‘New Democrat’ Watch #7: New Imf Loans To Vietnam — Ill-Advised, Undeserved And Betrayal Of Stance On Human Rights

(Washington, D.C.): Yesterday, President Clinton met for over an hour with representatives of the families of Vietnam-era POW/MIAs and veterans groups opposed to new, U.S. taxpayer-underwritten lending to Vietnam. Such loans are to be considered by the International Monetary Fund on 12 July. If approved with Washington’s (overt or tacit) support, they would inexorably lead to the lifting of the embargo and de facto normalization of relations with communist Vietnam.

The President told his interlocutors that, despite press reports to the contrary, he had not yet decided to approve the IMF loans. They urged him not to do so on the following grounds:

Vietnam Is Not ‘Cooperating’ on Still Unaccounted For Americans

An extraordinary new book entitled The Men We Left Behind: Henry Kissinger, the Politics of Deceit and the Tragic Fate of POWs after the Vietnam War by Mark Sauter and Jim Sanders, establishes that Hanoi has yet to come clean about the fate of all American servicemen who were missing in action or prisoners of war in Vietnam and Laos. It also reveals an appalling degree of complicity on the part of the U.S. government — both executive branch officials and some members of Congress — that has continued to the present day. The President was presented with a copy of this book by Dolores Alfond, chairman of the National Alliance of POW/MIA Families, who urged him to read it before acting on the IMF loan.

Interestingly, one of those whose devious and insidious conduct figures prominently in The Men We Left Behind — Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) — slipped into the White House to see President Clinton shortly before the families and veterans’ appointment. Sen. Kerry’s purpose: to give the President a letter signed by a number of his colleagues urging approval of the IMF loans and otherwise to undercut once again those who oppose normalization of relations with Vietnam under present circumstances.

In the meeting that followed, the President was specifically disabused of the notion that Vietnam had earned American reciprocity through its recent "cooperation" on accounting for POW/MlAs. As the National League of Families noted in a 16 June press release: "In reality, the last two or three years have been the worst since 1981 in terms of accounting for our missing loved ones….The number of unaccounted-for Americans has been reduced by only ten in 1992 and only one in 1993. This lack of results is due to Vietnam’s failure."

If President Clinton is true to his word, this reality alone should be enough to block improved U.S.-Vietnamese ties at this time. After all, last Memorial Day, Mr. Clinton told the families and veterans gathered at the Vietnam Memorial:

"We will do all we can to give you not only the attention you have asked for but the answers you deserve….We are pressing the Vietnamese to provide this accounting [of POW/MlAs] not only because it is the central outstanding issue in our relationship with Vietnam, but because it is a central commitment made by the American government to our people. And I intend to keep it."

 

Vietnam Continues to Interfere in Cambodia

Just as Hanoi is not really cooperating on resolving outstanding questions pertaining to the POW/MIA issue, so too it is failing to live up to another important precondition stipulated by the Bush Administration’s "road-map" for improving U.S.-Vietnamese relations: cooperation on bringing peace and democracy to neighboring Cambodia. As noted in a recent Center Decision Brief⁽²⁾, Vietnam and its proxies in Cambodia actively tried to subvert the U.N.-monitored election in May through a systematic campaign of violence and intimidation conducted against the non-communist opposition.

When such sabotage failed to have the desired effect and electoral returns gave a plurality to the royalist democratic FUNCIPEC party led by Prince Norodom Ranariddh, Hanoi’s surrogates first refused to accept the returns, then announced that the eastern provinces of Cambodia would secede rather than be ruled by a government led by non-communists. Only with the collapse of the secessionist movement did the Vietnamese-backed Cambodian People’s Party finally agree to participate in a coalition transitional government. This latest position, however, appears to be little more than a holding operation, designed to preserve Hanoi’s options — perhaps to "rule from below" like the Nicaraguan Sandinistas, perhaps to seek a violent return to power once the U.N. pulls out in August.

A U.S. Double-Standard on Human Rights?

The representatives of the American Legion and the Disabled American Veterans reminded President Clinton that another consideration must also be factored into any decision to improve relations with communist Vietnam: Over 58,000 U.S. servicemen and women lost their lives and tens of thousands of others were maimed to defend the freedom of the people of South Vietnam. This sacrifice would be unalterably demeaned were the United States to agree to IMF loans and other steps that would provide economic life-support to those who continue to deny basic human rights to the Vietnamese.

Such a step would be all the more indefensible in light of Secretary of State Warren Christopher’s recent, vehement rejection of the Bangkok Declaration. This declaration, which was adopted by Vietnam, China, Myanmar and other enemies of freedom on 2 April 1993, disputes the universality of human rights. It pronounces, among other things, "the interdependence and indivisibility of economic, social, cultural and civil and political rights and the need to give equal emphasis to all categories of human rights."

Secretary Christopher used his address to the U.N. Human Rights Conference in Vienna on 14 June to make the following points of considerable relevance to the pending decision about rehabilitating communist Vietnam:

"…The United States stands with the men and women everywhere who are standing up for [democracy and human rights]….President Clinton has made reinforcing democracy and protecting human rights a pillar of our foreign policy — and a major focus of our foreign assistance programs."

 

"In this post-Cold War era, we are at a new moment. Our agenda for freedom must embrace every prisoner of conscience, every victim of torture, every individual denied basic human rights….In the battle for democracy and human rights, words matter, but what we do matters more. What all of our citizens and governments do in the days ahead will count far more than any discussions held or documents produced here."

"[We] will support the forces of freedom — of tolerance of respect for the rights of the individual — not only in the next few weeks in Vienna, but every day in the conduct of our foreign policy throughout the world. The United States will never join those who would undermine the Universal Declaration [of Human Rights]."

 

"We reject any attempt by any state to relegate its citizens to a lesser standard of human dignity. There is no contradiction between the universal principles of the U.N. Declaration and the cultures that enrich our international community. The real chasm lies between the cynical excuses of oppressive regimes and the sincere aspirations of their people."

 

The Bottom Line

Much is riding on President Clinton’s impending decision on the renewal of IMF lending to Vietnam. Should new financial support to Hanoi and other steps toward full normalization of relations go forward under present circumstances, Vietnam’s communist dictators will obtain a new lease on political life. If so, American families and veterans concerned with obtaining the truth about their missing loved ones will be permanently stonewalled. Cambodia, Laos and others will continue to be subjected to aggression, subversion and domination from Hanoi.

And the U.S. commitment to democracy and human rights around the world — so elegantly enunciated last month by Warren Christopher on behalf of the Clinton Administration — will be shown to be selective at best and, at worst, completely and cynically disconnected from actual American policy. This would represent a further, odious betrayal not only of the long-suffering people of Vietnam. It would also defile the memory of all those Americans who demonstrated by making the ultimate sacrifice what a real commitment to democracy and freedom is all about.

– 30 –

1. "New Democrat" Watch is a series of Decision Briefs designed to illuminate important security policy decisions pending before the Clinton Administration. These decisions will do much to determine the compatibility of Clinton policies with the U.S. national interest. They will also provide objective measures of the President’s follow-through on his commitment to abandon the left-wing, "Old Democrat" behavior that has afflicted and undermined his presidency thus far.

2. See ‘New Democrat’ Watch #3: Will Clinton Reward Hanoi For Its Latest Cambodian Power Play? (No. 93-D 47, 14 June 1993).