Vietnamese Americans Brief Congress
by Dong Trinh
A distinguished panel of five Vietnamese Americans and a representative from Amnesty International briefed the Congressional Human Rights Caucus on September 30, 1997 on human rights abuses and political unrest in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.
The panel included:
The briefing was cosponsored by Representatives Loretta Sanchez (D-CA) and Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) with support from Congressional Human Rights Caucus co-chairmen Tom Lantos (D-CA) and John Porter (R-IL). The make-up of the panel reflected the role of Vietnamese Americans in contributing to the discussion on US policy toward Vietnam. The briefing had a large attendance and was "standing room only" before beginning.
In her opening remarks, Rep. Sanchez outlined the purpose of the testimony:
"Secretary of State Madeleine Albright made a trip to Vietnam in June setting the tone for future developments of diplomatic relations with Vietnam. Despite the many hearings and briefings on the issue of Vietnam, we have yet to begin to hear from members of the Vietnamese American Community....At this point, as the United States continues diplomatic relations with Vietnam, I think it is important to hear and learn from the knowledge of the Vietnamese American community because I know that you are the experts on what is going on in Vietnam."
Following the opening remarks of members of the Caucus, Dr. Thang D. Nguyen, President of the Vietnamese-American Community of Washington DC, Maryland, and Virginia, was the briefing's first witness. In testimony titled "ROVR Implementation: The Roadblocks," Dr. Nguyen reported that the Vietnamese government has openly circumvented the Resettlement Opportunity for Vietnamese Returnees (ROVR) program, established by Congress in 1995, to allow refugees, after agreeing to be returned to Vietnam, an opportunity to be screened by the US Immigration and Naturalization Service for resettlement in the US.
According to Dr. Nguyen: "Vietnam has erected many roadblocks, making it practically impossible for some and difficult for most returnees to benefit from the RVOR program. The present agreement, which allows the US to only interview individuals that have been granted exit permission by Vietnam, places returnees at the total mercy of the Vietnamese authorities....Many returnees have been demanded anywhere from $200, equivalent to a year's salary of an average government employee, to $2,000 for exit permission."
Evidence of the Vietnamese government obstructing the ROVR program comes at sensitive time. The granting of most U.S. trade programs is contingent on the recipient country's respect for free emigration. This rule, known as the Jackson-Vanik amendment, can be waived by the President only if there are compelling reasons in the national interest.
The second witness of the afternoon was Van Thai Tran, President of the Vietnamese-American Voters Coalition, who spoke on "Human Rights Abuse in Vietnam." Mr. Tran underscored that Vietnam continues to be ruled by a one-party communist dictatorship: "Article 4 of the Vietnamese Constitution guarantees the supremacy of the Communist Party wherein opposition parties are banned. The Constitution, as implemented under Article 4, is subordinate to the VCP."
Observing that communist authorities routinely violate the rights supposedly guaranteed by the Constitution, Mr. Tran informed: "Prominent Vietnamese dissidents such as Dr. Nguyen Dan Que, Professor Doan Viet Hoat, and religious leaders such as The Venerable Thich Huyen Quang of the Unified Buddhist Church, Elder Nguyen Van Thang of the Cao Dai Church, and evangelist To Dinh Trung, to name a few, have been, and continue to be imprisoned by the regime simply for calling on Hanoi to respect basic human rights and the right to worship freely."
Dr. Ho L. Tran, President of VPAC-USA, was the briefing's third witness. Dr. Tran began her testimony by noting the increasing political activism of Vietnamese Americans: "They have grown over time and both older and younger generations of Vietnamese Americans have learned the essence of the democratic mechanism in this country, which is discussion and participation, but not indifference nor cynicism. Also having put into practice their adage: If you want to eat the sweet fruits from the tree, nurture it, and having seen the wind of changes in the U.S. since the late 80s with its potentially important social and political impacts, they have strong wishes to be able to contribute to the process, as Americans."
Dr. Tran emphasized that a long term U.S. policy should recognize that the "Vietnamese" are the people of Vietnam, not the leadership of the Vietnamese Communist Party. A successful and effective U.S. policy must therefore be built on a relationship with the Vietnamese people, ensuring that the communist dictatorship does not benefit from closer ties.
At the same time, according to Dr. Tran, "Support for the people in Vietnam struggle towards a democratic government will best serve the U.S. interests. Such a democratic government, responding to the aspirations of the people will be able to motivate and mobilize effectively the remarkable natural and human resources of Vietnam, contributing positively to the geopolitical stability and business dynamics of the region and of the U.S."
The fourth witness of the briefing was Diem H. Do. Speaking on the "Current Condition of Vietnam," Mr. Do addressed three major issues: socio-political condition, economic concerns, and the absence of the rule of law.
On the socio-political condition, he cited an increase in unrest stemming from socio-economic inequities. According to the US-Vietnam Trade Council, "Vietnam's 100 richest individuals are all high officials of the VCP and each worth at least $300 million US dollars," said Mr. Do. In contrast, high poverty and malnutrition rates exist even though Vietnam is a leading rice exporter. Conditions such as these have led to growing popular discontent, culminating in the massive unrest in Thai Binh province which began last May.
In detailing the economic concerns, Mr. Do pointed to (a) a slowing down of economic reform due to contradictions of a market economy managed by the state according to a socialist orientation. (b) A lack of protection for labor rights. The consequences are that Vietnamese workers must endure the abuses and American workers face unfair trade conditions which the Vietnamese government derives from mistreating its workers. (c) An undeveloped Vietnamese market unable to grow to its potential and become a vibrant market for consumption of American goods.
On the absence of rule of law, Mr. Do observed: "The rule of law, or lack of it, can have profound impact on all aspects of society. In Vietnam, since the VCP is the ultimate source of power that can perform all three tasks of writing laws, enforcing laws and interpreting laws, the rule of law is nonexistent. In effect, the party is the law."
Duc Ngo, Director of External Affairs for the Free Vietnam Alliance, testified next and fused together all the preceding testimony. Concluding that authoritarianism is the root of Vietnam's problems, the Vietnamese people's patience is wearing thin, and "a violent conflagration with massive destruction is not at all impossible," Mr. Ngo offered a preferred resolution in testimony titled "A Proposal for a Peaceful Democratization of Vietnam."
According to Mr. Ngo: "Against this backdrop, a sensible approach to peacefully democratize Vietnam has to be based on the principles of pluralistic democracy, respect for human rights, social justice, and a market economy. Furthermore, it must be a multiple-stage process. The first, and most crucial step is the creation of a pluralistic and democratic environment as the foundation on which a new, free society will be built. To this end, the following reforms must take place: All laws which are anti-democratic in nature must be repealed.....The right of all organizations and political parties to exist and function publicly must be protected by law.
"It's not easy for Hanoi to concede and accept the first stage as I mentioned above. However, destitute Vietnam with its fractured ruling party will be greatly influenced by American solidarity on an issue or position as embodied in action by Congress. To that end, we would like to propose several concrete steps which Congress and the United States can take to make a real difference in the struggle to bring democracy to Vietnam.
Following the testimony by Mr. Ngo, T. Kumar of Amnesty International gave an introduction to his organization and noted the key areas of human rights violations that Amnesty monitors throughout the world. He reported that problems such as arbitrary imprisonment, executions, and prison torture exist in Vietnam. Mr. Kumar noted, however, that Amnesty lacks much information on Vietnam since the organization has so far been denied official access to the country and has a practice of only operating in the open.
A question and answer session followed the testimony of the six witnesses.
Dr. Thang Nguyen replied to questions regarding the treatment of repatriated refugees. He cited cases refuting the claims of the Vietnamese government that there have been no acts of retribution against returning individuals. He emphasized again that Vietnamese waiting to be screened through the ROVR program continue to face delays, extortion, and even personal harm.
Asked about the status of unrest in Thai Binh province and surrounding areas, Diem Do recounted that the unrest began in May in response to corruption and high taxes. According to Mr. Do, while the government has arrested over a 100 of those involved in the protests and sacked a number of local officials, authorities have been not managed to end the tensions. This is because most of the organizers of the unrest have eluded capture and gone underground. At the same time, the issues which spurred the unrest, corruption and high taxes, have not been addressed. Consequently, popular discontent still simmers in the northern provinces around Thai Binh and could easily erupt again.
In a separate question on whether the "Vietnamese citizens disappear in the middle of the night," Mr. Do held in his hand a copy of the April 14, 1997 Directive No. 31/CP which allows the Ministry of Interior powers of "administrative detainment." This directive allows the police to detain for up to two years citizens who "violate the laws....but [have violations] still not serious enough to be prosecuted criminally." In simple jargon, the police can snatch any citizen without pretense of even relying on the criminal justice system.
In a final question regarding the obstacles to democratization in Vietnam, Duc Ngo responded that one hurdle is the lack of information. A major force for opening up Eastern Europe had been the broadcasts of Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty. The recent emergence of Radio Free Asia, Mr. Ngo believes, is helping the Vietnamese have access to vital outside information. A second obstacle is the high efficiency of the Hanoi security apparatus which has managed to squash most dissent. Again, Mr. Ngo stressed the need to deny trade and economic privileges to economic enterprises of the Vietnamese military and police. The third obstacle cited by Mr. Ngo has been the so far limited international support for activists in Vietnam. The world's support for one-time dissidents such as Lech Walesa and Vaclav Havel no doubt speeded the democratization of Poland and Czechoslovakia. Clearly, Congress has the opportunity to advance political change in Vietnam by providing increased support and recognition to the democracy activists there.
In conclusion, the two and a half hour Congressional Human Rights Caucus Briefing highlighted the new prominence of Vietnamese Americans in effecting US policy toward Vietnam. The testimony of all the witnesses could be summarized as follows: Violations of human rights in Vietnam are leading to serious social and political instability. The only way to guarantee human rights is peaceful democratic change, which is in the interest of the Vietnamese people and also promotes America's economic and regional security interests. Finally, some steps toward supporting democracy in Vietnam include public displays of solidarity by the US Congress and denying the Vietnamese security forces and regime the resources to repress its citizens.