Common Ground for Vietnam and the U.S.

International New York Times / Editorial Board | 7 July 2015

Forty-plus years after the Americans withdrew from Vietnam, and 20 years after the two countries re-established diplomatic relations, President Obama took the relationship to a new level on Tuesday by hosting Nguyen Phu Trong, the head of Vietnam’s Communist Party, at the White House.

Because Mr. Trong doesn’t hold an official government post, diplomatic protocol did not necessarily call for a meeting with Mr. Obama. But, in spite of serious differences over human rights and labor rights, it made sense for Mr. Obama to bend the rules because Mr. Trong is Vietnam’s highest-ranking political leader and, along with other influential conservatives in that nation’s ruling party, has been the most resistant to closer relations with America.

The meeting showed Mr. Obama’s strong commitment to building deeper partnerships in Asia. The intent is to balance China’s growing economic, military and political clout and guarantee regional stability. Despite longstanding ties between Vietnam and China, many Vietnamese are anxious about China’s increasing assertiveness, especially in the South China Sea. In what Hanoi perceived as a challenge to its sovereignty, China last year temporarily parked an oil rig in waters claimed by Vietnam.

There are other reasons closer ties should be of mutual interest for Washington and Hanoi. Mr. Obama is trying to conclude a sweeping trade agreement, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, as early as this month and Vietnam is among the dozen countries that are part of that negotiation. Some of the most difficult TPP-related disputes involve Vietnam. The deal would require it to curb the state’s role in business and improve labor and environmental standards in exchange for easier access to American markets for clothing and shoes. Within the last two years, Vietnam has become the United States’ largest trading partner in Southeast Asia, with two-way trade totaling $35 billion last year. That trade is projected to grow to $57 billion by 2020.

In June, the two countries agreed to expand defense trade, including possible coproduction of new technologies and equipment, joint operations between their navies and cooperation in global peacekeeping. There is also talk about once again giving the United States access to Vietnam’s ports.

In seeking closer ties with Vietnam, Mr. Obama has come under fire from human rights groups and some Democrats in Congress who criticized Vietnam’s unfair labor practices and low wages. Such complaints are valid. Although the number of political prisoners has declined in recent years and Vietnam ratified the United Nations convention against torture in 2013, more than 100 Vietnamese are still imprisoned on political charges, and dissent is suppressed.

Mr. Obama did not avoid these issues on Tuesday. Standing with Mr. Trong after the talks, Mr. Obama spoke publicly about the political differences — Vietnam is an authoritarian one-party Communist state — and said they candidly discussed human rights and freedom of religion, although there was no mention of concrete progress.

Mr. Obama should continue to press Vietnam to open up its political system and allow its citizens greater freedoms, like letting workers organize or join independent unions of their choice. Tangible movement in such areas should be required before the United States lifts its ban on providing lethal weapons to Vietnam — like guns mounted on coast defense patrol boats — or before Mr. Obama sets a date to make an official visit to Mr. Trong’s country.