WASHINGTON INDOCHINA UPDATE #17

July-August 2003

 

 

An editorial opinion....Of Flags, Fish, and Foolishness

 

After Catharin finished this issue of the update, we received an urgent call from the embassy of Vietnam.  They were very disturbed that Boston had adopted a resolution giving giving official status to the flag of a non-existing government of their country.  I have added information in this update about Boston as well as about San Francisco where only a mayoral veto blocked such a resolution.

 

At first it was hard to take the flag issue seriously.  It was difficult to imagine that such an irresponsible action would be taken by elected officials outside of cities with a very large Vietnamese-American community like Westminster, California.  We did not expect that two of the most liberal sophisticated cities in the US could adopt such a resolution.

 

Does passage of these resolutions symbolize residual hostility to Vietnam, colossal ignorance, or a frivolous approach to a distant diplomatic issue which appears to have little practical consequence?  In any case, it would be a mistake to minimize the cumulative damage of such resolutions to US-Vietnam relations.   Americans become very upset when our flag is treated with disrespect, here or abroad.  The official use of Confederate flag symbols still prompts great controversy almost a century and a half after our civil war.

 

The Vietnamese have a legitimate grievance, legally, historically and morally.  American NGOs, educational institutions and businesses that wish to be involved with Vietnam in a comprehensive and normal way must recognize that abnormal treatment of Vietnam in the US can have a deleterious impact on their own interests--and should find ways to impact public debate and local government in the US.

 

This problem obviously is worsened by discriminatory trade policy decisions (e.g. catfish) and adoption by Congress of disproportionate "human rights" legislation.   The treatment of Laos over the approval of NTR and the unremitting hostility of key Congressional leaders toward Cambodia's electoral process emphasize that those who are interested in "moving beyond the past and building a positive relationship for the future" (in the words of the Secretary of State) have much to do.

 

John McAuliff

 

 

Washington dealt Vietnam a double blow with a trade ruling and House action on human rights.  With the House now adjourned for August recess, attention is focused on the Senate.  However, as the US approaches a critical election year, a significant number of sanction efforts have been launched, with the result that half of the countries of Southeast Asia are now under some threat of conditionality from the US Congress.

 

 

Human Rights and Political Development

 

Vietnam Human Rights Amendment Passes House

 

Incorporated as an amendment to the State Department authorization bill, the Vietnam Human Rights Act was passed on the House floor on July 16 by a vote of 382-42.  Despite the sizeable majority, the vote count fell short of the near-unanimous count in 2001, which had only one dissenting vote.  The most important provision of the present legislation is the prohibition on US non-humanitarian assistance, which comprises two-thirds of US aid to Vietnam, if movement on human rights, narrowly defined, is not seen.  Particular emphasis in this matter is given to religious freedom and individual political dissidents, and no mention is made in the bill of improvements in the personal rights of everyday citizens, or the increasing public participation in policymaking, both of which have been cited in recent State Department reports. 

 

The House action renders obsolete a recent Senate plan to offer a resolution criticizing Vietnam’s human rights as a means of heading off a House victory.  At this point, it is all but mandatory that the Senate offer a corresponding amendment to the Senate’s authorization bill for the State Department, although the substance and recommendations need not follow the House version exactly.   The Senate amendment could be defeated, but some moderates who oppose the legislation are now pinning their hopes on the conference process in the fall, when the House and Senate must reconcile differences between the two amendments.  At that time, they hope to remove or soften considerably provisions which would be the most damaging to US-Vietnam relations.  Opponents of the legislation in the broader public are well advised to continue making their views heard with both sides of Congress, tailoring their communications to the status of the legislation.  (For FRD’s sign-on letter to the Senate, see www.ffrd.org/indochina/hrbill/opposing letter.htm

 

 

McConnell Ups the Ante, Literally

 

In a series of actions prior to the July 29 Cambodian national elections, Senate Appropriations Chairman Mitch McConnell has extended his campaign against the Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) and, more specifically, Prime Minister Hun Sen.  On June 26 he introduced the Cambodia Democracy and Accountability Act, co-sponsored by Senators Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) and Jon Kyl (R-Arizona).  The bill proposes to increase US assistance to Cambodia by $21.5 million over the $43 million requested for Fiscal Year 2004, if the Secretary of State certifies that the July elections were free and fair and that Prime Minister Hun Sen was no longer in power.  It also provides US assistance to the Khmer Rouge tribunal, contingent upon an executive branch report to Congress that the tribunal was not subject to CPP influence; that participating judges have “high moral character”; that it is supported by democratic Cambodian political parties; and that it meets international standards of justice.  Lastly, the bill would require the Federal Bureau of Investigation to again investigate a March 1997 grenade action in Phnom Penh.  No determination on the legislation has been made in the Senate, awaiting an official outcome of the elections.  The initiative was matched with an increase in rhetoric.  Just prior to elections, McConnell published an op ed in the Boston Globe, in which he assigned responsibility for all of Cambodia’s problems to the CPP and once again called for its ouster.  In a statement on the Senate floor, he issued a bumper sticker,  labeling Cambodia “the Zimbabwe of Southeast Asia.”

 

In general, Congress is more inclined toward conditions and sanctions than monetary inducements to affect the internal behavior of another country.  Although rare, McConnell’s proposal is not unprecedented in US policy.  In 1948, for example, the United States poured funding into the Italian national election in an attempt to secure victory for the Christian Democrat Party.     At the time, this was viewed in the context of the brewing Cold War.  No such over-arching security context can be applied to Cambodia today, and critics of the McConnell legislation make two charges: that it emphasizes outcome to the exclusion of process, and that it approximates vote-buying, an electoral abuse that the West has been quick to condemn in developing countries.

 

The Fund for Reconciliation and Development coordinated 36 volunteer observers for the July 27 election in Cambodia.  The team was lead by former Canadian Ambassador Gordon Longmuir.  They concluded “ that the election process of July 27 and 28 was administered in a transparent and accurate way.”  Their daily and summary reports can be found at http://www.ffrd.org/indochina/camelection03/index.html

 

 

Trade and Economic Development

 

Catfish Tariffs Finalized for Vietnam

 

On July 24 the US International Trade Commission voted 4-0 to impose permanent tariffs on Vietnamese frozen fillets, ratifying a preliminary decision made by the US Commerce Department in the spring.  Effective July 31, tariffs ranging from 37% to 64% were mandated.  This is guaranteed to impose hardship on the 400,000 Vietnamese catfish farmers in the Mekong Delta, and Vietnamese trade authorities are moving rapidly to shift a greater percentage of fish exports to Europe and Asia, as well as considering plans to process fillets in the US, since whole fish imports are not affected by the ruling.

 

In the run-up to the decision, the New York Times took an unusually strong editorial position against the tariffs.  On July 22 it warned that a decision upholding tariffs would make Vietnam become “yet another case study in the way the United States, Europe and Japan are rigging global trade rules so they remain the only winners.”  Following the Commission’s announcement, in a July 26 editorial, the Times condemned the decision as “a final flourish of hypocrisy to its efforts to crush the Vietnamese catfish industry under a mountain of protectionism”  It attributed the American catfish industry’s campaign against Vietnam to “myopic greed and blatant xenophobia,” and decried the refusal to label Vietnamese catfish by that name as an “Orwellian tactic.”

 

Beyond the damage of the ruling to the catfish industry in Vietnam, trade authorities fear that it will set a precedent for a similar anti-dumping action on shrimp.  Vietnam is one of several shrimp producers (including Thailand, China and India) thought to be under consideration for a suit by the US Southern Shrimp Alliance.  The magnitude of a negative ruling on shrimp would be much greater than that for catfish.  Last year, Vietnam exported more than $450 million in shrimp to the US, almost half its total shrimp exports.

 

 

NTR for Laos: Backing and Filling

 

The move to grant Normal Trade Relations to Laos has slowed down in light of the fact that the United States and Laos have never signed the Bilateral Trade Agreement that must precede NTR, although it was initialed five years ago.  The House Ways and Means Committee has indicated that any legislative action on NTR must come after the signing.  Observers expect that to happen in the near future, although the legislative path after that is not well defined.  The arrest, trial and subsequent expulsion from Laos of two foreign journalists and a Hmong-American pastor has complicated the process this summer on the Hill, although it did not succeed in bringing consideration of NTR to a halt.

 

 

Nam Theun II: France Bows Out

 

Efforts to wrap up international funding for the Nam Theun II dam in Laos suffered a major blow when  the Electricite de France (EDF), a major investor, pulled out in mid-July.  The French state-owned entity, which had a 35% stake in the venture, withdrew a day before it was to sign a power purchase agreement with Vientiane.  Vientiane has turned to the region in its efforts to find a replacement for EDF, and is hoping that Thai companies will increase their share.  The Thai government’s Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand has given Laos a year to find another investor.

 

 

Security

 

More Conditions for Cambodia

 

The Bush administration has proposed resumption of International Military Education and Training (IMET) funds for Cambodia, in light of its heightened security concerns in Southeast Asia after September 11.  The Senate Foreign Relations Committee has approved the request, as part of a larger counter-terrorism package.  However, in a move which parallels his introduction of the Cambodia Democracy and Accountability Act, Senator Mitch McConnell has attached conditions to IMET for Cambodia, which would require the Secretary of State to provide a list of those alleged to have ordered or carried out attacks which some consider to have been politically motivated.  The current consensus is that these conditions could serve to deny IMET to Cambodia this year.

 

 

Will Vietnam Be a “Lily Pad”?

 

Vietnam has recently come in for mention in broad scenarios intended to reconfigure the US security presence in Asia presently being discussed in Washington defense circles.  Still in the discussion phase on this side, the Pentagon has launched trial balloons which speculate on the possibility of redistributing a greater number of US troops from Northeast to Southeast Asia.  Policymakers reason that this could take pressure off growing anti-Americanism in South Korea and Okinawa over US bases there.  They also believe it could strengthen US cooperation with Southeast Asian nations on counter-terrorism, as well as hedge against a greater Chinese security presence in the region.  In this configuration, some Southeast Asian facilities would serve as jumping off points, or “lily pads,” between US bases in Northeast Asia and an American base in Australia.  Although the brunt of this scenario would fall upon traditional US allies in the region – particularly the Philippines – mention has been made of docking visiting US naval vessels in Cam Ranh Bay, presently undergoing conversion to a commercial port.

 

Even if this scenario comes to pass, it is not likely to result in a US military presence in Vietnam of any significant size.  By mutual agreement, the pace of the US-Vietnam security relationship has been slow and cautious since normalization.  In July, however, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld invited his Vietnamese counterpart, Pham Van Tra, to visit the United States.   Tra has not as yet replied. 

 

 

Legacy Issues

 

More Flag-Waving in the Localities

 

In July Louisiana became the first state to enact a law requiring that the flag of the former Republic of South Vietnam be displayed in state-sponsored schools and functions concerning Vietnam.  The bill passed the legislature – 91-7 in the House and 32-3 in the Senate -- on July 15  and was signed into law by Governor Michael Foster.  It recognizes the former South Vietnamese flag as the official flag of Vietnam in Louisiana.  The bill’s dissenters feared that the law could sour trade relations between Vietnam and Louisiana.  That point was countered with a somewhat myopic argument, that the bill does not require the state’s ports to fly a particular flag, and that each port could essentially choose.    Earlier this year a similar bill had been proposed in the Virginia legislature, but died after the State Department questioned its constitutionality and made public its concerns that it would damage US-Vietnamese relations.  

 

Some parallel efforts have been seen at the local level in areas of the United States with significant percentages of Vietnamese-American citizens.  The City Council in San Francisco adopted such a resolution but it was vetoed by Mayor Willie Brown.  On July 29 the Council decided not to override his veto.  The next day the Boston City Council passed its own flag resolution. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

     The Washington Indochina Update is published by the Fund for Reconciliation and Development (FRD), 355 West 39th Street, New York, NY 10018. 

      It is compiled and written monthly by Catharin Dalpino who is representing FRD in Washington on a consultant basis. She can be reached at <washington@ffrd.org>

      The Update is sent free by e-mail to not-for-profit organizations with programs in Indochina.  Other offices and individuals are asked to contribute at least $25 annually to FRD.  For prior issues and further information, visit www.ffrd.org or e-mail to info@ffrd.org  To be removed from this list or to suggest other recipients, e-mail to update@ffrd.org or call 212-760-9903.