Article review:
One‐Party Rule and the Challenge of Civil Society in Vietnam

Vietnam has experienced important changes since the Doi Moi in 1986. One of these changes is the emergence of the political civil society groups. Nowadays, these groups gain importance over the years. The reason of the presence of those association and groups is because of the repression of the state, the hegemony exercised by it, the corruption and other social ills. That is to say that Vietnam may face domestic instability if the one-party state fails to answer the civil society’s challenge.
The Vietnamese system, the mono-organizational one has during these last years lived some important changes.
The Vietnam Communist Party was viewed as an elitist hierarchical organization that exercised an unchallenged power. This party has been exercising control over the state and the armed forces by the penetration by committees and party cells Such as Vietnam fatherland Front, an umbrella Organizations grouping the majority of pro-party mass organizations of the country.
The state has allowed a little room for the private sector, for associations such as Vietnam Union of Friendship Associations and organizations as the Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry. This private sector employs more than ninety per cent of the work force and private enterprises gain more importance and growth over the years even if it is policy that party committees must be established in all private enterprises.
Nevertheless, the one thing that did not change is the hegemony and the strong power exercised by the one party state. Power exercised through entities like the National assembly. Indeed, The National Assembly elections are being controlled by the Vietnam Fatherland Front where It set a three-round of consultations rule, and determines in advance the ideal structure of the national assembly.
Still, the hegemony of the one party state over society has been constantly challenged. The party has tried to answer these challenges by starting some reforms as in 2003 about the participation of communities and local organizations in development activities at the commune level. Few actions that are insufficient and do not answer the real population necessities and its grieves.

After the Doi Moi reforms, NGOs became more important in the civil society. It appeared that supporting NGO’s was a good strategy to carve out a space for civil society in the authoritarian Vietnamese system. The NGOs took so muck place that even some scholars defined the civil society by NGOs. But one must remember that civil society is more complex than that. Indeed, according to Mark Sidel, NGO was not the exact term to use in order to describe the newly formed groups, that he classified as new policy and development-orientated groups.
It is also shown that the different organizations obscure the quick growth of non-profit associations. These community based organizations took the lead in managing natural resources. Some of them were state independent but had nonetheless ambiguous legal status that made them vulnerable to the state intrusion.
Further, the NGOs gain a lot of support from UN and the World Bank but were still state-sponsored and funded and part of the VFF system. These NGOs are quite different from the western ones. The Vietnamese ones are closely related to the state and the party. Even if they represent somehow the opposition they also support some state policies.
Since the 90’s, mono-organizational state has retreated and leave space to associations, Vietnamese and international NGOs. But this retreat is only an image of front and hides the intrusion of the state in the civil society. Indeed, as an example to this, the state tried to draft a law on NGO’s to try to govern the expanding private associational activity.
It is difficult to give an accepted overall definition of civil society in Vietnam. Academics do not agree on one true, suitable definition. However, Mary Kaldor identifies five types of civil society.
Also, it is agreed that civil means non violent. However, the disagreement is about whether this non violent activity is to conform the law or not.
In conclusion, civil society has two meaning in the current Vietnamese context. First, the economic meaning views civil society as a service delivery by local development NGOs. Secondly, the political meaning which associates civil society with the duty of the promotion of liberal democracy. In the contrary, when in the Vietnamese society, civil society is used referring to the Vietnamese organizations close to the state.
There has been a major development in the nature of political civil society in Vietnam. This last decade, political dissidents made efforts to try to form organized and explicit organization defending human rights. Indeed, a pro-democracy network has emerged comprising democracy activists and groups. These democracy advocates became the Bloc 8406.
The Bloc has been a real active member for the democracy defense, as in the events of November 2006 when the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation took place in Vietnam. The bloc tried to denounce the state authoritarianism by protesting and demonstrating. Unfortunately, this bloc had the same fate as democracy activists in the 90’s, heavy repression by the state. However, one difference is to be made; the development is the contribution of the overseas Vietnamese pro-democracy activists where the Viet Tan is the Key organization. Even if viewed as a terrorist organization because of its founders, the Viet Tan claims to be henceforth to promote democracy pacifically. The Viet Tan has significant power in the Vietnamese context.
Civil society groups present in Vietnam are not directly challenging the one party state, as they are closely related to it. Indeed, Vietnam does not yet comprise groups as watchdogs that could denounce corruption. However, some journalists of progressive newspapers have tried to expose corruption. This kind of criticism is however limited because it is not permitted to openly criticize the state and the government. That is why Internet has become the most important conduit for opposition views since privately owned newspapers are not permitted.
It is clear that the recent emergence of these groups has not permitted them to lead off an engaged and direct civil disobedience or big demonstrations against the government. Therefore, it is interesting to see how this will develop and if these groups will become more present in civil society through demonstrations and public actions.
It is sure that important achievements have been made since 1986, a certain intern stability, economic growth are one of them. But in the other hand, some major issues have appeared such as protests over land or economic grievance. Besides, the actual economic woes in Vietnam undermine the regime legitimacy.
Furthermore, Vietnam’s one-party system is likely to be heavily challenged in the future where civil society groups are expected to be more powerful and be able to gather more people than ever.
To conclude his article, the author proposes five patterns of political change that could be expected to happen in Vietnam. According to him, the most unlikely scenarios are the statu-quo and transplacement where opposition and state join their actions. In the contrary, three others could be true in the future, the replacement, the transformation and the Authoritarian rule.
As a conclusion, we can say that the Vietnamese civil society is facing considerable changes that are remodeling its relations with the one-party state and the government. This civil society is taking much and much place in the political and economical Vietnamese scene. That is why; the state must take this data into consideration, more than ever. Indeed, Vietnam may face domestic and internal instability if the party state fails to the challenge that the emergence of this civil society poses.