Communism and Internet censorship, communists fear educating their people Options

[herosword]

China's tight rein on online growth
By Mark Ward
Technology Correspondent, BBC News website 


In less than 10 years China has gone from a net newcomer to the country with world's second-largest online population.
The first international internet data from China started travelling across the net in 1994, yet now the country has more than 100m net users

Jail time

Net cafes have to abide by a strict series of guidelines that govern where they can be sited, what services they can offer and how they must monitor what customers do.

Those that do not comply are shut down. In 2004, more than 47,000 net cafes were shut for breaking these laws.

This leads to a lot of self-censorship and a willingness by private firms to co-operate with government monitoring of what people do online, said Julien Pain, head of the internet freedom desk at Reporters Without Borders.


"The intention is to clear the web of subversive material," he said.
The monitoring of comments posted in chat rooms and on bulletin boards is quite aggressive, said Mr Pain.

Now, he said, thanks to automatic censoring systems undesirable postings only last a few minutes.

Less than 18 months ago, such posts would survive for up to 30 minutes, he said.

The consequences of posting subversive information, be it about Tibet, Falun Gong, or even Sars can be severe.

This week Amnesty International released a report that highlighted the number of people imprisoned for championing human rights in China. Many were jailed for posting information online.

Currently 54 people are thought to be in jail because they were judged to distributed "illegal" information via the net.

Many activists used to think that the more people that were online the harder it would be to censor, said Mr Pain.

But, by contrast, censorship of political debate in China seems to be getting more effective.

"We are talking about software that's really efficient," he said, "and when you have 100 million or 200 million people it does not make any difference."

The resources that the Chinese government puts in to monitoring dwarfs the efforts of the activist groups working to combat it.

Said Mr Pain: "Surveillance is much easier in cyberspace than in the real world."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/technology/4327067.stm

Internet censorship and distortion of information. Communist countries seems to fear letting their people think beyond anything "scientific or technological." They want people to be mindless little chumps who eat up all the nationalist propaganda; they want to do away with individuality and replace it with collectivism; the dnager is that individuality is the driving force behind inovation and entrepreneurship. Censorship and harsh control seems to work in Vietnam and in China. A website like asiafinest would probably be banned by this firewall.

Some say that an improved economy and better standard of living might also bring more freedom, but I recently read an article that this wasn't necessarily the case. The article is about the Tianamen Square mothers who complain that their lives are now worst under the "reformist" Hu Jintao than under Jiang Zheming. I always thought that improved economy in Vietnam might mean improved political conditions for the people ; but with China's experience as a paradigm, perhaps I am mistaken.

Some little whiny hoard will probably ask me why I'm posting about China in Vietnamese Chat. The reason is that both countries seems to parellel each other in censorship of informations and trying to dumb down their citizens and destroy individuality. In a a few decade or years, Vietnam might look very much like China does now (on a smaller scale). What can we learn from the Chinese experience and what option is there to bring improved political freedom along with economic growth?

This post has been edited by herosword: Mar 8 2005, 08:18 PM

[JimTungLe]

Herosword,

Thank you for providing this article it was very informative concerning Internet censorship.

The Truth must be told so Freedom will prevail for a NEW VIETNAM under a Democractic government elected by the people.

[Preydominator]

I don't think they will succeed in censoring the internet. They simple can't unless they disconnect the net entirely from the worldwide internet. With a some effort you can encrypt data stream with a propriety format an with a decent long key, setup a proxy based outside Vietnam provide access to the rest of the world. You can hide connection to the proxy server using a distributed network of servers, something like this http://tor.eff.org/ I don't know if Vietnam censor the Internet, rightnow I only read about chinese government. I know for sure there AF posters from Vietnam, so this site is not banned.

[herosword]

Computer Major? The article did talk about how there are website like elgoog (google spell backward) where if you type in the subject backward you can bypass the firewall. The problem is not the technology but the human fear that this generate and the occurrence of self-censorship. Internet cafes and corporations are cooperating with the govt to censor information. The fines and penalty for not doing so is too great for many of these capitalist enterprise. If you read Milton Friedman literature about trade and economics --> he suggest that spreading free trade will help to spread freedom. This has been a basic tenets, but China is proving an exception. Vietnam is also currently heavily censored --> so it worries me that even though the material conditions of vietnamese will improve societal freedom and a respect for human rights might not.

I don't think they will succeed in censoring the internet. They simple can't unless they disconnect the net entirely from the worldwide internet. With a some effort you can encrypt data stream with a propriety format an with a decent long key, setup a proxy based outside Vietnam provide access to the rest of the world. You can hide connection to the proxy server using a distributed network of servers, something like this http://tor.eff.org/ I don't know if Vietnam censor the Internet, rightnow I only read about chinese government. I know for sure there AF posters from Vietnam, so this site is not banned.

[Preydominator]

Computer Major?  The article did talk about how there are website like elgoog (google spell backward) where if you type in the subject backward you can bypass the firewall.  The problem is not the technology but the human fear that this generate and the occurrence of self-censorship.  Internet cafes and corporations are cooperating with the govt to censor information.  The fines and penalty for not doing so is too great for many of these capitalist enterprise.  If you read Milton Friedman literature about trade and economics --> he suggest that spreading free trade will help to spread freedom.  This has been a basic tenets, but China is proving an exception.  Vietnam is also currently heavily censored --> so it worries me that even though the material conditions of vietnamese will improve societal freedom and a respect for human rights might not.

I know Friedman's theory that is what I'm hoping for Vietnam. Free trade will get Vietnam rich and help spread freedom of though and politics. Even Chinese situation is bad, it's still much better than the autarky-ish, isolated North Korea, would you agree? One step of a time, I can wait till the day most Vietnameses are online. That is why I hate people asking for boycott Vietnam. The method like elgoog is very easy to encounter technically, all they need is to put elgoog site on the ban list too. There are much sophisticated ways to encounter censorship. And they couldn't use much technology to censor it, except using the human factor, which it's costly in time and resource. Sure some may get caught but information still reaches common people. This is a lost battle for government and big companies. Take a look at the currently widespread P2P phenomenon.

[herosword]

So you already studied macroeconomics. Well, yes, Vietnam looks like a paradise compare to North Korea (but that just shows how bad NK is, not how good Vietnam could be). I will give the Vietnamese govt some credit. For close to two decades, Vietnam's market was autarkic(although we did have some trade with soviet, chinese, and sorrounding country), US sanctions really hurt us and stunted development. I'm also hoping that Friedman's theory will prove true in Vietnam.

However, I don't think political change will occur driven solely by economic factors. It's certainly not happening in China right now. If anything, Hu Jintao has clamped down more harshly on peaceful oppositions, continue to build up the PRC military, and threaten his neighbors with anti-seccessionist laws. The danger is that economic constraints by themselves cannot deterr agressive communist countries. With the case of the PRC, US's hand is somewhat tie because right now the PRC holds most of our foreign debt (ie bonds; and getting big net remittances from them too). At the same time, they fix the currency rate so that the yuan is artificially undervalued so that they can export more than they import (ie have balance of payment surplus that puts the US in deficit). The US meanwhile continue to play by the games of fair trade and maintains a floating exchange rate. In instances like this, America should seriously consider "protectionist policy" to make the PRC reconsider the way it does business. Since economic factors by themselves fail to get the PRC to change, political pressure needs to brought to bear. Trade protectionism will hurt both countries, but if the PRC refuse to play by rules of free trade, then why should the US? In terms of relative strength, if we get into a trade war, US will come out on top. Let's just hope the PRC realize this and open up its market and deregulate; both countries can prosper and China can continue its "peaceful rise to power."

In the case of Vietnam, I also argue something similar. You need to bring political pressure to bear when economic factors fails to induce changes. While I fundamentally oppose putting sanctions on Vietnam, I do believe that the threat of sanction should be wielded to force Vietnam to move towards the road to reform. If Vietnam continue to suppress rights and inhibit individual freedom, then limited sanctions on technology and defense knowhow should be imposed. If the situation gets worst, then we move towards more sanctions that might even derail the economy. I think that will send a clear message. It worked in Libya so it might work in Vietnam.

In the short run sanctions will hurt Vietnamese, but in the long run it will induce reform and lead to a more stable and open society (and a more prosperous economy). I'm only proposing sanctions, however as A LAST RESORT. Hopefully, the commies can avoid this situation by cracking down on corruption and respecting international law. I'm still waiting to see some action...

Computer Major?  The article did talk about how there are website like elgoog (google spell backward) where if you type in the subject backward you can bypass the firewall.  The problem is not the technology but the human fear that this generate and the occurrence of self-censorship.  Internet cafes and corporations are cooperating with the govt to censor information.  The fines and penalty for not doing so is too great for many of these capitalist enterprise.  If you read Milton Friedman literature about trade and economics --> he suggest that spreading free trade will help to spread freedom.  This has been a basic tenets, but China is proving an exception.  Vietnam is also currently heavily censored --> so it worries me that even though the material conditions of vietnamese will improve societal freedom and a respect for human rights might not.

I know Friedman's theory that is what I'm hoping for Vietnam. Free trade will get Vietnam rich and help spread freedom of though and politics. Even Chinese situation is bad, it's still much better than the autarky-ish, isolated North Korea, would you agree? One step of a time, I can wait till the day most Vietnameses are online. That is why I hate people asking for boycott Vietnam. The method like elgoog is very easy to encounter technically, all they need is to put elgoog site on the ban list too. There are much sophisticated ways to encounter censorship. And they couldn't use much technology to censor it, except using the human factor, which it's costly in time and resource. Sure some may get caught but information still reaches common people. This is a lost battle for government and big companies. Take a look at the currently widespread P2P phenomenon.

This post has been edited by herosword: Mar 10 2005, 12:38 PM

[Byron]

but if the PRC refuse to play by rules of free trade, then why should the US? In terms of relative strength, if we get into a trade war, US will come out on top. Let's just hope the PRC realize this and open up its market and deregulate; both countries can prosper and China can continue its "peaceful rise to power."

LOL China has US by the balls. The US needs China. Big captalist business runs America and they want the cheapest prices, so they need China.

Not to mention US is gonna owe China some favours for China helping them with the North Korean issue.

We all know how the US is paranoid about terrorism, so they have no choice but to appease China and in return China limits sharing nuclear secrets with other groups.

Thanks to Bush who is a China suck up, it is very possible that China will be more powerful than the US in the next 50 years.

While I'm not a fan of China, I think it was brillant how they made the US dependant on them.

This post has been edited by Byron: Mar 10 2005, 01:26 PM

[Preydominator]

So you already studied macroeconomics.  Well, yes, Vietnam looks like a paradise compare to North Korea (but that just shows how bad NK is, not how good Vietnam could be).  I will give the Vietnamese govt some credit.  For close to two decades, Vietnam's market was autarkic(although we did have some trade with soviet, chinese, and sorrounding country),  US sanctions really hurt us and stunted development.  I'm also hoping that Friedman's theory will prove true in Vietnam. 

However, I don't think political change will occur driven solely by economic factors. It's certainly not happening in China right now.  If anything, Hu Jintao has clamped down more harshly on peaceful oppositions, continue to build up the PRC military, and threaten his neighbors with anti-seccessionist laws.  The danger is that economic constraints by themselves cannot deterr agressive communist countries.  With the case of the PRC, US's hand is somewhat tie because right now the PRC holds most of our foreign debt (ie bonds; and getting big net remittances from them too).  At the same time, they fix the currency rate so that the yuan is artificially undervalued so that they can export more than they import (ie have balance of payment surplus that puts the US in deficit).  The US meanwhile continue to play by the games of fair trade and maintains a floating exchange rate.  In instances like this, America should seriously consider "protectionist policy" to make the PRC reconsider the way it does business.  Since economic factors by themselves fail to get the PRC to change, political pressure needs to brought to bear.  Trade protectionism will hurt both countries, but if the PRC refuse to play by rules of free trade, then why should the US?  In terms of relative strength, if we get into a trade war, US will come out on top.  Let's just hope the PRC realize this and open up its market and deregulate; both countries can prosper and China can continue its "peaceful rise to power."
 
In the case of Vietnam, I also argue something similar. You need to bring political pressure to bear when economic factors fails to induce changes.  While I fundamentally oppose putting sanctions on Vietnam, I do believe that the threat of sanction should be wielded to force Vietnam to move towards the road to reform.  If Vietnam continue to suppress rights and inhibit individual freedom, then limited sanctions on technology and defense knowhow should be imposed.  If the situation gets worst, then we move towards more sanctions that might even derail the economy.  I think that will send a clear message.  It worked in Libya so it might work in Vietnam.

In the short run sanctions will hurt Vietnamese, but in the long run it will induce reform and lead to a more stable and open society (and a more prosperous economy).  I'm only proposing sanctions, however as A LAST RESORT.  Hopefully, the commies can avoid this situation by cracking down on corruption and respecting international law.  I'm still waiting to see some action...

I agree, in general economic factors alone won’t drive the political change. With the specific Vietnam case I’ve got the feeling people are tired of lengthy wars, politics and poverty. Vietnam is still one of the poorest countries of the world. Some family have trouble to get enough food on the table, political freedom is not the nr 1 on their priority list. Take their primary worries away; you will create a condition for a political change. I don’t see sanction of Libya for example might work with Vietnam. Libya’s cooperation is because the pressure after the Sadam’s dethrone. Vietnam is no way under control of one dictator like Gadhaffi. The collective are watching each others back. I don’t think they’re easy to be intimidated by another war started by western countries. Vietnam was sanctioned by the West for almost 2 decades, why would you think this time will work?

What China is doing right now it reminds me of Japan in the ’80. It’s a danger game. Japan ended up with losing buck load of money after the bubble crashed. If you worry about their military built up, their spending is a fraction of the DoD budget.

This post has been edited by Preydominator: Mar 10 2005, 07:45 PM

[herosword]

Have you ever given a child some food he doesn't like and it turns out he likes it. Then you take the food away and you say you can't have more of it til you do your chore.

Well, that why sanctions might work now when they didn't work before. When the people and the country achieve a relatively stable standard, then you threaten that economic prosperity and it hits home more. You say if you don't reform and do better business, then we're going to put political pressure on you. I think the mere threat might be enough to induce reform to avoid the pain. If threat doesn't work then you move forward with severer penalty--> but again, change will not occur if Vietnameses continue to take a passive attitude and just say oh, let's just let things goes on as they were as long as the economy is improving.

So you already studied macroeconomics.  Well, yes, Vietnam looks like a paradise compare to North Korea (but that just shows how bad NK is, not how good Vietnam could be).  I will give the Vietnamese govt some credit.  For close to two decades, Vietnam's market was autarkic(although we did have some trade with soviet, chinese, and sorrounding country),  US sanctions really hurt us and stunted development.  I'm also hoping that Friedman's theory will prove true in Vietnam. 

However, I don't think political change will occur driven solely by economic factors. It's certainly not happening in China right now.  If anything, Hu Jintao has clamped down more harshly on peaceful oppositions, continue to build up the PRC military, and threaten his neighbors with anti-seccessionist laws.  The danger is that economic constraints by themselves cannot deterr agressive communist countries.  With the case of the PRC, US's hand is somewhat tie because right now the PRC holds most of our foreign debt (ie bonds; and getting big net remittances from them too).  At the same time, they fix the currency rate so that the yuan is artificially undervalued so that they can export more than they import (ie have balance of payment surplus that puts the US in deficit).  The US meanwhile continue to play by the games of fair trade and maintains a floating exchange rate.  In instances like this, America should seriously consider "protectionist policy" to make the PRC reconsider the way it does business.  Since economic factors by themselves fail to get the PRC to change, political pressure needs to brought to bear.  Trade protectionism will hurt both countries, but if the PRC refuse to play by rules of free trade, then why should the US?  In terms of relative strength, if we get into a trade war, US will come out on top.  Let's just hope the PRC realize this and open up its market and deregulate; both countries can prosper and China can continue its "peaceful rise to power."
 
In the case of Vietnam, I also argue something similar. You need to bring political pressure to bear when economic factors fails to induce changes.  While I fundamentally oppose putting sanctions on Vietnam, I do believe that the threat of sanction should be wielded to force Vietnam to move towards the road to reform.  If Vietnam continue to suppress rights and inhibit individual freedom, then limited sanctions on technology and defense knowhow should be imposed.  If the situation gets worst, then we move towards more sanctions that might even derail the economy.  I think that will send a clear message.  It worked in Libya so it might work in Vietnam.

In the short run sanctions will hurt Vietnamese, but in the long run it will induce reform and lead to a more stable and open society (and a more prosperous economy).  I'm only proposing sanctions, however as A LAST RESORT.  Hopefully, the commies can avoid this situation by cracking down on corruption and respecting international law.  I'm still waiting to see some action...

I agree, in general economic factors alone won’t drive the political change. With the specific Vietnam case I’ve got the feeling people are tired of lengthy wars, politics and poverty. Vietnam is still one of the poorest countries of the world. Some family have trouble to get enough food on the table, political freedom is not the nr 1 on their priority list. Take their primary worries away; you will create a condition for a political change. I don’t see sanction of Libya for example might work with Vietnam. Libya’s cooperation is because the pressure after the Sadam’s dethrone. Vietnam is no way under control of one dictator like Gadhaffi. The collective are watching each others back. I don’t think they’re easy to be intimidated by another war started by western countries. Vietnam was sanctioned by the West for almost 2 decades, why would you think this time will work?

What China is doing right now it reminds me of Japan in the ’80. It’s a danger game. Japan ended up with losing buck load of money after the bubble crashed. If you worry about their military built up, their spending is a fraction of the DoD budget.

[Preydominator]

Have you ever given a child some food he doesn't like and it turns out he likes it.  Then you take the food away and you say you can't have more of it til you do your chore.

Well, that why sanctions might work now when they didn't work before. When the people and the country achieve a relatively stable standard, then you threaten that economic prosperity and it hits home more. You say if you don't reform and do better business, then we're going to put political pressure on you.  I think the mere threat might be enough to induce reform to avoid the pain.  If threat doesn't work then you move forward with severer penalty--> but again, change will not occur if Vietnameses continue to take a passive attitude and just say oh, let's just let things goes on as they were as long as the economy is improving.

I don’t see how it works. Vietnamese export for example is roughly less than 10% of Vietnamese economy. Vietnam is no way heavily dependant on trade yet like some Western countries. Second, which country will support sanction Vietnam? USA? EU countries won’t. There are countries with worse human right record than Vietnam and they didn’t sanction them. China, fast growing and become one of main trade partner of Vietnam won’t sanction VN. Let’s face it sanction VN will have a little effect to initiate a political change. Further I fear sanction VN you will lost a lot of good will of common folks toward the West. You know their propaganda: foreign countries always try to destroy/harm VN…

[herosword]

Export is gradually expanding and political pressure on Vietnam would not be concentrated on export. You must not neglect import; Vietnam right now is following the import-substitution model to industrialize, so import is vunerable. Sanctions on military imports would have a strong effect and minimize negative civilians impact. Also, Vietnam economy is dependent on the huge dollar influx from abroad that it recieves, esspecially in the "hated and immoral" United State. US can regulate this with law (like those concerning Cuba; Vietnam is worse than Cuba; at least the Cubans have a good health care system; still America sanctions them so why would it be inconsistent to sanction Vietnam?). Tourism also is also one of the biggest industry in Vietnam. Threaten those, and you'll have huge hammer to force the govt to move toward political reform (hopefully, the acutal hammer will never be used).

I agree with you with the fear of negative backlash...that's why the sanction to be dissigned to weaken the govt such as those directed at the military and high technology. The timing of the sanction must be correct...when Vietnam has achieved a relative good level of weath and its economy is in the intermediate phase, then this is the best time to press for policy change. The people would (hopefully) be educated enough to ignore govt propaganda; if they don't then simple economic reality will stir unrest and get Hanoi's attention. Don't rule out the support of the US and the impact of its huge influence. If the American-Viet community can unite like the Cuban-American community, we'll have enough clout to press for reform.

Have you ever given a child some food he doesn't like and it turns out he likes it.  Then you take the food away and you say you can't have more of it til you do your chore.

Well, that why sanctions might work now when they didn't work before. When the people and the country achieve a relatively stable standard, then you threaten that economic prosperity and it hits home more. You say if you don't reform and do better business, then we're going to put political pressure on you.  I think the mere threat might be enough to induce reform to avoid the pain.  If threat doesn't work then you move forward with severer penalty--> but again, change will not occur if Vietnameses continue to take a passive attitude and just say oh, let's just let things goes on as they were as long as the economy is improving.

I don’t see how it works. Vietnamese export for example is roughly less than 10% of Vietnamese economy. Vietnam is no way heavily dependant on trade yet like some Western countries. Second, which country will support sanction Vietnam? USA? EU countries won’t. There are countries with worse human right record than Vietnam and they didn’t sanction them. China, fast growing and become one of main trade partner of Vietnam won’t sanction VN. Let’s face it sanction VN will have a little effect to initiate a political change. Further I fear sanction VN you will lost a lot of good will of common folks toward the West. You know their propaganda: foreign countries always try to destroy/harm VN…

This post has been edited by herosword: Mar 14 2005, 01:17 AM

[JimTungLe]

herosword, Preydominator, Byron

Sanctions may initiate a political change, in Vietnam or it just might hurt the people of Vietnam even worst that have to live under the conditions, because as we know the Communist Party members even under sanctions will live comfortble in their homes, and do not live under the same conditions as the regular Vietnamese Common Citizen.

But the truth remains, that the Communist Party knows it will lose power if the United Nations has a mandated Elections where all Political Parties are represented to chose a Prime Minister.

There are sanctions currently on Burma, and the Junta of Generals that are in Control are still living very comfortble, even when Aung San Suu Kyi won the election to lead the nation of Burma in 1990.

It is now 2005, ---------------------------15 years later, and Aung San Suu Kyi has been jailed and now under house arrest.

What can sactions help, if Burma has economic sacntions against them since 1990, and still after 15 years there has been no political change in the nation of Burma.

Furthermore, a member of the Burmese Royal Family Prince Shwebomin has been also politically pressuring the government of Burma for poltical change, but it has fell on deaf ears from the powerful Junta of Generals that control Burma with an Iron Fist.

What can be done, if there is Political Change in Vietnam, the people chose a Non-Communist to represent them, and then the Communist refuse the mandate of the democratic elected Prime Minister by the people to transfer power?

We are back to step one.

Reference:

Aung San Suu Kyi: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aung_San_Suu_Kyi

Prince Shwebomin: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shwebomin

This post has been edited by JimTungLe: Mar 15 2005, 05:30 AM

[Preydominator]

Herosword, I mention export only because VN's import from US is neglectable compair to its export to US. VN currently import a lot more from other Asians countries and Europe. Thanks JimTungLe for mention Maynmar (Burma). Well Cuba is also obvious example where sanction didn't work. How long ago did they start the sanction? Sanction on military goods and hi-tech? US only sell hi-tech to its closest allies, not even to neutral countries. The Viet community can never be a strong lobby like the Cubans or Jewish communities because we're devided. A lot of us still have families, relatives in VN. Would you support sanction if it would also cut the financial support, tie to them?

We're only spectators. If any polical changes happen, it will have to initiate from inside Vietnam. I don't know if outside pressure will help the process. Viets have to much pride in ourself (nationalism). I say yes to freedom of information, providing alternative sources of information beside the VN's government monopoly. I say no to sanction, I hate to see VN being poor like dirt, being already one of the poorest countries of the world.

[herosword]

I will answer both the Cuban and the Burma arguement with a rhetorical question. What economic phase was Cuba and Burma both in when sanctions were imposed? Answer: the Keyesian phase with high structural unemployment and economic stagnation resulting from corruption and govt mismanagement. Even today, the Burmese govt continues to control export and domestic production of the most basic of necessity, rice. The intention of the Burmese junta is very benign. They want to keep prices low so that civilians can get cheap rice (and are well-fed and less likely to rebel). Good right? Well, it has been a disaster. Such price ceiling has undercut farmers motivation to grow and produce more rice --> the result is impending famine and a drasitic drop in the production of a staple crop that feeds million of Burmese.

So getting back to our central question of why did sanction not work in Cuba and Burma? Simple, if you squeeze a dry orange you can't make orange juice. If a country is already economically isolated and downtrodden and you further slap sanctions on it, then instead of motivating the people within that country to rebel against their govt, they will listen to the govt's propaganda and see sanction as aggression by a third party, instead of blaming it on the irresponsiblity of the govt.

Side note: To some degree sanctions have been successful in Cuba...it has failed to destablize and overthrow Castro but it has forced him to reform. Couple years ago he allowed the pope to visit and open up religion in Cuban society. For awhile he also allowed peaceful oppositions (he recently cracked down). In terms of the number of execution, Fidel kills far less people than the Vietnamese govt and cuban society is less draconian. Cuba has a good heath-care system, a highly educated populace, and it exports it nurses and doctors to poorer Latin American country. Has the Vietnamese govt done anything close to this...sadly no. The Vietnamese govt deserves to have sanction placed on it more than Cuba.

What economic phase then would be prime for the application of sanction? For Vietnam, sanctions should be "threatened" and applied in the intermidate phase when Vietnam is making the transition from a 3rd to 2nd world country. When the people are wealthy and most of the populace is educated, political pressure will be more effective.

I think you're also missing my point on the types of targeted sanctions that would be employed. You see sanction as a clear-cut, generalized action that will derail the economy and make the country "dirt poor." By targeted sanctions, I mean those on weapon import and high technology, whose aim is to weaken and punish the the communist govt rather than the civilian populations. I will moderate my stance and say that sanction should be used as a last resort, however.

You also raised an interesting point that Vietnam exports more to the US and vice versa. One reason is cheap labor but another is also like China, Vietnam undervalue its currency to maintain the imbalance of trade. That's why when Vietnam complain about American anti-dumping law, I'm not as sympathetic since the Vietnamese govt doesn't play by the game of fair trade.

I also disagree with your defeatish mentality. "Vietnamese" are divided, we'll never be able to get it done, we're just outsider and should just sit back and let our country go to hell. I can see why supporting sanction is controversial, but what's even more dangerous is pacifism and apathy. If you dont' support sanction (it's understandable), then join human right watch, involve yourself in political activity, protest against the communist govt's crime --> just do something besides saying we're outsider, it's not our problem. People aren't born with a sense of nationalism and unity. These things are developed through culture, history and nutured by courageous leaders who have goals and visions.


Effective change will not occur only because of economic dictates but also by the application of coordinated political pressure. Don't be a fence sitter, that's what the communists want. Take action!

This post has been edited by herosword: Mar 18 2005, 03:53 PM

[LaniKai]

David Smith
Sunday October 22, 2006
The Observer

Vietnam is controlling the use of the internet by encouraging providers and users to spy on each other and turn informant if they suspect politically 'subversive' activity, according to a report today by Amnesty International.

The communist regime has harassed, detained and imprisoned its citizens for expressing peaceful political views online, leading to widespread self-censorship among the Vietnamese. Owners of the country's hugely popular internet cafes have been described by the organisation Reporters Without Borders as 'police auxiliaries'.

The report comes before a petition calling for an end to internet repression and signed by 42,000 supporters of Amnesty and The Observer's Irrepressible.info campaign, is presented to the UN's Internet Governance Forum in Athens next week.

Internet service providers in Vietnam are required to inform on web users; internet cafe owners are required to inform on customers; and web users are required to inform on sites that oppose the state. Laws ban web users from spreading information that causes 'harm to national security or social order'.

While the Vietnamese government claims that filtering is for the protection of web users from pornography, a recent OpenNet Initiative study found little filtering of such material. Instead blocked sites are those referring to known dissidents or mentioning democracy and human rights.

Cong Thanh Do, who uses the internet to promote democracy in Vietnam, was arrested on 14 August, accused of attempting to 'implement a terrorist plot to destroy the US General Consulate in Ho Chi Minh City'.

He spent 38 days in solitary confinement in a cramped cell, maintaining a hunger strike for the entire period. American officials said there was no evidence to support the allegation and he was released. Amnesty believes that the arrest of the 47-year-old - who lives in America and travelled to Vietnam regularly but is now barred - was aimed solely at punishing him for expressing his political views.

Cong Thanh Do said: 'There are internet police who can hack into your email account and read everything. That's what happened to me. I think they really wanted to put me in jail for a long time to destroy my group, the People's Democratic party, so they accused me of being a terrorist.' He added that six members of the party are still in prison.

Herosword,

Thank you for providing this article it was very informative concerning Internet censorship.

The Truth must be told so Freedom will prevail for a NEW VIETNAM under a Democractic government elected by the people.

Internet - đấu trường giữa nhà nước và phe chống đối


Bài sau đây do ký giả lão thành nổi tiếng quốc tế Richard Lloyd Parry viết sau khi gặp Bác sĩ Nguyễn Đan Quế tại Sàigòn, vào dịp Hội nghị Thượng đỉnh Apec diễn ra tại Hà Nội. Tựa đề bài này là “Internet battlefield pits dissidents against the State”, đã được phổ biến trên The Timesonline, một nhật báo uy tín hàng đầu tại Anh quốc, ngày 18-11-2006 . Nguyên văn Anh ngữ, Đinh Từ Thức chuyển sang Việt ngữ.
NẾU NGUYỄN ĐAN QUẾ có điều chi nghi ngờ về sự nguy hiểm của Internet, thì những điều này đã biến mất vào cái đêm ông bắt đầu đợt chót cuộc đời bị giam giữ. Hôm đó là buổi tối ngày thứ Hai, và Bác sĩ Quế, một nhà đối lập kỳ cựu của chính quyền Cộng sản Việt Nam, đang âm thầm làm việc tại một quán cà phê Internet ở gần nhà.
Đám công an thường phục đã cắt đường giây điện thoại tại nhà ông, do đó, ông phải nhờ vào các quán cà phê để đọc tin tức và trao đổi điện thư với các nhà đối kháng Việt Nam ở trong nước và hải ngoại.
Ông nhớ lại: “Tôi đang lướt lưới thì một kẻ nào đó dùng cánh tay xiết cổ tôi”. Công an kéo Bác sĩ Quế từ màn ảnh máy vi tính, tống vào tù. Mãi hai năm sau ông mới được tha, do bị kết tội “lợi dụng các quyền dân chủ” – vì đã chuyển qua internet những lời tố cáo về tình trạng không có tự do thông tin ở Việt Nam .
Trong khi các thám tử của chính quyền lượn bên ngoài với máy quay phim, ông Quế nói ở trong nhà tại thành phố Hồ Chí Minh: “Internet chính là đấu trường giữa chính quyền và giới đối lập. Đó là một thứ võ khí trấn áp nguy hiểm ở trong tay chính quyền. Nhưng chúng tôi phải khai thác loại dụng cụ này, dù phải vào tù”.
Cuối tuần này, trong khi Tổng thống Bush và các nhà lãnh đạo Trung Quốc, Nhật Bản, Nga và 17 nước khác tới tham dự Diễn đàn Hợp tác Kinh tế Á châu Thái bình dương (Apec), Việt Nam có cơ hội hiếm hoi để giới thiệu một bộ mặt tân tiến hấp dẫn với thế giới bên ngoài. Dầu sao, đằng sau những nụ cười đã giấu những thực tế xấu xa.
Ủy ban Nhân quyền Việt Nam có cơ sở tại Paris nói rằng, nhà của các phần tử chống đối tại Hà Nội đã bị công an ngăn chặn, và những tờ yết thị bằng tiếng Anh được niêm yết, với nội dung cấm người nước ngoài lui tới. Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh hay Sàigòn, như tên gọi của nó cho tới năm 1975, là một thành phố sinh động, khó có thể tưởng tượng đó là một nơi bị áp bức. Một chuyến viếng thăm Bác sĩ Quế đã phơi bầy sự thực.
Hai công an thường phục đứng ở cửa quay phim khi tôi tới, và những người đi xe gắn máy chạy tiếp sức đuổi theo chiếc taxi chở tôi khi tôi đi. Trong nhà, Bác sĩ Quế, 64 tuổi, kéo màn cửa và đưa cho tôi một phong bì tài liệu về sự nghiệp đối kháng của ông. Ông nói: “Cầm lấy cái này. Nếu họ đến gây sự với ông, chúng ta sẽ không có thì giờ nói chuyện”. Từ 1978, ông đã trải qua 20 trong tù, đã chịu đựng tra tấn, đánh đập, và không được săn sóc về y tế.
Đa số cuộc đời còn lại, như những ngày đang sống, ông hầu như đều trong tình trạng bị quản thúc tại gia – điện thoại của ông bị nghe lén và thường bị cắt, ông bị theo dõi khi di chuyển, bạn bè và người trong gia đình ông bị quấy nhiễu.
Về mặt chính trị, những đòi hỏi của ông chỉ ở mức dân chủ tối thiểu – tự do báo chí, tự do ngôn luận và lập hội, và chấm dứt tình trạng độc quyền trong 31 năm qua của Đảng Cộng sản Việt Nam . Cho đến gần đây, ông trong tình trạng cô đơn với tiếng nói lẻ loi.
Bác sĩ Quế nhấn mạnh rằng sự thô bạo của áp bức đã làm im tiếng nói của đa số -- nhưng internet đang làm điều đó thay đổi mau chóng.
Ông nói: “Người ta phải đối diện với các biện pháp tàn bạo khi dám đứng dậy đương đầu với loại chính quyền đó, nhưng năm nay các phong trào dân chủ đã phát triển nhiều so với vài ba thập niên qua. Mức độ đó sẽ tiếp tục”.
Vào khoảng một trong sáu người của 84 triệu dân Việt Nam xử dụng internet, so với một trong chín người hồi năm ngoái. Đa số không có máy vi tính tại nhà, nhưng xử dụng máy tại năm ngàn quán cà phê, với giá vài xu (tiền Anh) một giờ.
Các nhà chống đối còn dùng cả tiếng nói trên mạng, như Skype để tự mình nói với nhau qua một môi trường ít có thể bị thu lén hơn là qua điện thoại cố định hay di động.
Ngay cả Hòa Thượng Thích Quảng Độ, nhà tu hành Phật Giáo 77 tuổi và có lẽ là nhà đối kháng cao cấp và được kính trọng nhất ở Việt Nam, cũng đang cho thiết kế internet tại ngôi chùa nơi ngài đã trải qua tám năm “quản thúc tại chùa”.
Nhà cầm quyền hiện đang ngăn chặn việc mở các website chống đối và tuyển mộ chủ nhân các quán cà phê internet để do thám khách hàng.
Một số các nhà bất đồng chính kiến nghi ngờ rằng có những kẻ vô danh cung ứng cho “chat room” có thể là những nhân viên cò mồi tạo cơ hội để nhận diện các phần tử chống đối. Hòa Thượng Quảng Độ nói rẳng: “Cộng sản cũng giống như những người sợ gió thổi bên ngoài. Họ không dám mở cửa vì họ sợ bị cảm lạnh”.
Sau đây là nguyên văn bài báo trên The Timesonline.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,25689-2459437.html
Internet battlefield pits dissidents against the State
The Times of London (www.timesonline.co.uk), November 18, 2006

From Richard Lloyd Parry in Ho Chi Minh City



IF NGUYEN DAN QUE had any doubts about the danger of the internet, they were dispelled the night that he began his last long spell in captivity. It was a Monday evening, and Dr Nguyen, a veteran opponent of Vietnam ’s communist Government, was quietly working in his local cyber-café.

The plainclothes security police had severed the telephone line at his home, so he depended on the café to read the news and exchange e-mails with Vietnamese dissidents at home and abroad.

“I was surfing the internet when somebody grabbed me with an arm, choking my throat,” he recalls. The police dragged Dr Que away from his screen, and into jail. It would be two years before he was released for the crime of “abusing democratic rights” — posting on the internet statements denouncing Vietnam ’s suppression of the media.

“The internet is a battlefield of the Government and dissidents,” he said at home in Ho Chi Minh City , as government spies with cameras hovered outside. “It’s a dangerous weapon of repression in the hands of the Government. But we have to exploit this tool, even if it means going to prison.”

This weekend, as President Bush and the leaders of China , Japan , Russia and 17 other countries fly in for the Asia Pacific Economic Co-operation (Apec) Forum , Vietnam has a rare opportunity to present an attractive modern face to the outside world. Behind the smiles, however, ugly realities are concealed.

The Paris-based Vietnam Committee on Human Rights, says that homes of dissidents in Hanoi have been blockaded by police and signs posted in English ordering foreigners to stay away. Ho Chi Minh City , or Saigon , as it was called until 1975, is such a lively city that it is difficult to imagine it as a place of repression. A visit to Dr Que reveals the reality.

Two plainclothes policemen stand by the gate and film me as I arrive, and my taxi is followed by a relay of young men on motorbikes when I leave. Inside, Dr Que, 64, draws the curtains and gives me an envelope containing an account of his career as a dissident.

“Take this now,” he says. “If they come in after you, we will not have time to talk.” Since 1978, he has spent 20 of his 64 years in jail, and has suffered torture, beatings and grievous medical neglect.

For much of the rest of the time he has lived, as he does now, in a state of virtual house arrest — his phones bugged and frequently disconnected, his movements followed, his friends and family harassed.

Politically, his demands are the bare democratic minimum — a free press, freedom of speech and assembly, and an end to the 31-year old monopoly of the Vietnamese Communist Party. Until recently his was a lonely and isolated voice.

Dr Que insists that it is the harshness of the repression that has silenced the majority — but the internet is fast changing that.

“You have to face brutal measures when you stand up to these authorities,” he says, “but this year the democratic movement has been progressing a lot compared with the past two or three decades. That momentum will continue.”



One in six of the 84 million Vietnamese people is estimated to be an internet user, compared with one in nine a year ago. Most do not have home computers but use the 5,000 cyber-cafés for a few pence an hour.

Dissidents also make use of online voice services such as Skype to speak in person to one another in a medium less susceptible to tapping than fixed or mobile telephone lines.

Even the Venerable Thich Quang Do, the 77-year old Buddhist monk who is perhaps the most eminent and revered dissident in Vietnam, is installing an internet connection in the temple where he has spent eight years under “pagoda arrest”.

The authorities are now blocking access to dissident websites and recruiting the proprietors of cyber-cafés to spy on their customers.

Some dissidents suspect that anonymous contributors to chat rooms may include agents provocateurs hoping to flush out and identify dissidents. “The communists are like a person afraid of the wind blowing outside,” says the Venerable Do. “They won’t open the door because they fear they will catch a cold.”

This post has been edited by LaniKai: Dec 4 2006, 05:14 PM