Kim Them Do
April 30, 2025, marks the 50th anniversary of the end of the Vietnam War, a significant milestone in contemporary history. This day offers an opportunity to reflect on the events of April 30, 1975, and the journey the nation has undertaken over the past five decades.
On April 30, 1975, the war ended, ushering in a new era of peace, reunification, and post-war reconstruction. The spirit of national reconciliation and harmony was strong. However, the reality often fell short of the sincere wishes of those who hoped to seek an appropriate place in the heart of the nation.
This day marked a complex process of contrast and paradox: while South Vietnamese were glad to be rid of the American war, North Vietnamese understood better the sacrifices made for the just cause. Victory and material gains were intertwined with humiliation and spiritual damage, creating opposing moods of thinking and feeling that persist to this day.
Over the past 50 years, the nation has experienced many ups and downs. The minds of the people in both parts of the country have become quieter, and the eagerness to debate about winning and losing has faded. In the context of dynamic economic development and international integration of the country, the common dream of an inclusive liberal democratic politics and a just and sustainable prosperous economy has emerged. The focus now is how we work together for a better future.
But who are “we” here? There are two main actors: the government and the people. 50 years is a long enough time for both to consciously reflect on the historical past and find a common path for the country’s future. Awakening is a necessary starting point of thinking, an ability to enlighten oneself and make decisions about the life of the country and the happiness of the whole people. In the patriotic background, we tell each other what we think and want to work together for the better future.
Government
The government must reflect on the past achievements to understand the current aspirations of the people. This reflection will enable the proposal of comprehensive, effective, and feasible reforms for the future.
The government has made outstanding achievements in healing the wounds of war and upgrading relationships with former enemies. However, it has failed to reconcile the people of the two regions. The opposing voices of the overseas Vietnamese community have become tranquil, and the goal of domestic democracy struggle movements has changed to be more realistic. The government no longer focuses on national reconciliation but seeks to collect more remittances from overseas Vietnamese.
With the passing of time, the generation engaging in the war, whether at home or abroad, whether they want to or not, must pass away, and the post-war generation hardly carries much burden from the historical past. No one told anyone, both generations told by themselves that the need for reconciliation would end in silence sooner or later, a natural outcome.
Theoretically, the government knows better than the people that it cannot continue to advocate for the ideal of dictatorship of the proletariat according to the downing socialism, because, in fact, it can no longer convince anyone. Basically, the socialist-oriented market economy is inherently a monster that helps the crony capitalists themselves rise to the throne as a new exploitative class that causes so much injustice to society. The government also has no other or better theory to apply to the new situation of the country. Overall, economic reforms have so far been achieved to a certain extent, but comprehensive political reform within the framework of the market economy and civil society is needed more urgently than ever. Why?
Looking back after 50 years in power, the government may be proud of its economic achievements, specifically in 2024 the growth rate will reach 7.09%, exceeding the target of 6.5-7%, and the export turnover of goods will reach a record of 405.53 billion US dollars, up 14.3% compared to 2023. Vietnam’s voice is heard in many important forums such as ASEAN, the United Nations, the Mekong sub-region, APEC, AIPA, IPU, UNESCO, COP 28, the Belt and Road, etc., but it cannot hide a common disaster for the country: corruption, environmental depletion, moral degradation, education crisis, human rights violations and social unrest.
Does anyone have the courage to speak out seriously to take responsibility for the current difficult situation? Of course, the american Imperialist and its followers had long since out of the country and today could not do it. But who else? The government is simply attributing to a minority with politically opposed views, reactionary elements that are destroying the country. Rather, the government needs to look at an obvious downside: The party’s monopoly has created an ineffective power control mechanism, a lack of transparency and accountability in public life.
Today, a country of 100 million people with only about 200 prisoners of conscience is a matter of minority, so the government does not need to go all out to suppress dissent. Most importantly, goverment need to have a direct and sincere dialogue with the opponents in a spirit of mutual respect. Compared to opposition movements such as in Syria, Serbia and Turkey, the government has more advantages to deal with this.
However, it is also a lesson that the government needs to further discuss: the longevity of the nation and the life expectancy of leadership of the Party are two different issues that almost the government has not distinguished, for example, „on the occasion of new lunar year, best wishes to the Party and the people“ is such a familiar slogan that almost everyone agrees that the congratulations to the Party are somewhat more preferential.
Times have changed after 50 long years, the history of the heroic nation is still full of tragic moments, but the government continues to erase historical facts. It is time for the government to realize that all perceptions of a heroic country’s glorious past need to be reviewed, rather than continuing to monopolize interpretation.
There are two typical examples. In the world history of war, there has never been a case in which the leadership was extremely proud of the goal of the struggle to bring soldiers to die in place of foreign states such as the Soviet Union and China. As for the outcome, the victor lost about 1 million, 1 North Vietnamese soldier compared to the loser about 225,000 in the South, a sacrifice worth pondering in terms of loss and victory.
Arguably most importanty, finally, we need to close the historical past, which is an attitude of avoidance and wise selection: in fact, the government wants to try to cling to the glories of the past, to hide the misguidance and deceptions of history.
Fortunately, oral narrative is still inert to tell us the truth. Oral history will never forget the crimes that the Viet Minh murdered Huynh Phu So, the Hoa Hao Buddhism founder, (1946) suppressed Hoa Hao Buddhism and the Viet Cong massacred 5000 innocent people in Hue in the events of the Lunar New Year (1968), which are the two most cited examples. Of course, there are countless other classified documents from the West source of literature have recently published. In the civilized age, the monopolistic forms of giving historical truth are not the voice of conscience and morality. The truth will forever exist and enlighten us.
Post-war generation
The post-war generation, who will mature at the age of 50, has a political responsibility for the development of the country in this new era. Their aspirations are simple and practical: to protect personal health, ensure the happinesss of the family and the security of village, and achieve a peaceful and prosperous country where civil rights are respected. This framework for rebuilding common relationships is agreed upon by everyone.
Looking it further, the common goal for the country in the new era is noble: to change the constitution to be democratic, pluralistic, and multi-party; to improve ethics and education; to respect intellectuals and the law; to enforce human and civil rights; and to protect nature. This spirit of collective consensus on new political values becomes the common belief in building the nation in the future.
However, young people face challenges in accumulating the necessary knowledge and experience in dealing with this. They have difficulty building a theoretical background, because they have not inherited any viable theories of their elder. So far, the government has not been able to explain the operation of the market economy and the rule of law in a socialist-oriented way and has also openly confirmed that it is impossible to accomplish the socialist orientation until the end of the 21st century.
Where does the new awareness for young people come from? It is only from the education system after 1975. Unfortunately, it has gone astray, leading to a lack of interest in learning and valuing history and liberal democracy. Therefore, they cannot find the way in which a new theory to be learned and implemented accordingly.
In terms of experience, what do young people to prepare for future? Hardly not. The heroic struggle experiences of the predecessors during the August Revolution (1954) and the Great Victory of the Spring (1975) are no longer suitable for the nation – buidling in the context of economic globalization, digitalization and international cooperation. New experiences are extremely needed. A model of social democratic economic policy in the Nordic countries in Europe should probably also be further addressed. Respecting the spirit of democracy, freedom, equality, law and welfare for the whole people in this model needs to be compared with the socialist orientation. In general, Vietnam needs to follow a specialized model, reflecting national identity and history within a common framework according to the universal values of the global trend. Of course, the most difficult thing here is the difference in the cultural context and the way of practicing.
After 50 years of ruling in a unified country, would the government be ready to transfer political power peacefully to the young people? Probably not. In a chaotic society, no one can predict how political innovation will be formed. It all depends on some conception of the future, different ways of assessing the meaning of trends, and norms for resolving differences.
The government is calling for the country to enter a new era and the Party will better grasp its comprehensive leadership role and continue to improve its mechanism. Young people need to wonder if that is good news for the country? What do they understand about recent reforms, especially the prospects for democratization and renewal of the country? The many personal purges and shady transfers of power at all levels of the Party and government central committees point to a new, more pessimistic signal: just like what is happening in China, it is the concentration of power in the Party system in the hands of individuals. That is, individual power will be misued and a tougher police regime than ever before will be introduced.
In this light, does the call to „renew thinking“ in the „new revolutionary period“ to have „historical decisions“ come from the best honest policy, is it a premise for expanding the right of young people to participate in the new system? In fact, the 14th Congress is preparing a long-term plan for the future: to take full control of the organizational apparatus to restructure the Party, to personalize the top power of the head, which is more of a survival need than an effort to democratize of the country; that is, to transfer political power peacefully in a transparent, legal way and oriented to the long-term national interests for the younger generation must not be set out in the agenda. Therefore, young people will not have the opportunity to participate in this process of political reform.
In conclusion, the country is undergoing radical transformation, and comprehensive political reform is the best solution. The strength of the whole people and the right to national self-determination are crucial, and the generation in their 50s will be the main force in this process. Do they dream of a politics with full freedom, democracy, and a just and prosperous economy in the long run? Do they have the courage to participate in this goal? These are the challenging questions that need to be addressed.
The post-war generation must be aware of the current situation and determine to act for a new beginning. If they remain indifferent and argue that the Party remains the best source of happiness, the country will continue to live as it has for the past 50 years. The main problem is the right choice and the determination to act for a new opening.
KIM THEM DO 