Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
[client name deleted]
Question: Have you heard of a ban on Facebook in Vietnam. Indeed, it's just one of
many sites that the government apparently asked Internet providers to shut down in
an August 8 decree issued by the Ministry of Public Security. When people couldn't
get on Facebook last week, rumors of a ban were flying but many were still able to
access the sites. Today, it appears there was a near total ban, and FPT confirmed it
was blocking the sites because of a government order.
Answer: I have tried to contact friends in Vietnam on Facebook but no replies came
back. I also contacted a human rights activist in the US and he came back with, "one
of my FB [Face Book] friends in Vietnam four hours ago that in fact it is blocked now
and he is using a proxy server." But otherwise I have not picked up anything from
other Vietnamese sources.
[second client name deleted]
Question: There are reports that Facebook and some other sites are being blocked.
Have you been following this? Does it represent an escalation, a new effort to
control the Internet or create a "Great Firewall" like China's? Why haven't they done
this before?
Answer: I have tried to contact friends in Vietnam on Facebook but no replies came
back. I also contacted a human rights activist in the US and he came back with, "one
of my FB [Face Book] friends in Vietnam four hours ago that in fact it is blocked now
and he is using a proxy server." But otherwise I have not picked up anything from
other Vietnamese sources.
Vietnam has set up firewalls but they keep getting breached. I don't think Google
was so forthcoming (by rumour). I have long argued that ministerial changes after
the tenth party congress elevated a conservative from Nghe An province to the
ministry with oversight of the internet.
The new Ministry of Information and Communications was formed by the
merger of the Ministry of Posts, Tele‐communications and Technology with
the Press Administration Agency of the former Ministry of Culture and
Information. Responsibility for this new ministry has been given to Le Doan
2
Hop, the former minister. The breakup of the Ministry of Culture and
Information is an important development because of its unsavory reputation
as the watchdog for regime censorship. The most recent fifth party Central
Committee plenum focused on improving party control over the media.
Censorship will not go away, it will just become more sophisticated (written
commentary for the BBC August 1, 2007).
Then To Huy Rua's promotion to full membership on the Politburo gave further
impetus to more sophisticated controls. The regime is unnerved by the anti‐bauxite
and anti‐China that have emerged. No doubt the Ministry of Public Security and the
military's General Directorate II are happy to lend their expertise.
Facebook was used to propel the anti‐bauxite network. So if Vietnamese authorities
have shut it down, even temporarily, it represents another tightening of the screw
on internet sources.
Thayer Consultancy Background Briefing:
ABN # 65 648 097 123
Vietnam: Crackdown on
Facebook
Carlyle A. Thayer
November 20, 2009
[client name deleted]
First, the most obvious question. Why has the government blocked Facebook?
Sources who work in communications and social media report that as a tool to
organise politically Facebook is somewhat lacking in comparison with say, Twitter.
It’s mostly an innocuous time wasting site. Why block it?
Do you think it is entirely politically motivated, or could they be making space for a
local provider?
Google is coming later in the month. Do you think any people within the government
are concerned to how this looks to a multinational whose business ethos is Don’t be
Evil?
Many news reports see this in the context of a wider crack down, and connect it to
the arrests of bloggers earlier this year. Others, and I’m not implying here the two
are mutually exclusive, think the government is trying to get things in order well
ahead of 2011, or even Hanoi’s 1000‐year‐anniversary next year.
Vietnam seems to be following China’s model. But unlike China they are not the
world’s factory and they are not an economic powerhouse. As a result are other
nations less likely to look the other way when it comes to a crackdown on freedom
of speech?
Do you think this may have the opposite effect? Apolitical young Vietnamese only
interested in posting silly photos of their friends may, through sheer annoyance,
become politically motivated?
Those who want to use Facebook are still doing so, via proxies. Those who want to
use it for political reasons are doing that. Given that, it seems a weak clamp down.
Or are they afraid the innocent will become ‘infected’?
Could this ultimately just be a hurdle? Vietnam’s internet use has expanded so fast,
and as a result the politically active have started organising online, that this is just
one way the government is putting on the breaks for now?
ANSWER: The crackdown against Facebook is part of a larger government drive, led
by the public security forces, to control all forms of electronic communication and
expression in Vietnam. Earlier this year a group of around 70 anti‐bauxite activists
used Facebook to network and spread their message. At the same time pro‐
2
democracy activists were using blogs on the Internet to raise their concerns over not
only human rights, but bauxite mining, relations with China and the economy.
Additionally, individual bloggers who were not part of this network began to raise
similar issues, some more historically orientated such as human rights in the Soviet
Union and the 1954 decision to partition Vietnam. From the public security point of
view, also shared by party ideologues, these developments signaled a clear loss of
control.
My information is that the blocking of Facebook is not working very well and
depends on the provider. Those more knowledgeable are using proxies. No doubt
security officials will get more proficient and service providers will assist in order to
suffer penalty. The aim is to round up and punish a few leading examples, intimidate
the larger number of curious and reduce the numbers of persons willing to join sites
that have a political content. The authorities argue that Facebook is only for personal
matters.
In many respects Vietnam follows China’s lead. China propounded the theory of the
threat of peaceful evolution (hostile overseas forces would act in collusion with
internal dissidents to overthrow socialist states using human rights and religious
freedom issues). A careful reading of the deliberations of the party Central
Committee’s ninth plenum in January reveals a renewed concern over peaceful
evolution. To Huy Rua, who heads the party’s Information and Training Commission,
was promoted to full membership on the Politburo. Shortly after he raised the
spectre of the threat of peaceful evolution. I believe his elevation has given impetus
to the subsequent crackdown on political dissent and greater efforts to control the
internet and other forms of electronic communication. The specialized role of the
military’s General Directorate 2 (intelligence) reportedly has been prominent.
Vietnam may not be as large a market as China, but its growth rates put it among the
top performers in the region even factoring in the impact of the global financial
crisis. Vietnam is increasingly seen senior foreign policy, defence and security
officials as an emerging strategic player in the region. Vietnam has been able to
repress dissent at home and get increased commitments of development assistance
from the international donor community at the same time. While the U.S.
International Commission on Religious Freedom recommends that Vietnam be put
back on the list of Countries of Particular Concern, the State Department argues
otherwise. Is sum, I do not think Vietnam is going to be deterred in cracking down on
Facebook.
My assessment is that the current crackdown, which has been accompanied by an
orchestrated media campaign, public show trials, and less publicized public
denunciation sessions directed against individual activists, will cow young people
and not provoke them quixotically to challenge the state. The number of political
dissenters is quite small, perhaps 30 are in jail and a slightly smaller number in
detention.
It is my assessment that party conservatives are clearing the brush in advance of the
11th national party congress scheduled for January 2011. Preparations for this
congress were begun in mid‐year at the tenth plenum of the Central Committee.
Next year key policy documents will be circulated to focus groups and then made
3
public for comment. In the past political dissidents and others have used this process
to criticize the party and its policies. In 2009 the conservatives have launched a pre‐
emptive strike. They are aiming not just at “the usual suspects” but progressive
reformers in the party itself. The conservatives want to put a chill on calls for
political reform. In the past progressives have argued for abandoning terms such as
“dictatorship of the proletariat” from the party vocabulary and even dropping
“communist” from the party’s name. At the last national congress in 2006, delegates
demanded a choice of candidates for party secretary general and the right to vote.
Three candidates were produced and delegates were permitted a straw poll. The
next congress will feature a revision of the 1991 Party Platform which set out the
“transition to socialism”. This will be hotly debated.
I have likened the crackdown on the internet bloggers this year to Star Wars storm
troopers entering cyberspace. They may have occasional victories but they cannot
conquer the entire electronic universe.