Vietnam's Political Process

How education shapes political decision making

Casey Lucius

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2009
• eBook ISBN: 9781135999193
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Politics
• Index: Politics & International Relations

In a system that is known for its covert political style, Vietnam's decision making process is often described as either consensus-based or simply confusing and inexplicable. This book provides an approach to understanding political decision making in Vietnam by recognizing enduring values that are derived from State-controlled education and official historical narratives.

The nation's official historical narrative has led to the development of protected values that are called upon during political decision making. In order to secure these values, such as regime stability, national independence, and social order, officials must act within accepted rules of appropriate political behavior. The book shows that through State-run education, mandatory defense training, and membership in mass organizations, Vietnamese citizens are taught social and political ethics, and their identity is moulded in concert with this process.

Using textbooks and education to understand the underlying values within Vietnam's society is used as the contextual framework for two case studies - the problem of landmines and the on-going threat of avian influenza - which examine how authorities frame problems, negotiate, and deal with potential crises.

This book will be of great interest of academics and students within Asian studies, but also for policy makers involved with the country and those doing business in Vietnam, including non-governmental organizations, private businesses and charitable groups.

1
Introduction

During the time that I lived in Vietnam, there were several major historical events that took place that I was grateful to observe and which gave me a greater insight into the complex processes which I yearn to better understand. In 2005 I witnessed two relatively long and productive National Assembly, or legislative sessions, as well as the tenth National Party Congress which occurs only once every five years and which resulted in Vietnam’s legislature electing a new Prime Minister, President, and National Assembly Chairman. In 2006, the Vietnamese Government hosted the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) conference for the first time, hosted by US President George W. Bush and 20 other world leaders, and concluded over 11 years of negotiations to make Vietnam the one hundred and fiftieth member of the World Trade Organization. In 2007, Vietnamese officials successfully concluded a Bilateral Market Access Agreement with the US. Amongst many other achievements, in 2008 Vietnam took a seat as a non-permanent member on the UN Security Council.

There have been many developments in Vietnam since I moved there in the spring of 2005 and there continue to be daily transformations to Vietnam’s society and economy. The most obvious changes are structural and can be viewed by anyone who lives in Vietnam or who simply visits the country for a few weeks. Despite the seemingly rapid transformation that the nation is undergoing, particularly in urban areas, there continue to be legacies of the war including tons of unexploded ordnance that threatens lives daily, there are constant complaints about the outdated education system, and while progress is being made, citizenship rights are still limited. Vietnam continues to be ruled by only one party, the Communist Party of Vietnam, and although the authority of the National Assembly and mass organizations are said to be increasing, the Party leaders make the rules and decide at what pace the country will develop. The Party is most easily understood as an umbrella organization that oversees how the Government, consisting of various ministries, responds to problems of the past such as landmines and unexploded ordnance, present problems like AI, and problems of the near future like transforming the education sector. It is these issues that will be explored in the following pages in order to understand how political decisions are made in Vietnam at the highest levels of government.

While change and progress abound in Vietnam, there are still consistent political messages that are maintained, secured, and preserved which appear to guide the Vietnamese people in their daily lives and, more importantly, guide Vietnamese officials in their political decision-making. This book will show that historical narratives have led to the development of rules and protected values that support national preferences, leading me to propose that in order to understand decision-making in Vietnam, one must examine the nation’s history to determine how lessons of the past have helped the Vietnamese identify what is important and useful.

The following chapters will show how the process of political decisionmaking can be understood in Vietnam in the context of historical narratives and how enduring values and rules reiterated throughout society and in education may influence this process. I studied the rule-following model as introduced by James March to determine if this theory would help to develop an understanding of Vietnam’s national level decision-making process.

Rule-following and decision-making literature

James March explained that sometimes decisions can result from rule-following and the desire to fulfill an identity. March noted,

Decision-makers use processes of recognition to classify situations; they use processes of self-awareness to clarify identities; they use processes of search and recall to match appropriate rules to situations and identities. The processes are easily recognized as standard instruments of intelligent human behavior. They require thought, judgment, imagination, and care. They are processes of reasoned action, but they are quite different from the process of rational analysis.¹

He explained the difference between rational analysis and rule-following by dividing those who see decisions as choices made in the name of consequences and preferences and those who see decisions made in the name of appropriateness.

For the purposes of giving this concept a definition, rule-following can be defined as a concept or method that is used to make decisions, but this method requires strict attention to the situation, established identities, and choosing corresponding rules to guide the decision process. March asserted that the logic of appropriateness is tied to the concept of identity. He defined identity as a conception of the self organized into rules for matching actions to situations.² In order to make decisions within the logic of appropriateness, March emphasized that decision-makers need to be able to determine their own identities, understand the situation at hand, and establish what action is appropriate given the circumstances.³ However, different situations can conjure up different identities and different rules. Therefore, one’s role in the situation is essential because roles typically are associated with certain rules. March explained that sometimes agents pursue their own identities which may be inconsistent with their principals’ identities and rules. Therefore, the most common reason for the use and enforcement of rules is the expectation that individuals might not act correctly in certain situations.⁴ However, the definition of what is correct or appropriate and what is inappropriate tends to be socially constructed through interpretations of past behavior.

The concept of rule-following depends greatly on events of the past and the decision-maker’s ability to use lessons from the past and apply them to current situations. Thus, decision-makers learn from experience what rules to use under certain circumstances. Experience consists of a set of events that may be observed and interpreted. On the other hand, individuals typically understand history by following socially approved procedures for telling stories about events.⁵ Sometimes, people augment experiences because history may provide only a small sampling of information, causing individuals to over interpret experiences and rely too heavily upon them. Nevertheless, past experiences and history are essential for rule formulation, and identities and the need for appropriate behavior are the vehicles that allow rules to continue to exist even through situational and structural change.

Given my understanding of Vietnam’s historical narratives and the development of culture, and after studying various decision-making theories, I approached this project utilizing a rule-following model to better understand how Vietnamese officials make national level policy decisions. Having said that, rule-following theory is not the only way to view Vietnamese political practices, but it is one useful way to understand certain key aspects of political decisionmaking in Vietnam. Studying this theory brought to light the idea of protected values, so while I begin this writing with a review of rule-following, I actually find it is best to think in terms of protected values or enduring values and use this concept to better understand decision-making in Vietnam. Protected values can be defined as certain values that should never be compromised or traded. They are enduring principles that are historically generated and continue to be taught to Vietnamese citizens today. Shalom H.Schwartz more specifically defines values as concepts or beliefs that pertain to desirable end states, that transcend specific situations, that guide the selection or evaluation of behavior, and that are ordered by relative importance.⁶

It is important to articulate that rules do not always exist in writing or in articulated forms, especially in Vietnam. For this reason, the use of conventions or values is sometimes more appropriate than rules. Often times rules or conventions may not even be verbally identified or acknowledged during problem analysis. Decision-makers may reach into their memories and make decisions based on what has worked in the past and therefore they apply rules subconsciously. Each time a rule is used either consciously or unintentionally, it inevitably evokes past myths, rituals, and other symbols that attach the State to its past, making history an inevitable part of rule formation. Traditionally, those decisionmakers who use a rule-following model learn from past experiences which rules to evoke during certain situations and thus they also learn how to improve the rules that they use. In other words they form a pattern of matching current situations with rules previously evoked. In some sense, evoking rules in certain situations and justifying actions through rules and conventions can be easier than identifying specific political goals and paths to achieve those goals.

March points out that students of rule-based decision-making describe two procedures; one for establishing a set of rules, and one separate process for making the decision that will conform to those rules.⁷ The two case studies will show that officials first identify appropriate rules, or rather, identify protected values, then make a decision using the proper procedure. The decision process or the “private arrangement” as it is referred to by Douglas Pike, actually occurs after the selection and implementation of values and probably even after a decision is made. This process is what many people refer to as consensus in Vietnam. Typically, rules and protected values are identified, the decision is made by one or a few key leaders, then a group of political authorities will meet to go through the motions of voting and showing their support for the decision, a decision that has already been made behind the scenes. As long as consensus among the group is reached, then proper decision procedures have been carried out, however, consensus plays a small role in a much larger process.

By evoking rules and protected values, the decision-makers are able to fulfill a desired identity. James March points out that educational systems, religions, and legal systems spend time, money and effort to instruct people on the meaning of identities and on the principles of proper behavior during specific life situations.⁸ In order to make decisions of appropriateness, decision-makers need to know what their identities are, what roles they are to play in a situation, how the situation is to be framed, and what actions are considered appropriate in any given situation.⁹ There can often be varying identities depending on the situation at hand, therefore, education and indoctrination are essential to help decision-makers determine the identity that must be fulfilled through action under certain circumstances. Additionally, through education and training, decision-makers are more likely to be aware of the rules, even in complex situations. Many rules and conventions, which are typically in unarticulated forms and often inarticulatable forms, can often be ambiguous, but nevertheless even the seemingly informal and unofficial rules are expected to be abided by as if they were written, formal, and official laws. Sufficient and recurring education and indoctrination limits incompatible rules from forming and discourages leaders from pursuing self-interested identities or preferences.

Not only does education play a key role in the teaching and development of rules, but rules are also diffused among decision-makers because the lessons and experiences of one decision-maker is disseminated among the others, transferring knowledge about what rules work best and which rules are most appropriate in certain situations.¹⁰ This allows decision-makers to feel more comfortable about following particular rules, but also provides an awareness of success related to rule-following. Observed behavior among decision-makers and observed successes lead to accepted definitions of both appropriate behavior and well-utilized rules. However, obedience toward the rules should not be mistaken for lack of choice or thoughtlessness. Rule-following demands that individuals and institutions learn from the past, form useful identities, and choose appropriate rules to fulfill a specified identity.¹¹

Society also plays a necessary part in the rule-following decision-making process. Rule-following could not be sustained by decision-makers alone because rule-following requires roles including those who make, break, and follow the rules. Rules are a form of social contract between those who make and enforce the rules and those who agree to abide by them. It seems that people around the globe are convinced that rules are in their interest and by following the rules they will remain safe. For example, we are often taught to cross the street at the pedestrian crossing in order to stay safe and avoid being hit by a car, but is it not true that you can cross the street at any point and avoid being hit by a car, or be hit by a car even in the pedestrian crossing? The rules in and of themselves do not protect us or keep us safe, but we believe in a social contract that univocally tells us that our community and society will be a safe place to live if we all follow the rules, therefore many citizens follow the rules without question. Rules are therefore not unique to Vietnam and it is likely that many governments and societies allow rules and protected values to guide decisionmaking. In Vietnam though, it could be argued that Vietnam’s political leaders are more concerned with the rules and protecting high interest values than they are with the consequences of their rule-based decisions.

Rules themselves are not stable and unchanging. In fact, education, experience, and historical narratives all contribute to the development of an accepted and approved set of rules and values. Such rules aim to fulfill an identity, and all of these factors including education, experience, and interpretations of history, rules, and identity are transformational and recreated over time. However, this book will demonstrate that the Vietnamese have one accepted interpretation of their history which is taught to students in secondary school, and through this understanding of history, a basic set of rules and values have been formulated and accepted which guide the Vietnamese people and political leaders through their daily lives and allow them to secure their identity. Therefore, while the rules themselves may not be consistent, the fact that there is a set of historicallybased and traditionally accepted rules is consistent and the use of rules has been reliable over time as an effective means to maintain power and preserve national identity.

When discussing rule-following theory, I would be remiss if I did not mention the “skeptical paradox” introduced by Saul Kripke: “The paradox is: ‘…no course of action could be determined by a rule, because every course of action can be made to accord with the rule.’ ”¹² Actually, according to Wittgenstein the answer to the paradox is, “…if everything can be made out to accord with a rule, then it can also be made out to conflict with it.”¹³ Another paradox with rulefollowing is the issue of how one can accomplish both a blind reaction to a situation and deliberately follow a rule. The answer is through practice and technique. If rules are anchored in practice, then following a rule is equated to belonging to a custom, practice, or institution, and therefore is not blind action, but instinctual.¹⁴ Therefore, rule-following consists in a culture, becomes an accepted custom, and becomes institutionalized. In Vietnam since the rules that are used to govern decision-making are sometimes not written, formal rules, but are more institutionalized conventions, it is difficult to determine when a problem is solved by using rules or when rules conflict with the decision process, but it is more likely that calling upon rules is instinctual.

Authors who have written on decision-making specific to Vietnam include Douglas Pike, Hoa Levan, and Carlyle Thayer among others. Douglas Pike called upon Vietnamese historical experiences to explain how the political system developed and operated in the 1960s. Much of his explanations are based on Confucian principles which he asserted began in Vietnam as early as 111 bc. Pike explained that historically political participation was not only discouraged, but it was unheard of. He noted that the individuals in the village almost never dealt directly with the national authorities, but instead village officials were the liaisons for any concerns or business related issues. He explained that rulers employed a model of “private arrangements” to make political and societal decisions and to alleviate any confrontations in the village. Pike noted that the sentiment of “private arrangements” existed during the Confucian era and continued throughout the 1960s.¹⁵ Private arrangements allowed for the principles of harmony and submission to be emphasized and fulfilled.

According to Pike, the essential political structure in Vietnam will remain what it was in the past: a Leninist organization within a Confucian construct with little actual input from Marxist thought; collective leadership by the Communist Party and the same operational code of the Politburo; no policy ch...

Table of contents

• Routledge contemporary Southeast Asia series
• Contents
• Illustrations
• Preface
• Acknowledgments
• 1 Introduction
• 2 A historical and cultural framework
• 3 Review of Vietnamese text books and defense education
• 4 A case study on the National Landmine Impact Survey in Vietnam
• 5 A case study on Vietnam’s response to AI
• 6 Comparison and analysis of two case studies
• 7 Other things to consider about decision-making in Vietnam
• 8 Conclusion
• Appendix A Political system of Vietnam
• Appendix B Government of Vietnam
• Appendix C Political bureau members
• Notes
• Bibliography
• Index