Right after the adoption of the Vietnam Human Rights Act 2007 (HR3096) adopted by the US House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs, public opinion had exposed the nature of the draft sponsored by Rep. Christopher Smith and nine others. However, the voice of the public has not awoken good sense and political intransigence of some US representatives. They have mobilised for the ratification of a legal document which actually distorts the issue of human rights in Vietnam, brazenly interfering in the internal affairs of Vietnam.

Filled with groundless content, the Vietnam Human Rights Act 2007 intentionally creates a gloomy picture on the issue of human rights in Vietnam while ignoring the differences between religious freedom and other activities which can be seen as illegal political activities. HR 3096 is a move in support of a number of Vietnamese extremists mainly living abroad. Not only lacking in goodwill, the bill also uses human rights as a “trump card” to gamble with common sense because it threatens to prohibit increased U.S. non-humanitarian assistance to the Government of Vietnam unless the country makes progress in human rights according to “their own standards”. By adding this requirement, the US House of Representatives has directly affirmed that “human rights” has to conform to their conception which in fact could be described as “non-humanitarian” as it is being used to put pressure on the development process of another country regardless the people’s interest. In particular, in order to support the illegal activities against Vietnam, the act proposes to authorise US $4 million over two years for organisations and individuals that “promote human rights in Vietnam” and over US $10 million for Radio Free Asia which has been long notorious for distorting any stories regarding Vietnam. A Vietnamese abroad has stated that “most of RFA’s programmes are aimed at causing disorder in Vietnam. The issues which have been so far exploited by RFA included freedom, democracy and religion. They did not hesitate to create stories which never happened. They have never felt ashamed of reporting false stories. Regular guests of RFA are terrorist groups supported by Vietnamese living in exile, Anti-Vietnam extremist groups in the Vietnamese community living in the US and political opportunists wearing the mask of “pro-democracy activists” such as Tran Khue, Nguyen Thanh Giang, Nguyen Dan Que, Nguyen Van Ly, Nguyen Van Dai and Do Nam Hai (http://www.chuyenluan.net/200706/0706_21.html). By increasing the budget for RFA, it must be questioned whether the Vietnam Human Rights Act 2007 pays any attention at all to human rights and to Vietnam’s development and stability or it is aimed to support those who are launching illegal activities against Vietnam?

In the run-up to the vote over recent days, those US representatives involved in the bill could be seen at work. They sent letters to Christopher Hill, Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, expressing their concern toward the so-called “continuous prohibitions and outrages against different religions and dignitaries working for those groups attempting to struggle for legal reforms, freedom of expression and human rights.” Representative Loretta L. Sanchez made a statement in strong support of the Vietnam Human Rights Act 2007, saying it was “a very critical time in the relationship with Vietnam” and pointing to “the critical need for the Government of Vietnam to demonstrate significant progress.” Commenting on this loudmouthed congresswoman who is notorious for her noise about “human rights in Vietnam,” Ho Van Xuan Nhi wrote in a Vietnamese-run newspaper abroad that “she knows nothing about Vietnam. She has been struggling against the communists because she is supported and guided by an anti-communist party looking to gain votes from the Vietnamese community. She needs the votes from the Vietnamese community and the Viet Tan group need her vote in Washington. If there was a Vietnamese well-informed about the situation in Vietnam able to have a direct talk with her, she would not be able to state that she knew much about Vietnam” (Vietweekly, November 2, 2006). Regrettably, some representatives such as C. Smith and L. Sanchez have led normally well balanced US representatives astray. They were  shaken by ill-affected distorted information on Vietnam which these representatives have spread.

Briefly, “human rights” include the right to be a person, the right to be part of society, the right enjoy the achievements created by oneself and the community. Therefore, in order to have “human rights,” a person must be born and exist in an independent and free country, as master of their fatherland, able to live in a stable political and social environment which makes it possible to ensure basic human rights, while creating the material and spiritual conditions to realise these basic rights. This is also the target which the Communist Part and State of Vietnam have been striving for their people. In order to have human rights, the Vietnamese people together with their Communist Part have experienced a long and hard path of struggle for over half a century to gain national independence so as to help every Vietnamese citizen live in a society where human rights are respected.

Moreover and above all else, the target of “a prosperous people, a strong country and an equitable, democratic and civilised society” is a target of great human values, a vivid and most specific symbol of human rights values in Vietnam. In order to have human rights, Vietnam has had to pay a very high cost, including the lives of millions of people. Therefore, Vietnam will never accept any request or attempt to impose “human rights standards” which threatens the country’s sovereignty. If US representatives such as C. Smith and L. Sanchez want to show their concern about “human rights,” they should care about their people first. Even now in the US, there are still many people who are unable to enjoy human rights, are discriminated against and are not offered the opportunities to become a “human being” in the true sense of the concept. They should think about themselves first, before brazenly interfering into others’ internal affairs. By behaving contrary to morality and the principles of civilised relations, these US representatives are tarnishing their own images before their voters, thus staining the image of their own country.

A stable society can support development, that is the legitimate aspiration of over 80 million Vietnamese people. No one has the right to interfere in Vietnam’s stability no matter attempted demagogy or imposition. Therefore, Foreign Ministry spokesperson Le Dung stated on September 19 that “Vietnam strongly protests against the Vietnam Human Rights Act 2007 which contains fabricated information on the situation in Vietnam and affects the current positive development of the Vietnam-US relationship.”

By QUANG HA