http://www.vietnamreview.com/english/modul...cle&sid=547

Why Vietnam Must Remember February 17

[18/02/2009 - Author: admin1 - Vietnam Review]

Danger lies in forgetting a cruel war

By Pham Hông Son Feb 15, 2009

HANOI—February 17 marks the 30th anniversary day of the outbreak of the Sino-Vietnamese War. It was short—just about a month—but so bloody and cruel that tens of thousands of people lost their lives. Many Vietnamese women were raped, many women and children were killed by being hacked to death with axes or forest knives, and nearly all the civilian infrastructure in six border provinces of Vietnam was completely destroyed.

As I write this, only a few days remain before this 30th anniversary of this war, but no articles in Vietnam’s official media recall this event. In several recent years, official media in Vietnam have maintained a timid behavior towards such China-related issues as the secret border agreement in 1999, and islands or landmarks shared or occupied by China.

Many activists and bloggers who tried to speak out about China’s evil have been imprisoned or intimidated. It is clear that the incumbent leaders of Vietnam do not want to commemorate such an event as this war; they are keeping silent and attempting to silence others in the face of China’s hegemony.

The Dangers of Silence

Three dangers result from that silence.

First, a danger occurs inside Vietnam. An essential factor that made up the legitimacy for Communist Party of Vietnam’s sole leadership in the last five decades has been its efforts to defend national sovereignty.

Whatever the different opinions may be about the two major struggles in the twentieth century in Vietnam, one with the French and the other with the American-backed regime, the Communist Party of Vietnam (CPV) took the lead and became the winner.

In the long history of Vietnam, the nation’s pride lay in never bending before the attacker or invader, especially before the traditional Northern invader. A few Vietnamese leaders in history who went to the Northern neighbor for help against popular uprisings have been condemned severely.

Moreover, the CPV’s strategy in struggling for power was always to find every opportunity to accuse opponents of co-operating with a foreign enemy. But, ironically, now it is the CPV who has allowed many of Vietnam’s lands, seas, and islands to be lost into China’s hand over the last five decades.

The CPV must have observed that a simmering indignation exists among people who are aware of these concessions. A veteran soldier who fought in the Sino-Vietnamese war in 1979 recently wrote in the private blog Osin: “What we call a ‘victory’ had to be paid for with blood and human heads. … And 30 years have passed since we advanced furiously straight to the northern border, but islands are still lost and the country is still silent.”

The CPV is now trying every effort to hide their concessions to the Northern invader. The CPV may succeed in silencing people to some extent, but over time, with the support of a sophisticated Internet, the truth will come to every person. And the current silence will become as dangerous as a tight lid on a hot steaming pot.

Ambitions of the Chinese Regime

The second danger is to encourage the Chinese regime’s imperial ambitions. China is vast in geography and great in culture and history. In the far past China was for centuries a superpower. So an ambition to bring back the past image of a superpower for a contemporary China is understandable and natural.

But the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which has held sole rule over China since 1949, took several wrong and disastrous ways to achieve this ambition. In the Mao era from 1949-1976, China conducted a series of such paranoid policies as the “Anti-rightist campaign”(1957), the “Great Leap Forward” (1958-1960), and the “Cultural Revolution” (1966-1969). These campaigns only brought the death of tens of millions of people and a huge devastation of China’s ancient culture and natural environment.

Deng Xiaoping became Mao’s successor in 1978 and opened up China’s economy and sought modern technology. However, China contains within itself the seeds of an insidious disaster, such as Japan in the Meiji era or Germany in the post-WWI period encountered. Germany and Japan, which developed powerful economies by applying scientific knowledge and know-how, were both led by authoritarian politics into a catastrophic attempt at hegemony–World War II.

So the silent or compliant behavior of the CPV before China’s hegemony southward has the effect of urging the CCP to venture further on a wrong and disastrous path.

Destabilizing

The third danger is to destabilize the regional and world peace. In the long history of earlier times, war was not a rare phenomenon for the two countries Vietnam and its Northern neighbor. Nearly every dynasty in China carried out at least one invasion into its southern neighbor Vietnam.

But Vietnam’s leaders, together with their people, were always determined to defend its sovereignty and its honor, though the leaders had to conduct a skillful diplomacy toward their giant neighbor after any victories. So for several centuries, the Vietnamese people’s resistant spirit made an indomitable shield for South-East Asia nations against Northern invasion. But now Vietnam’s contemporary leaders, the CPV, have failed to follow their ancestors’ wisdom and the shield Vietnam historically provided for regional and even world peace is being broken up.

A Way Out

In a time of economic crisis, people may neglect to care about anything other than making money. Thus, a brief war like the Sino-Vietnamese war that broke out 30 years ago may no longer draw much attention. However, the attacker’s desire for hegemony remains fierce and appears stronger.

More importantly, the attacker behaves aggressively not just toward the outsider but toward the insider, as democracy activists inside China face suppression. Just as many Chinese are today calling for democracy, so are many Vietnamese. Democracy has proven to be the best solution to settle any dispute or trouble without violence and is the best mechanism to build social harmony and national prosperity in a durable peace.

One small step toward bringing democracy to Vietnam and to China is to speak out about the meaning of February 17.

Dr. Pham Hông Son in early 2002 translated into Vietnamese the article "What is Democracy?" that was posted on a website of the U.S. embassy in Vietnam. Sentenced to 13 years in prison, he spent 4.5 years in prison and has been under house arrest in Hanoi since his release in August 2006. Author of many on-line essays focusing on political and social subjects of national interest, in 2003 and 2008 he was one of the winners of Human Rights Watch Hellmann/Hammet grants, awarded to writers suffering political persecution.

good post thanks.

Relative to the US aggression, the Sino-Viet 1979 was nothing.

Million died in the US aggression versus 5-digit deaths in the Sino-Viet 1979.

A lot sources usually are exaggerated the range from civilian killed is between 400k - 700 k most of them killed by bombs or mistaken for "VC" the total killed vietnamese killed betweek civilian and military 1961-75 is from beeteween 1,200k - 2, 000 k + 40k more killed by unexploded bombs



we need a few year more between 5-10 for have a official Vietnam balance as now we have only U.S sources.

-----

China Vietnam (1979) only lasted one mount but was different there was a full scale invasion independent state who try to invaded another independent state. Vietnam claim only win the war and Soviet Union official newspaper Pravda write a few days before 62.500 Chinese were killed , in fact some Soviet did part in the military operation in China Vietnam North front and Kampuchea Vietnam in the South East front.

The article in Vietnamese wikipedia is very good
http://vi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiến_t...9;t-Trung,_1979

And this is relevant because? Trying to distort the focus of this thread?

Vietnamese were killed in both wars. The difference is that they boast about the US war, but are strangely silent about the other. "Strangely".

None for both actually, or any others. You should pay a visit to the country to find out for yourself.
If your conclusion is based on from this board, then it is unfortunate.

The American only do bombs against North Vietnam never ground invasion and the South Vietnamese Government was pro US ot just a puppet government.

The Chinese do a massive ground attempt for invade the country but their main objective was stooped the Kampuchea invasion with China puppet government and radical anti Vietnamese leader Pol Pot. they fail in both objectives but causes seriously Economic / Civilian major damage in Vietnam border places.

In 1984 the Chinese do another offensive no like in 1979 but important they were stopped in the border mountain but here they do better than 1979 (major defeat)

China does not have control of ha long bay and the control of spratly islands and the parcel islands is still up for grabs. The 1979 war and the 1984 war was to grab control of the spratly island and the parcel island.

But why Vietnam want to invade Cambodia?

The official reason for the Cambodia invasion were the Ba Chuc Massacre in An Giang province there a group of Khmer Rouge soldiers killed more than 3k Vietnamese civilian, the Cambodian genocide under Chinese support was another reason in fact the China military Support make Pol really aggressive but for me the Basically Was Push Out the Chinese influence in SE Asia so the plan for China was supply the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia for open battles, but they were defeated in just a few week.



*The Paracel Island were to taken to South Vietnam in 1974 so south Vietnam were in this moment in war against the North and the FLN, this time without US aid so the chinese attack it in the best moment.

*1984 was a imitated Chinese ground offensive they take a few mountain in the border nothing more and just for few days only this time they used better new better equipment.

*The Chinese taken five Vietnamese reef in Sprantly Island it happened in 1988 check here http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=225214 but for now Vietnam controlled the major part of the Waters and reef.

What does that mean? That they're trying to bury both wars to promote diplomatic relationships? I have visited the country. Jumping to conclusions seems to be a disease around here.

Nobody seems to talk about them [wars], let alone boasting about them. At the cultural level, the Vietnamese do not advocate hatred. That would be the worst thing one can do to his progeny. But the key characteristic of the Vietnamese people is the innate ability to forgive. If you study the Vietnamese language, you will understand why I said that.
At the diplomatic level, you are correct.

I disagree. If the cultural level is how everyday citizens think about it, then they (many) do boast about defeating the americans. And the french. They don't go around saying 'we defeated the americans' parading on the streets. But, whenever there is criticism, and they somehow think that their 'greatness' is under attack, you bet they'll play the old we-defeated-USA-therefore-we-are-win-card. On the diplomatic level, meaning how their government officials go about it, they generally keep a low profile on those issues so they can smooth relationships with USA, China and other countries. None of this has to do with advocating hate.

Whether or not it would be the worst thing to promote hate does not say whether or not hate is being promoted.
I disagree that the key character of vietnamese people is to forgive.
Studying the language will show me nothing, and I'm honestly not interested. It is not the language that shows how forgiving a people are, it's the literature, and even then, people's actions say more than what the literature says about them. If you want to say that the people are forgiving then show how their actions support your view. You confuse outer appearance with substance.
Lastly, if you have something to say then out with it. If you have studied the language and come to some revelation about the character of vietnamese people, then support it with evidence. Support it with what you think you have found right here. No one is going to study something just because of your general handwaving and superior attitude. Whether or not I will come to the same conclusions is also not a given. Seeing how much I disagree with you so far, I doubt it.

You're saying I'm correct if it's about the diplomatic level. So when being diplomatic the vietnamese remind people about the wars that they 'won'? Sounds very unforgiving if you ask me.

If you go around and [verbally] attack people, do expect retaliation, hello,,, common sense. It should apply to anyone, no matter how tolerant he is. That's not boasting, that's retaliation. This goes back to the old adage, speak kind words so that you may hear kind echoes. You should know better. But I forgive you for overlooking those subtleties ;-)

People are not attacked, they feel that they are attacked. And I did none of the 'attacking'. This is my impression as a bystander. It's not a valid retaliation if it has nothing to do with the issue.

Critique 1: Freedom of speech is quite restricted in Vietnam. In western countries you have more freedom.
Answer: We beat the americans. We are strong.
Critique 2: Pollution is a big problem in Vietnam.
Answer: We beat the americans. We are awesome.
Critique 3: Income per citizen is still very low in Vietnam, and the education system is lacking.
Answer: We beat the americans. Who can say that?

To many vietnamese, winning that war is still somehow viewed as a success that they can draw strength from today. Living in past glory.

--------------------------
Back to the topic:
It's a shame the Chinese aggression seems to be so easily forgotten or forgiven. It is perhaps not stupid, but it looks spineless. I don't want a war between China and Vietnam. But I also don't think that turning the other cheek is the best strategy. I can understand the OP's frustration.

So how long does it take for you to pull 3 fictional scenarios off the top of your head?
You're beginning to sound very pathetic and desperate.

Here take your own advice

Based on what do you claim that they are fictional? Second time now.