PANO – The “democratic circle” have been excited by Le Hieu Dang’s article, titled “Thoughts during days on the sick-bed”. Why are they so excited?
An article to settle
This is a long article, like a combination hot pot, which is a mix of his personal feelings, life chores and poem extracts.
However, the main idea of Le Hieu Dang’s article is to settle his own life bill by calling members of the Communist Party of Vietnam to abandon it and found a new one, such as the Social Democratic Party, to counter the CPV.
This makes “democrats” happy because that “appeal” seems to be easy to lure and incite to cause social chaos to gain power to control the society. And this has happened in many countries recently, causing bloodshed in the former countries in Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria and Egypt.
For the “democrats”, it means nothing! The blood is others’ and the corpses are others’! They just want to gain their selfish goals!
In Le Hieu Dang’s article, there are no new ideas. Old stories about one parties or a multi-party system that can bring about democracy; national independence and behaviour with major countries; freedom… Those concepts and issues have been analysed and commented by analysts, scholars and commentators many times.
However, in his article, Le Hieu Dang still wanted to impose his backward evaluation that every ordinary person can easily realize.
For instance, he said that Vietnamese State President Truong Tan Sang’s visit to the US lacked the highest ceremony for a state leader. His statement echoed some hostile websites arguing that President Sang’s visit to the US showed that the US did not respect the Vietnamese leader because there was no 21-gun solute.
In fact, this argument shows the desperation of the “democrats” at the frank talks between the US and Vietnamese leaders in the White House, when the two countries agreed to establish a comprehensive partnership. Not knowing where to avenge their rage, they have to talk about the 21-gun salute to lower the importance of the visit while it is known that every country has its own diplomatic way to welcome the guests. It is hilarious to compare a ceremony to a royal member with an official visit of a country’s leader to try to argue that the Vietnamese leader’s visit was not respected.
Le Hieu Dang also made unilateral statements to try to label an issue such as for those who cross the border illegally, he blamed that many people had to die because of the crime of the CPV. Or, in another case, he said that talented Vietnamese artists under French colonialism could not compose any good works under socialism. He went on to say that the socialism in the North of Vietnam did not have a human sign. In that time, he was working in a students’ movement in the South of the country and did not have a chance to live and work in the North, so that it was hard for him to understand the reality in the North at that time. Therefore, how can he make that statement? How can the artists, as he mentioned in his article, compose their famous works as he admitted in his article? Many of these artists are his friends, too.
A question on press ethics
There are many other wrong points in Le Hieu Dang’s articles. For example, he argued that Vietnamese leaders’ behaviours are gentle when he himself referred to the battles of Chi Lang and Bach Dang in which our predecessors were very flexible and intelligent to gain land-slide victories against the invaders. Surely, Mr. Dang understands this, but for the purpose of his article he had to speak in the “democrats’ way” to fight against the enemy on the keyboard.
However, those groundless arguments were eagerly reported by some Western media agencies.
The BBC Vietnamese, on August 16th, reported about Mr. Dang’s article and stated that some activists in Vietnam are calling for establishing a new party to promote democracy and civil society development.
This is not new. Just click on the website, for example on August 22nd, one can see various articles on boycotting the government and reporting about activities against the State. Apart from publishing Mr. Dang’s article, the website also reported about some people who protest Decree 72, “advising” for quick privatization. It seems that without mentioning negative issues, the website has nothing else to serve.
The BBC was not alone. The RFI also voiced its echo by interviewing Le Hieu Dang on August 12th with ill-will and a prejudiced view on Vietnam. In all, they want to set up a chorus to frame an illusion that the world pays much attention to a new figure that fights for “democracy” in Vietnam.
Le Hieu Dang wrote his article, as he said, on his sick-bed. The above media agencies, with their malicious intent and stigma on Vietnam, must be sick too. Their illnesses are to hope that Vietnam will be disordered and the Vietnamese fight against each other so that “democratic beggars” will take use of the situation for their own interests.
Yes, we cannot ask these websites and radios to report good things about Vietnamese society. However, at least they should have an objective look and should not forget their press ethics.
Written by Pham Trung
Translated by Ngoc Hung