Embedded Files
From: Michael Montesano via Vsg <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 3:06 AM
To: Vietnam Studies Group <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Subject: [Vsg] "Backlash Against Fulbright University Vietnam: Are Propagandists Barking Up the Wrong Tree?"
Backlash Against Fulbright University Vietnam: Are Propagandists Barking Up the Wrong Tree?
Backlash Against Fulbright University Vietnam: Are Propagandists Barking Up the Wrong Tree?
Published 13 Sep 2024
Raising the spectre of foreign influence against young Vietnamese students out of fear that they might be inspired by recent street protests in other countries to topple the regime might do more harm than good.
The spectre of street protests led by disaffected youths toppling autocratic regimes has long unsettled Vietnamese authorities. This is a concern starkly illustrated by the recent online vitriol aimed at Fulbright University Vietnam (FUV). The US-backed university was accused of fostering dissent and being a potential hub for “colour revolutions”, movements historically associated with destabilising authoritarian regimes.
This uproar underscores an entrenched anxiety within some factions of the Vietnamese leadership that “Western influences” might incite dissent and challenge the regime’s grip on power. However, the regime’s propagandists, in their attempts to engage with a tech-savvy, cosmopolitan audience, have remained didactic and out of touch.
FUV, founded in 2016, grew out of a 1994 partnership between Harvard University’s Kennedy School and the University of Economics in Ho Chi Minh City. FUV was established by a prime ministerial decision, with the Vietnamese government providing land for its campus in Ho Chi Minh City. Both the US and Vietnamese governments have strategically leveraged FUV as a symbol of their evolving bilateral ties. While its enrolment remains modest compared to larger state-run universities in Vietnam, FUV, whose faculty is a mix of local and international professors, markets itself as offering a liberal arts-focused education.
The backlash against FUV emerged following the deadly student-led protests that rocked Bangladesh in July. This situation swiftly captured the attention of pro-government social media accounts in Vietnam, which in early August seized upon the unrest in Bangladesh to craft a narrative warning against “colour revolutions”. These narratives were quickly adopted and magnified across various social media platforms in Vietnamese cyberspace, chief among them TikTok, Facebook, and YouTube.
Pro-government social media accounts emphasised the threat of colour revolutions, portraying them as risks to political, economic, and social stability. They claimed these movements, often driven by foreign “hostile forces”, had severe consequences elsewhere and suggested that similar dangers were emerging in Vietnam, particularly in educational settings. In this context, FUV was cast as a breeding ground for dissenting voices and a potential catalyst for these revolutionary movements.
Intriguingly, pro-government groups resurrected early criticisms of FUV to bolster their attacks. For instance, the university faced backlash for a June 2024 commencement parade that omitted the Vietnamese flag. Another point of contention was what the university’s former president Dam Bich Thuy said in a 2019 discussion about Ken Burns and Lynn Novick’s documentary “The Vietnam War”. In the recorded YouTube video of the discussion, Thuy noted that the documentary deeply moved FUV students, who were surprised to learn about American suffering during the war, challenging their prior understanding of history.
Harping on the threat from external forces and portraying Vietnamese youth as easily manipulated is condescending, laying bare the regime’s detachment from the younger generation.
Pinpointing the exact orchestrators of the online attacks is challenging but it is likely that Vietnam’s state-sponsored cyber troops were involved. On platforms where the government has exerted increased control, such as TikTok, Facebook, and YouTube, most comments appeared uncannily uniform in tone and phrasing, merely regurgitating propagated narratives. This similarity suggests that the support may have been artificially amplified — by cyber troops or otherwise — to create the illusion of widespread agreement. In contrast, sentiments that were more supportive of FUV and pushed back against the hostile discourse targeting it emerged on Threads, a newer Meta-owned platform where public sentiment is more freely expressed due to less government oversight (for now).
It is also evident that the overarching message of these attacks aligns closely with the regime survival agenda favoured by certain factions within the ruling Communist Party of Vietnam (CPV). On 21 August 2024, the state-run Vietnam National Defense television channel aired a commentary that strikingly mirrored the rhetoric from pro-government social media accounts. This alignment suggests that, even if the Vietnamese propagandists did not initiate the attacks, they piggybacked on them to advance their agenda.
Just a week later, however, the Vietnamese Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement affirming its support for FUV, highlighting the university’s positive impact on US-Vietnam relations and its importance to bilateral ties. The online commentary by the Vietnam National Defense channel has since been removed.
These inconsistent responses to the incident might have stemmed from internal rifts within the CPV over how to navigate its burgeoning ties with the US. The forthcoming visit by Vietnam’s party chief and president To Lam to the US might have influenced the moderation of the reaction. However, one certainty remains: the fixation on the threats of foreign forces co-opting Vietnamese youth to overthrow the Communist regime continues to dominate the mindset of certain conservatives within the CPV.
Vietnam’s history of external interference and colonialism fuels the authorities’ heightened sensitivity to even the slightest suggestion of foreign influence. Such a preoccupation manifests in a formulaic strategy that blames external forces for any potential domestic instability. This approach, however, driven by ideological posturing and political expediency, mostly creates noise without addressing real issues.
In Bangladesh, the protests initially sparked by demands to abolish discriminatory job quotas quickly metastasised into a violent anti-government movement driven by deeper issues like economic inequality, inflation, and job scarcity. Similarly, uprisings like the Arab Spring and recent protests in Asia were driven by deep-seated socioeconomic grievances. These protests should serve as a cautionary tale, not about the dangers of external influences but about the urgent need to address underlying domestic issues that drive popular discontent.
Harping on the threat from external forces and portraying Vietnamese youth as easily manipulated is condescending, laying bare the regime’s detachment from the younger generation. As previously argued, youth-led movements in contemporary Vietnam have focused on urging authorities to address pressing socioeconomic issues — that could boost the regime’s performative legitimacy — rather than seeking regime change or yielding to external influences. Unlike China, Vietnam has not experienced any student-led pro-democracy protests on the scale of Tiananmen Square in 1989.
While suspicions of US and Western agendas among Vietnamese hardliners are not entirely unfounded, the persistent use of formulaic rhetoric by propagandists may backfire. Absent a more nuanced and engaging approach, the regime risks not only alienating the next generation but also eroding the very legitimacy it seeks to preserve. In an increasingly interconnected world, the true threat may not come from external forces but from within: a disaffected and disengaged populace that no longer believes in the official message being delivered.
2024/284
Dien Nguyen An Luong is a Visiting Fellow with the Media, Technology and Society Programme of the ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute.
From: Balazs Szalontai via Vsg <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Sent: Sunday, September 1, 2024 11:29 AM
To: Hoang Vu <hmv23@cornell.edu>; Vietnam Studies Group <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: [Vsg] An Open Letter from Fulbright University Vietnam
Dear list,
these attacks on Fulbright University Vietnam may have gained some inspiration from the events and attitudes described below, especially the Russian and Chinese accusations against the Soros Foundation (which allegedly fomented the color revolutions in the post-Soviet states) and the expulsion of the Soros-funded Central European University from Viktor Orban's increasingly authoritarian Hungary:
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202112/1240540.shtml
https://eurasianet.org/kyrgyzstan-the-sun-sets-on-the-soros-foundation-in-bishkek
With a heavy heart,
Balazs Szalontai
Korea University, Department of Saola Studies
From: Wynn Gadkar-Wilcox via Vsg <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2024 7:41 AM
To: Hoang Vu <hmv23@cornell.edu>; Carl Robinson <robinsoncarl88@gmail.com>
Cc: VSG <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: [Vsg] An Open Letter from Fulbright University Vietnam
Dear All:
Although I am not very familiar with this current controversy, I would like to emphasize how valuable Fulbright University Vietnam has been for international scholarly exchange and research.
Though I have not yet had an opportunity to visit their campus, I am very appreciative of their cooperation with Columbia University and the Luce Foundation to digitize precious resources on premodern Vietnamese history and to build the digital humanities capacity of Vietnamese studies globally. And I have been impressed with their many seminars and symposia—some online—that have engaged scholars from Vietnam and around the world in dialogue. This work has earned them a well-deserved international reputation as a leader in producing global scholarly exchanges and research partnerships.
Best,
Wynn
Wynn Gadkar-Wilcox
Chair and Professor of History, Philosophy, and World Perspectives
Western Connecticut State University
181 White Street
Danbury, CT 06810
Phone (203) 837-8565
Fax: (203) 837-3968
From: Carl Robinson via Vsg <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2024 5:52 AM
To: Hoang Vu <hmv23@cornell.edu>
Cc: VSG <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: [Vsg] An Open Letter from Fulbright University Vietnam
I am not making any accusations, Hoang, against Fullbright University but just highlighting how the game is played out there.
Carl
From: Hoang Vu via Vsg <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2024 2:20 AM
To: Carl Robinson <robinsoncarl88@gmail.com>
Cc: VSG <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: [Vsg] An Open Letter from Fulbright University Vietnam
Dear list,
As a faculty member at Fulbright University Vietnam, I want to convey the sincerest appreciation from our community to our friends in global Vietnam Studies for their concerns on our behalf in recent weeks. Many list members have privately asked after our situation and publicly spoken out in defense of our institution. The difficult events of the past few weeks have reminded us more than ever that the long-term survival and success of the Fulbright project in Vietnam is possible only with the dedicated support and trust in our institution from the widest possible range of friends and partners, including in international academia.
The open letter that is the subject of the original post on this thread has already explained our mission clearly and concisely, and I have little more to add. Our own VSG members have discussed the Fulbright University Vietnam project in the past in long, often contentious threads. While I have been active in promoting specific events and initiatives of Vietnam Studies at Fulbright in the VSG, when it came to conversations about the university itself, I have taken the position of interested observer. Even before the current situation arose, I had been acutely aware that while I have my own intimate perspective from the inside, having been personally engaged with the Fulbright Program in Vietnam in various ways since 2008 (and my family has since 1992), how people on the outside perceive us is at least as important. For a long time, Fulbright has operated under the assumption, familiar to many of us in academia, that if we just focus on fulfilling our professional research and educational mission, our work should speak for itself. It is clear now that that approach is too naive in the current social media and political landscape. We are learning lessons and evolving our response to protect our community and our mission.
For VSG members who express misgivings about our mission and cast allegations upon our motives, I only ask one thing. This is, after all, an academic forum, open to respectful debate of any idea or opinion. So if you are going to make accusations, e.g. that Fulbright University Vietnam is engaged in fomenting a color revolution in Vietnam, please provide details and evidence so we can evaluate the veracity of your assertions. What color is the revolution going to be -- one of the primary colors or something more Pokemon-style like cerulean or vermilion? How would such a revolution succeed in toppling a government that has survived three Indochina Wars and maintains a tight grip over a nation of 100 million souls for the past 80 years without "taking much"? What specific programs are being taught at our university that would encourage such a revolution? Why has such a revolution not occurred if it was the ultimate goal of the Fulbright Program, when it has operated in Vietnam for the past thirty years and already produced many of Vietnam's top leaders, including a Prime Minister and President, many other Politburo members, many Deputy PMs and Ministers of several major ministries, and officials at many levels as well as influential people in Vietnamese business, media, and NGOs? Finally, what incentives are there for the United States to overthrow or seriously destabilize a government that has been an ever closer and more willing partner in trade, diplomacy, and defense for the past thirty years? I would genuinely like to collect as much evidence of this plot as possible, as I surely must present them to my Communist cell leader at my next self-criticism session.
Bill is certainly right, there is a lot happening behind the scenes that will only be discussed publicly in 20 years' time, if ever. Publicly, I will only say two things. First, Vietnam is in the midst of a generational leadership transition that will continue at least until the 14th National Congress of the Vietnamese Communist Party (2026), where there will be many important positions to be filled. It has been a constant refrain for some time now that the Vietnamese government is not a monolith, but recent events also remind us that even its ministries and other constituent bodies are no monoliths either. Observers have to be careful not to mistake the work of one actor for that of another in these confusing times. Second, those waiting to hear from General Secretary and State President To Lam should tune in to his speech at Columbia University this September, at the invitation of a Columbia-Fulbright University Vietnam team. Stay tuned for more!
With thanks and warm regards,
Hoang Minh Vu (Vũ Minh Hoàng)
Fulbright University Vietnam & Columbia University
From: Carl Robinson via Vsg <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2024 9:16 PM
To: Cau Thai <cvthai75@gmail.com>
Cc: VSG <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: [Vsg] An Open Letter from Fulbright University Vietnam
Sorry to point out that today's USAID is tarnished by its very agenda-driven administrator Samantha Power and show up in many countries at play between US and Russia/China. It was dicey enough in South Vietnam seeing USAID used as cover by the spooks even though most of us were idealistically just trying to get hearts & minds stuff done. The NED, or National Endowment for Democracy, funded by US Congress is also often in the colour revolution game. So from Hanoi's point of view, especially those at the top, I can understand their suspicions and see how this has blown up. FA is certainly not very influential right now. And society itself is in quite a flux too and I do worry about the potential of a colour revolution and quite openly told friends & acquaintances this on my last trip. From recent past in these ops, it doesn't take much.
Sorry if this is not appropriate here at Vsg but this does to be stated. Nothing ever all that clear and innocent.
Carl Robinson
USOM/USAID 64-68; AP Saigon 68-75
Convenor of Google Group Vietnam Old Hacks.
From: Cau Thai via Vsg <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2024 6:57 PM
To: VSG <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: [Vsg] An Open Letter from Fulbright University Vietnam
I meant to say an online bashing against the FUV and its founding president.
Calvin
From: Cau Thai via Vsg <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2024 6:17 PM
To: VSG <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: [Vsg] An Open Letter from Fulbright University Vietnam
More information to address David's comment on the FUV letter and on the "color revolution":
From General Luong Tam Quang last August:
"“Qua công tác đảm bảo an ninh quốc gia của Bộ Công an cho thấy âm mưu lợi dụng hợp tác quốc tế về giáo dục và đào tạo để tạo ra lớp người có quan điểm, tư tưởng không phù hợp với những đường lối, quan điểm của Đảng và Nhà nước ta.”
Đây là thông tin được Thượng tướng Lương Tam Quang, Thứ trưởng Bộ Công an cho biết tại Hội nghị tổng kết năm học 2022-2023, triển khai nhiệm vụ năm học 2023-2024 do Bộ Giáo dục và Đào tạo tổ chức chiều ngày 18/8.
Thứ trưởng Lương Tam Quang cho biết, về phương thức hoạt động, các đối tượng sẽ triệt để lợi dụng các điểm yếu của lứa tuổi thanh niên, sinh viên để kích động tư tưởng chống đối, phá hoạt tư tưởng của Đảng và Nhà nước, tác động không chỉ đến học sinh, sinh viên mà thậm chí chí cả giáo viên."
https://www.vietnamplus.vn/bo-cong-an-canh-bao-am-muu-loi-dung-pha-hoai-trong-hop-tac-giao-duc-post889936.vnp
Quang was the Deputy Minister of Public Security then and Minister of Public Security now.
From MoFA spokesperson several days ago:
“Đại học Fulbright Việt Nam là thành quả của hợp tác giáo dục giữa Việt Nam và Mỹ, nhất là trong lĩnh vực đào tạo nguồn nhân lực chất lượng cao.
Việt Nam hoan nghênh các hoạt động của Đại học Fulbright Việt Nam như đã được khẳng định trong Tuyên bố chung về nâng cấp quan hệ Việt Nam - Mỹ lên Đối tác chiến lược toàn diện năm 2023.
Chúng tôi mong muốn và tin tưởng rằng các hoạt động của Đại học Fulbright Việt Nam tiếp tục đóng góp thiết thực vào sự phát triển quan hệ hữu nghị, hợp tác đang ngày càng phát triển giữa Việt Nam và Mỹ”.
https://tuoitre.vn/bo-ngoai-giao-len-tieng-ve-cac-hoat-dong-cua-truong-dai-hoc-fulbright-viet-nam-20240826203956459.htm
Between these two events are the video that Bill mentioned (shown below) and an online bashing against the FUV and a specific individual. That individual was also the target of a 2019 article (attached).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLc67zDn0D8
Calvin Thai
Independent
PS: Just in case anyone is interested, I have the video of the conversation about the related subject at Carthage College, Kenosha, WI.
From: Dan via Vsg <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2024 4:49 PM
To: David Brown <nworbd@gmail.com>
Cc: Vietnam Studies Group <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: [Vsg] An Open Letter from Fulbright University Vietnam
Fulbright University of course is not just a "Vietnamese university" but well funded by the US government. A USAID press release anticipates $25 million in USAID funding for Fulbright University through 2025:
2021 - 2025 | IMPLEMENTER: FULBRIGHT UNIVERSITY VIETNAM | PLANNED BUDGET: $25,000,000
2021 - 2025 | IMPLEMENTER: FULBRIGHT UNIVERSITY VIETNAM | PLANNED BUDGET: $25,000,000
https://www.usaid.gov/vietnam/fact-sheets/fulbright-university-vietnam-fuv-support
Dan
From: David Brown via Vsg <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2024 3:50 PM
To: Vietnam Studies Group <vsg@u.washington.edu>; Bill Hayton <bill@billhayton.com>; David Marr <david.marr@anu.edu.au>; Cau Thai <cvthai75@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Vsg] An Open Letter from Fulbright University Vietnam
The wave of online sniping at Fulbright University of Vietnam likely reflects belief that Vietnam's Ministry of Public Security and by extension the PM have it in for FUV. I am heartened by the Foreign Affairs Ministry's unflinching defense of FUV but believe that at this stage only an unequivocal statement of support for FUV from PM Tô Caô is going to shut this thing down. David Brown
From: billhayton via Vsg <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2024 3:08 PM
To: David Marr <phanmarr@gmail.com>
Cc: VSG <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: [Vsg] An Open Letter from Fulbright University Vietnam
Mike Tatarski provided a good explainer here:
https://vietnamweekly.substack.com/p/what-the-fuv-controversy-says
Broadly, a news site linked to the VN Ministry of Defence - Quoc Phong Viet Nam - started to insinuate that FUV was trying to instigate a colour revolution in VN. Someone then seems to have jumped on QPVN very hard and the government came out with formal statements saying how much they appreciated FUV.
Probably a lot going on behind the scenes which we’ll find out in about 20 years time.
Bill Hayton
From: David Marr via Vsg <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2024 2:50 PM
To: Cau Thai <cvthai75@gmail.com>
Cc: VSG <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: [Vsg] An Open Letter from Fulbright University Vietnam
Unfortunately the letter does not tell us what these attacks are, or who is making them.
I gave a talk last year at Fulbright University that was well received, and no one mentioned ‘Color revolution’ condemnations.
David Marr
ANU
From: Cau Thai via Vsg <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2024 9:17 AM
To: VSG <vsg@u.washington.edu>
Subject: [Vsg] An Open Letter from Fulbright University Vietnam
Dear All,
I would like to share the following Open Letter:
An Open Letter fromFulbright University Vietnam
Best,
Calvin Thai
Independent
Page updated
Report abuse