AP and other dispatches. Hopefully Carl and others will write something at some point. I agree with you that the number of Cong An electees was very large, but given the strong rumors of a pending administrative division of public security and other security affairs into two ministries (echoes of China), some of those elections may have perhaps been in preparation for two different ministry structures.
Elsewhere on the law and security side I have been struck by the number of Party law and security officials (Ban noi chinh and Ban bao ve chinh tri etc.) officials elected (down to the pho ban level); and the relative dearth of other law and justice officials elected (other than two Ministry of Justice personnel and one Supreme Court person, but no procuracy, and that's not surprising given the situation there). On the law and security side it is well worth noting the election to the Central Committee of Ha Hung Cuong, currently Party Secretary in Quang Binh and former Deputy Minister of Justice and clearly (at least to me) headed back to Hanoi at some point for a senior posting.
The Foreign Ministry seems the major loser here. In the midst of the Congress, domestic press reports identified the Foreign Ministry, Public Security, and Defense as having the greatest number of nominees for Central Committee slots. Press reports indicated that up to six (!) MFA officials were nominated for the Central Committee, including (as far as I can tell) virtually all the Deputy Ministers and including one Deputy Minister who nominated himself under the new process. As far as I can tell, not a single one of those six Foreign Ministry nominees was elected to the full Central Committee. (The very smart and capable Pham Binh Minh, truly his father's son, was elected to alternate CC membership - the only MFA representative of any kind that I can spot anywhere near the new Central Committee, and that at the decidedly more junior level.) So the Foreign Ministry is in the extraordinary position of having no Minister or Deputy Minister on the new Central Committee at all - but only a department director (vu truong, Pham Binh Minh) as an alternate member.
Combined with the departure of Minister Nguyen Dy Nien, the retirement of Vu Khoan, who retained strong influence in the Foreign Ministry despite his formal departure for Trade and the DPMinistership years ago, and the election of two Party External Relations (Ban doi ngoai) cadres to the Central Committee, one cannot but see the Foreign Ministry as loser here.
But I am far from Hanoi, and know little. Do Carl (Thayer) and others have thoughts?
Best wishes.
Mark
From: Nhu Miller <trantnhu@gmail.com>
Date: Apr 26, 2006 7:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Vsg] results of 10th Party Congess
An assessment of the Xth party Congress by the IHT:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/04/26/news/vietnam.php
From: Ben Stocking <ben_stocking@yahoo.com>
Date: Apr 26, 2006 7:13 PM
Subject: Re: [Vsg] results of 10th Party Congess
here's the very non-academic perspective of a four-year hanoi resident with nothing more than a measly bachelor's degree:
i have spoken to many people in hanoi about the party congress recently, most of them ordinary folks in the 20 to 35 age group, some older. i hope i don't get in trouble for writing this -- the cong an is probably reading it -- but i haven't found a single person who could care less about the party congress. the political apathy among this age group seems greater than the apathy that leads to the pathetic voter turnout in u.s. presidential elections.
i am sure that the vast, vast majority of young people here, who still regard uncle ho as a hero because he rescued their country from foreign invaders, would much rather meet bill gates than any of the new politburo members. (hell, wouldn't anyone?) the capitalist impulse is far, far stronger than any other force around here. and the young people i know see bill gates as the embodiment of the entrepreneurial ideal, even if he is a bit if a nerd.
although they are frustrated by corruption among party members, they are pleased with the booming economy and the steady increase in their personal freedoms. those who are interested in political change assume that it will come about slowly, as the next generation, which has been more engaged with the outside world, takes power. they don't expect this new bunch of leaders to be significantly different than the last crew.
ben stocking
From: Nguyen Qui Duc <DNguyen@kqed.org>
Date: Apr 27, 2006 12:06 AM
Subject: RE: [Vsg] results of 10th Party Congess
Dear list
A point I failed to raise earlier - local reporters and media hands also mentioned in private a certain tug of war between a pro-Chinese vs a pro-American faction. Perhaps Phan Van Khai did not achieve significant results from his trip to the US--still, the focus on Bill Gates and the recent deal signed with Intel could also be seen as a reflection of the strength of the pro-American faction, as a counterweight to Chinese influence. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable can read the results of the party congress and offer more informed opinions. This tug of war was mentioned to me during all three of my visits in December, January, and last week in both Ho Chi Minh City and Ha Noi.
Nguyen Q Duc
From: Van Tran <tran@ssrc.org>
Date: Apr 27, 2006 10:04 AM
Subject: RE: [Vsg] results of 10th Party Congess
Dear All,
I can't resist telling my Bill Gates story. Bill Gates has been known in Vietnam long before he actually visited. I lived in Vietnam from 1997-98, and while in Hanoi in 1998, my husband and I ate at a noodle shop in Hanoi, popular among Vietnamese, but not a place that tourists or foreigners would visit. I was talking with my husband when a young man, probably 18 or so stopped by our table and asked, "Excuse me, are you Bill Gates?"
Information technology has been a growing important sector in Vietnam, especially among young people. My guess is that the enthusiam for Gates is the hope for this sector.
Van
From: Adam @ UoM <fforde@unimelb.edu.au>
Date: Apr 27, 2006 11:07 PM
Subject: RE: [Vsg] results of 10th Party Congess
Does anybody out there have any sense how Mien Trung as a whole did? And the Nghe an guys? They are in there somewhere.
Adam
From: martin.gainsborough@virgin.net <martin.gainsborough@virgin.net>
Date: Apr 26, 2006 7:05 PM
Subject: [Vsg] Some thoughts on the 10th Party Congress
Dear Mark, David, colleagues,
As I think I indicated on this list, the Bristol-Vietnam Project is
producing a report linked to the Congress which includes some specific
Congress analysis.
I did some of the number crunching that Carl usually does (late) last night
– average ages, extent of retained vs new Central Committee members.
The interesting statistic I discovered – and it was late at night when I
did this so please count it as tentative – is that in terms of retained vs
new Central Committee members we seem to have had the ‘greatest clear-out’
since 1976, namely 48.75% retained and 51.25% new. For the historical
record, I am drawing on Carl’s work, who has the average new intake for
1976-2001 as 37.7% and 42% new in 2001. But I am not sure how much we
would want to conclude from this: 51.25% new but they are all tried and
tested party men (and a few women). Admittedly the average date of birth
(1952) is now more recent – so formative experiences are changing but their
formative experiences were still arguably in the war and under central
planning (34 years old in 1986, 40 in 1992).
I am interested what people are saying about which constituencies are
heavily represented on the Central Committee and which are not but again
I’d like to ask the question how much we can really conclude from this.
Take, for example, the dearth of foreign ministry representation. Clearly,
no one would say that this means a total loss of foreign ministry
influence, which suggests that the means by which, in this case, foreign
ministry influence is exercised is diverse and doesn’t just depend on
Central Committee representation…?
I too enjoyed the fact that senior leaders rushed to meet Bill Gates
despite being mid-way through the Congress and – sitting in Hanoi – his
visit did create a nice frisson of what do young people feel is more
important.
For me, however, the most important thing about the Congress – and this is
from someone who has been spinning the provocative line of questioning
whether Congresses do indeed matter – is the themes or key issues which
have come up in the debates both formal and informal. For me, these embody
a new popular and media pressure in areas such as corruption,
participation, conflict of interest issues in relation to officials doing
business, and greater discussion (again formal and informal) about the need
to look beyond the party for people of talent. And I think senior people
in the party have sensed this pressure.
As ever, one should never exaggerate new trends and I am conscious that I
am still ‘living the Congress’ event and need to stand back from it more to
refine my analysis.
I have written someone along these lines which I hope is being published as
an op ed piece for the South China Morning Post. It is probably not the
analysis David is looking for but it may be a start!
Best wishes
Martin Gainsborough
From: Nguyen Qui Duc <DNguyen@kqed.org>
Date: Apr 26, 2006 11:51 PM
Subject: RE: [Vsg] Some thoughts on the 10th Party Congress
Dear List
Anyone looked at the results from the party congress and analyzed them along gender line?
One observer noted the lack of any female representation.
Not as crucial as foreign policy expertise, but what does this say?
Nguyen q Duc
From: Rupert Friederichsen <rupert@friederichsen.net>
Date: Apr 3, 2006 9:45 PM
Subject: [Vsg] VCP party plenum
Dear list readers and contributors,
I would like to add to Elizabeth's and Markus's questions: What are your thoughts on the upcoming party plenum? And what is the domestic discourse? I would be particularly interested in the areas of
a) governance
b) minorities and uplands development policies, and
c) research policy.
Concerning governance; I came across a recent newspaper article titled 'Nha nuoc phap quyen hay nha nuoc phap tri?' (full reference can be provided, it is from a Saigon law newspaper); how should I tranlsate 'phap quyen'? And how prominent is the idea of 'state under the rule of law' in the Vientames discourse of public administration reform, doi moi etc? Do we consider Vietnam to be a state under the rule of law?
Concerning research policy, a recent article in Van Nghe newspaper calls for e.g. less state intervention into research activities. Is there a domestic debate concerning scientific autonomy, and the dependence on external research funding in Vietnamese universities?
I have not come across any recent programmatic statement concerning minority policies; is this issue just not relevant for the developmentalist agenda compared to issues such as WTO accession, economic growth and industrialization?
Are we, and the people of Vietnam, expecting new impulses from the plenum or is it going to be a change of personnel without substantial change, as some suggest (e.g. Xinhua General News Service, March 29; I can send this to anyone interested)
Looking forward to your comments!
Rupert
From: Elizabeth St.George <elizabethstgeorge@homemail.com.au>
Date: Apr 26, 2006 9:06 PM
Subject: RE: [Vsg] VCP party plenum
Dear Rupert,
This is a reply with some delay
As far as I can see the Congress has fulfilled people’s realistic expectations: displaying slow and steady change, following in the wake of changes on the ground (rather than leading them as the Communist Party often claims). While it is somewhat dangerous to draw conclusions on the basis of written documents alone, given that they are the most public (and generally conservative) statement of where the Party is headed, for me these are the outstanding points from this Congress so far:
- much stronger emphasis on developing a market in all sectors of the economy
- only slight lingering statements about the central operational role of the state in the economy
- administrative and legal reforms highlighted as a means to ensure that the market economy can function smoothly, and to minimise corruption
- integration in the world economy overall but especially as a means to fast-tracking economic development in Vietnam (with some concerns to mitigate negative impacts – corruption etc)
- a much stronger emphasis on the environment than previously
No doubt others can pick out other key themes, but I have been struck by the embracing of the market economy in this Congress’ political statements, and the emphasis on international integration (no doubt continued efforts to join the WTO have something to do with this). There are the odd well-used repetitive statements about the central position of the state in the economy, but I find the overwhelming emphasis to be on the need to develop a cross-sectoral market economy as fast as possible. In terms of ethnic minorities or research, I don’t see anything new. Research and higher education got a huge plug in the previous two party congresses, so perhaps it is not surprising there is nothing very new this time (although I note they are now talking about adapting international research locally).
Markus asked earlier if there had been any articles about admitting business people to the Party. Nhan Dan has shown a series of opinion articles on the subject, some of which are still showing online, as has Tuoi Tre. It was a fairly important discussion point during the ‘request for opinions’ conducted in March.
I am still looking for a way to reliably access Party resolutions (Nghi Quyet Trung Uong) from the past ten years. If anyone on the list has suggestions then I would be very keen to hear about them!
Elizabeth St.George