16/09/2023 strategic-culture.su  7min 🇬🇧 #233889

Vietnam Faces Another Nato Proxy War, This Time Against China

Declan Hayes

Vietnam and countries contiguous to it need a further American-inspired war like they need a hole in the head.

The  recent White Paper of the Vietnam People's Army, founded in December 1944 by the legendary General Võ Nguyên Giáp, shows that their Long March is not yet ended. Whilst acknowledging the help given to them in the Second and Third Indo China Wars by the Soviet Red Army, yesterday's friends are, of course, often forgotten if circumstances dictate otherwise.

Today's circumstances are that Chinese economic and diplomatic advances through Laos and Cambodia present a threat, real or imagined, to Vietnam and Chinese adventurism in the East (South China) Sea is a direct threat not only to Vietnam but a challenge to her very existence and it is one that Vietnam's White Paper directly addresses.

Australia's armed forces are among a number of potentially hostile forces that have  picked up on Vietnam's uncharacteristic forthrightness regarding this challenge and that stand ready to exploit it as part of America's  places not bases strategy to throttle China.

The problem with that is, should NATO undermine China, Vietnam would also fall, just like the supposed dominoes of those earlier Indo Chinese wars. The Chinese Army, attacking from the North and the Chinese Navy setting Vietnam's East (South China) Sea ablaze would, together with vast economic collateral damage, see to that.

To counter these multiple NATO threats, Vietnam must maintain its  "four nos" policy of no military alliances, no siding with one country against another, no foreign military bases or using Vietnamese territory to oppose other countries, and no using force or threatening to use force in international relations.

Although that is an eminently praiseworthy and practical policy, it does not accord with the imperialist ambitions of the U.S. and its antipodean flunkeys, who feel they can use their economic muscle to nudge Vietnam to acquiesce in their plans of Chinese conquest. Their leverage is that, though Vietnam needs to hitch her wagon to China's economic growth, she cannot ignore the biscuits China's enemies throw her way either.

 Nato's think tanks have not only  taken note of that potential  Vietnamese Achilles heel but they have  consistently plotted how  they can exploit it, most notably  in the military sphere where the Soviet Union, and now Russia, has traditionally been its primary supplier of military hardware. Although Vietnam has been  quite right to diversify its arms' procurements in recent years, that diversification carries some major caveats with it. First off, as Russia's systems have outclassed NATO's in Ukraine, they seem to be the best and, certainly in Vietnam's case, most reliable there is.

Although the Israelis, who have  made significant inroads into  the Vietnamese market, might argue otherwise, that of itself is not Vietnam's major concern, which is America's presumed right to determine from whom Vietnam may procure her arms. American pressure to sabotage arms deals between Russia and Vietnam is totally unacceptable, as is any role Israeli agents in Vietnam might play in that.

Even as the White House was proclaiming that Creepy Joe Biden's Hanoi visit was a chance to "increase peace, prosperity, and stability in the region," the  extremist New York Times newspaper was bitching that sovereign Vietnam was still procuring arms from sovereign Russia, its traditional source, and was not sufficiently squaring up to the Chinese People's Liberation Army.

Although that same purveyor of CIA mis-information claims that "Vietnam's pursuit of a Russian arms deal undercuts its outreach to the United States", that outreach was a two-way street as the U.S. needs Vietnam as a military, maritime, diplomatic and economic counter to China.

Leaving aside that trade deals between Vietnam and Russia are not the business of either America or of the NYT's resident CIA propagandists, that pitiful rag is trying to implicate  Rusvietpetro, a Russian-Vietnamese joint venture, which has significant oil and natural gas operations in northern Russia into their smear. As regards Rusvietpetro, if the Vietnamese are able to elbow the Chinese out of the way to get a piece of the Russian oil pie, good on them.

And if Vietnam has refused to condemn Russia's special military operation, good again on them and good on Russian Defence Minister Sergei K. Shoigu for singling out Vietnam as an ideal buyer of the latest in Russian arms.

And eternal shame on the New York Times for perpetuating the American racism that led to the murder of over two million Vietnamese, Cambodians and Laotians during the Third Indochina War. What is all their racism about "Vietnam [being] rewarded as a useful hedge against China [and] "the upgrading of U.S.-Vietnamese strategic ties [making] it easier for U.S. allies like South Korea to sell advanced weaponry to Vietnam"?

Are the Vietnamese some type of Pavlovian attack dogs, to be rewarded with a Yankee biscuit if they do their bidding and buy weapons to kill the Chinese from Korea, which had a  fearsome reputation as primary collaborators in America's Vietnamese genocide? The racist New York Times and the gaggle of Russophobic collaborators and NATO apologists they cite certainly think so but then what would you expect from a Pentagon pig only a Pentagon grunt?

Although the Vietnam People's Army has performed without parallel since their foundation during the first Indo-China war, their job is not yet done. And nor is that of Vietnam's diplomats and economic planners, who face challenges no less daunting than those their illustrious forefathers faced.

Should a fourth Indo-China war be forced upon them, Vietnam will undoubtedly acquit herself as well as her forefathers did in those previous encounters. However, Vietnam and countries contiguous to it need a further American-inspired war like they need a hole in the head.

The way to forestall the Americans launching another such disastrous genocide on Vietnam and environs is for Vietnam to use its  proposed BRIICS membership as a forum to break bread with  China and all other proposed BRIICS members with an actual dog in this NATO inspired fight.

 Despite NATO's uninformed criticisms, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov's good offices would be the best vehicle to navigate such negotiations not least because of the friendly relations Russia enjoys with both China and Vietnam, as well as with too many other relevant players to adumbrate here. And, as China has proved herself to be a key peace broker in the Middle East as much as in her own Middle Kingdom, there is significant opportunity within BRIICS' frameworks to make progress, once Russia gets China, Vietnam and all other concerned parties to act like adults, rather than like NATO's lapdogs. Should Russia enable Vietnam and China to establish such a land, air and sea peace, then the greatest credit and, hopefully, the greatest dividends will go to the people of Vietnam, who will prove themselves worthy of the august destiny earlier generations of Vietnamese sacrificed so much against the Americans, Australians and South Koreans to bring that day into being.