Big brother still knows best but now keeps some distance
HANOI - On Sundays, the magnificent Catholic cathedral on
Nha Tho Street is packed for Mass. Pagodas throughout the
country again buzz with activity. Small groups of farmers gather
outside the Communist Party headquarters here almost daily to
meet with officials who hear--and sometimes act on--their
grievances.
The press is no longer just a monolithic propaganda machine,
and scores of lively newspapers have sprung up. Artists have
newfound leeway to choose their topics and display their work
abroad. One of Vietnam's most respected novelists, Dung Thu
Huong, told People magazine in April: "The government is a bunch
of liars. They are corrupt, ignorant, incompetent leaders." She did
not go to prison.
All this might not seem reflective of life in a repressive society,
but Vietnam's policy on human rights remains the subject of ongoing
controversy. The U.S. State Department and New York-based
Human Rights Watch summed up the situation with similar
assessments in their recent annual reports: Human rights in Vietnam
have improved significantly in recent years but still fall far short of
acceptable international standards.
"Dissidents of all kinds are less frequently imprisoned than in the
past," said Mike Jendrzejczyk, director of the rights group's Asia
division. "Instead they are subjected to less overt forms of
harassment and intimidation, including surveillance and restriction of
their freedom of movement or their ability to work. But the threat of
imprisonment remains real for those who publicly challenge the
party's authority."
Vietnam rejected the Human Rights Watch report as biased and
maintains that there are no political prisoners among the estimated
66,000 inmates held in the nation's 48 prisons.
Although human rights activists say dissidents aren't killed, don't
disappear and aren't tortured in Vietnam, Amnesty International has
listed more than 40 people who are in prison or under house arrest
for religious or political activities--undertakings that Hanoi contends
would threaten national security.
Vietnam's official policy is straightforward: The Communist
Party--headed by 18 elderly Politburo members whose lives were
shaped by war and ideology--knows what is best for 77 million
Vietnamese.
Le Kha Phieu, the party's secretary-general, said last summer:
"Our people won't allow any political power-sharing with any other
forces. Any ideas to promote 'absolute democracy,' to put human
rights above sovereignty, or support multi-party or political
pluralism, are lies and cheating."
But in the past few years, human rights activists say, Vietnamese
authority has become less intrusive in the lives of ordinary citizens
and the party has concentrated its energies on the handful of
dissidents who speak out, such as Gen. Tran Do, a wartime hero
and a member of the Communist Party for 58 years. He was
expelled from the party last year and generally put off-limits to
diplomats and journalists after criticizing the party.
"I never anticipated that my original dreams of building a strong
and beautiful society could turn into today's bitter reality--a society
that has independence but does not yet have freedom," Do wrote in
1998. "Sooner or later, the party will have to change. 'Change or
die' is a slogan that is very applicable to today's party."
Change has come, albeit modestly. The Big Brother
neighborhood monitors aren't as intrusive now. Citizens are able to
freely move about the country, to get passports for travel abroad,
to socialize with foreigners in their homes. Foreign-language
publications such as Newsweek and the International Herald
Tribune are widely available in the cities; the Internet and satellite
TV are increasingly accessible.
Reduced government interference in daily lives also has led to a
resurgence of religion, which is practiced openly but under the
auspices of official organizations. Freedom of religion is protected
under Vietnam's Constitution, as are the independence of judges
and juries, and freedom of speech and the press.
Hanoi would argue that it hasn't violated those guarantees.
Human rights activists, however, contend that the party views
individual freedom as subservient to its own survivability, which,
they say, is inherently contradictory.
By David Lamb - The Los Angeles Times - August 18, 2000.
|