Engaging Vietnam and Laos on Religious Freedom

Vietnam and Laos, as the two remaining Communist nations in Southeast Asia, will always occupy a special place in the hearts and minds of Americans due to the complicated legacy of the Vietnam War. In recent years, great strides have been made in the bilateral relationships between the U.S. and these two countries. Much of that springs from the desire on the part of many Americans to reconcile with former foes and close a painful chapter in history.

In addition, there is a significant geopolitical factor at play. Vietnam and Laos have grown increasingly wary of China’s rising economic and military power. As a result, they have both sought to hedge against Chinese influence by building relations with other regional powers. In Vietnam’s case, it is the U.S. For Laos, it is Vietnam and, to a lesser extent, the U.S.

This trend also coincides with ASEAN taking on a more important role in U.S. foreign policy, particularly with the Obama administration’s “Rebalance to Asia.” This was demonstrated by the November 2015 ASEAN-U.S. Summit where the relationship was elevated to the level of a “strategic partnership.” In addition, in February 2016 President Obama hosted a meeting of all ASEAN heads of state in the U.S., the first ever standalone meeting between top leaders of the U.S. and ASEAN.

However, the status of human rights in Vietnam and Laos has long presented challenges to further deepening ties between the U.S. and the two nations. On the issue of religious freedom in particular, significant differences remain over the role of religion in the public square. Due to their Communist heritage, Vietnam and Laos have traditionally viewed religion as a phenomenon that is inimical to social development and the Party’s rule. Thus, “religious freedom” is largely seen as a political issue rather than a “human rights” one. As a result, the Vietnamese and Lao governments have strongly restricted the ability of citizens to engage in religious practice. This has often led to harsh persecution of religious believers as well as ethnic minorities, who often strongly identify with a particular faith.

However, during the past decade, Vietnam and Laos have slowly shifted away from this approach. Much of this is due to the sustained and constructive engagement of both the U.S. government and NGOs on this issue. There is also growing recognition amongst officials in Vietnam and Laos of the positive contributions that religious communities make to societal flourishing, particularly through charitable endeavors and inculcating ethical norms through religious education. As a result, both countries have shown interest in learning more about positive models of governance of religion from around the world.

This presents a strategic window of opportunity for the next U.S. president to advance both religious freedom and bilateral relations with Vietnam and Laos.

Vietnam

Vietnam’s Communist Party has had a spotted history with religion. Like other Communist countries, the Marxist view that the ruling class in the society will use religion as a tool to exploit and control the working class is still widespread among Party officials. Although Vietnamese lawmakers have moved away from Marxist economics, they still hold a Marxist view of religion. Therefore, Vietnam’s religion policy has mainly been based on the perception of religion as a threat to social and political stability.

As a result, Vietnam’s religion policy calls for closely monitoring religious groups and strictly limiting religious practice in order to curb its influence in the public square. There are often reports of religious leaders in rural areas being arrested, beaten, and banned from performing their religious duties. Negative stereotypes, misunderstandings, and lack of respect and trust between government authorities and religious leaders have existed for decades. This tension has boiled over into violent conflicts, particularly in the Central Highlands in 2002 and 2004. The causes of these conflicts were multi-layered and involved ethnic and religious minority, security, and public policy issues.

The violence, coupled with the desire for Vietnam to join the World Trade Organization, caused the Vietnamese government to issue a new set of policies. From 2004 to 2005, the Vietnamese government seemed to signal an evolution toward a new approach toward religion when it issued the “Ordinance on Beliefs and Religion” and Decree 22/2005/ND-CP. In the past decade, Vietnam’s Governmental Committee on Religious Affairs (CRA) has conducted hundreds of seminars throughout the country to push for implementation of these policies. At some level, these efforts eased religious tension in certain areas. The CRA also continues to work with European and American organizations to conduct seminars on religious freedom issues (Governmental Committee on Religious Affairs 2014). Nevertheless, many religious leaders still encounter bureaucratic resistance and negative attitudes from local authorities when seeking to obtain official registration. Those who advocate for social justice, religious freedom, or human rights face imprisonment, beatings, and house arrests. Most of the outspoken advocates for religious freedom and human rights belong to one of the five largest religious groups in the country: Buddhists, Catholics, Protestants, Cao Dai, and Hoa Hao Buddhists.

Today, there are contradictory reports on religious freedom from Vietnam. The degree of freedom in which religious groups operate is greatly influenced by relationships between religious leaders and local authorities. While some religious groups enjoy more freedom to practice their faith, others still struggle. Some religious groups have been able to gain a stronger voice, engage in charitable work, and participate in public life. For example, some religious groups were recently consulted by the government on the topic of environmental protection. Religion’s contributions to society have also been recognized and encouraged, although this has been seen more in large cities and with registered groups as opposed to rural areas and unregistered groups.

Draft Law on Religion

In 2015, the CRA presented a draft law on religion. Policy-makers collected feedback and recommendations for the draft from domestic religious groups and academic institutions as well as foreign legal experts and scholars. The law drafting process was more open than previous instances in which the government presented draft ordinances and decrees on religion in 2004, 2005, and 2012. According to CRA’s Legislation Department,

the proposed new law on belief and religion aims to better protect the right to freedom of belief and religion for the people and stipulate responsibilities of State and competent authorities to ensure the right to religious freedom. The draft law on belief and religion has been drafted in line with the 2013 Constitution’s spirit on freedom of religion and belief and is compatible with international agreements and treaties to which Vietnam is a member. (Governmental Committee on Religious Affairs 2016)

However, many observers argue that the draft law does not provide adequate guarantees for religious freedom in Vietnam. Their concerns include limits placed on the legal rights of religious groups, bureaucratic obstacles that stymie religious registration, government interference of religious practice and the operations of religious groups, and the government’s lack of compliance with international human rights standards (Democratic Voice of Vietnam 2015).

Vietnam’s policy-makers and advisors are predominantly Communist Party members. As a result, there is very little understanding or knowledge of fundamental concepts related to religion and the rule of law among Party elites. This absence of research and scholarship is reflected in the religion law drafting process thus far. It has only been during the past 10 years in which Vietnam has gained greater access to international standards and embarked on efforts to build a foundation of scholarship on religion and the rule of law.

As the draft law is revised, there are several key questions facing Vietnam. Which model will it follow: the emerging international model of religious freedom, or the Marxist one which sees religion as a threat to the state? Do lawmakers have access to lawmaking principles, religious freedom norms, and knowledge on religion and rule of law in order to draft a law that would treat people of faith fairly? Are there channels available to state officials and religious groups to communicate openly and build trust? What legal channels are available if religion-based conflicts cannot be solved by dialogue? The answers to these questions will determine Vietnam’s long-term success in developing a legal structure and societal norms that will enable people of faith to participate and contribute to societal flourishing as equal citizens.

Engaging Vietnam on Religious Freedom

“Religious freedom,” “human rights,” and “democracy” have been taboo topics in Vietnam. However, during the past decade, the Vietnamese government has started to provide trainings on religion and rule of law, religious freedom, and human rights for academic scholars, government officials working on religious affairs, and public security officials. The government has also partnered with international NGOs and foreign governments to convene seminars on the positive role of religion in society (Institute for Global Engagement 2015).

The U.S. has been the most active country in engaging Vietnam on religious freedom. The State Department’s International Religious Freedom office and the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) issue regular reports on Vietnam. The U.S. embassy and consulate in Vietnam have also made religious freedom and human rights a regular part of their work (U.S. Department of State 2014a; U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom 2015a). When Presidents Obama and Sang announced in 2013 that the U.S. and Vietnam would enter into a Strategic Partnership, issues such as human rights, freedom of assembly, and freedom of expression were included in their meetings. The U.S. Congress has also held numerous hearings featuring Vietnamese-American religious freedom advocates.

While some Vietnamese government officials criticize the U.S. government for “interfering in Vietnam’s internal affairs,” there are actually others who think that the U.S. government needs to engage with greater intentionality the Vietnamese government on these issues. Accordingly, below are recommendations for the next U.S. presidential administration in engaging Vietnam.

First, the U.S. government should continue to ensure that religious freedom and human rights are placed on the agenda in all dialogues with the Vietnamese, particularly those involving economic and military issues. The U.S. government should express concerns through diplomatic channels whenever there are verified incidents of religious harassment, human rights violations, and arrests of people who advocate for religious freedom and human rights progress in Vietnam. The U.S. should also remind Vietnam of human rights standards embedded in international bodies in which Vietnam is already a member such as the United Nations Human Rights Council and the World Trade Organization.

Second, the U.S. government should ensure that American companies doing business with Vietnam operate in such a way that would improve rather than harm rule of law, religious freedom, and human rights. This effort will be a strategic investment toward building a more competitive, fair, and rules-based business environment that will benefit citizens of both Vietnam and the U.S. With the Trans-Pacific Partnership coming into force, this will take on even greater significance.

Third, the U.S. Agency for International Development’s efforts in Vietnam should seek to encourage or strengthen the role of local religious groups, many of whom are marginalized by the local government. Community development projects should also ensure that voices from affected religious and ethnic minority communities are included in every project phase. Not only will this improve the chances for successful outcomes, but it also has the added benefit of building the capacity of marginalized communities and strengthening civil society.

Fourth, the U.S. government should provide training for Vietnamese legal professionals and judicial officials. In Vietnam, judges and prosecutors are not independent as the positions are all filled by Communist Party members. As a result, the legal system is incentivized to maximize benefits to the Party rather than society as a whole. Offering opportunities to receive exposure to the American legal system and receive training in the U.S. will provide a helpful comparative lens for Vietnamese to evaluate and reform their own legal system.

Finally, the U.S. government should support NGOs which are effectively working with both the Vietnamese government and religious communities to promote religious freedom. There is a critical need recognized by Vietnamese officials for training Vietnamese policy workers, academics, religious affairs officials, and religious leaders on good governance and religion. Encouraging and supporting NGOs that can meet this need will lay the foundation for positive and sustainable improvement of religious freedom in Vietnam.

Laos

The upcoming visit of President Obama to the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, as it will be hosting and chairing the ASEAN meetings, promises to make 2016 a historic year for Lao–American relations. Already in recent months there have been unprecedented high-level visits to Laos by deputy national security adviser for strategic communication for the President, Ben Rhodes, Assistant Secretary of State, Daniel R. Russel, and U.S. Secretary of State, John Kerry. As the first U.S. President to ever visit Laos, Obama’s visit will mark a high point in Lao–American relations. The visit is of course also part of the ongoing efforts to “rebalance” the role of the U.S. in the Asia Pacific Region (Davidson and Dickey 2015). Specifically the U.S. seeks to slow the growing influence of China in Laos and encourage Lao support for slowing China’s influence in the South China Sea (Malloy 2016). The Lao may find this difficult given the significant Chinese foreign assistance to Laos and China’s role as its major source of foreign investment (Howe and Park 2015).

Since the early 1990s the communist government in Laos has slowly opened up to international investment and bi-lateral partnerships. For example,

In 2012, Laos scored big wins internationally by hosting the 6th ASEAN University Games and the 9th Summit of the Asia-Europe Meetings, joining the World Trade Organization, and receiving US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on a visit to Laos. It was the first visit to Laos by a US Secretary of State in 57 years. (Bailey 2013)

The economy has been growing quickly even if unevenly. Of course Laos is one of many nations wrestling with the economic inequalities that result from neo-liberal free market policies. Nevertheless, the Lao People’s Revolutionary Party is in firm political control and has brought stability and increasing prosperity to the nation. The U.S. has been contributing to stability and prosperity through a number of assistance programs (approximately $26 million in 2012) (U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom 2015b). Clearly both nations have a great stake in the stability and prosperity of Laos and the region. As President Obama clearly knows, protecting human rights in Laos will be a key factor in achieving these goals. As more and more U.S. policy experts are realizing, establishing and protecting religious freedom will be key to the establishment of other human rights and to internal and regional security (Farr and Hoover 2009).

Laos does not have a good track record with human rights. Civil rights have suffered the most since 1975 when the Party took power, but religious freedom is also limited. U.S. State Department reports on human rights and religious freedom state that Laos is still a long way from being a nation “ruled by law” (U.S. Department of State 2014b). Significant strides have been made to increase the participation of the people of Laos in electing local government officials and members of the People’s Assembly. But too often the concerns of culture, religion, and Party politics infringe on individual human rights and freedoms. As of this writing, there are three Hmong Protestant Christians being held without trial in the village of Phonthong, District of Muangkho, Hua Phan Province. They appealed to the local courts and argued that their right to religious freedom had been violated. The local court apparently agreed but the local police subsequently beat the three men—one of whom is a 15-year-old student—because they dared to make the appeal. Many other human rights and religious freedom cases in Laos could also be cited (see Amnesty International 2016; Christian Solidarity Worldwide-USA 2016). Indeed, the recent USCIRF report lists Laos as a Tier 2 nation

in which religious freedom conditions do not rise to the statutory level that would mandate a CPC [Country of Particular Concern] designation but require close monitoring due to the nature and extent of violations of religious freedom engaged in or tolerated by governments.

Progress in Laos

But the USCIRF report must be placed within an important larger context if the U.S. government is to formulate a policy toward Laos that will enhance the environment for religious freedom and other human rights. The larger context is shaped by the fact that Laos has been making steady progress on these rights for the last 15 years. If you ask leaders from all of Laos’ religious communities, they will tell you that while there is still has a lot of work to do there is significantly more religious freedom today than 15 years ago.

Over the past 10 years there have been fewer and fewer arrests made for religious reasons. While some people have been detained—in some cases for several months—it has been several years since anyone has been sentenced to prison for issues related to religious belief. Every year there are more and more minority religious communities in Laos, and their relationships and communication with the government is improving. Decree 92, the government’s policy document on implementing religious freedom, are being revised after extensive feedback from religious leaders from all over the country. While Decree 92 has come under criticism from some quarters such as USCIRF, the facts on the ground are there is more sincerity on the part of the government than might first be seen. The document has sometimes been misinterpreted and used to refuse people their constitutionally guaranteed religious freedom, but it has also been used to defend those freedoms by officials working in the Department of Religious Affairs at both the Lao Front and the Ministry of Home Affairs.

Challenges

The greater problem with regard to expanding religious freedom lies with the long-standing practice of interpreting law as leaders see fit and the lack of an independent judicial system. Another equally important problem is the lack of experience among government officials everywhere in the country with the rule and respect of law. But this is changing as more officials attend seminars on religious freedom and the laws and policies of the Lao government. This positive momentum on religious freedom must be the lens through which the ongoing issues on religious freedom in Laos are interpreted.

While the Lao economy is growing quickly, the social and political transformation of Laos is happening slowly because the government prioritizes a pace that protects its place in power and the social stability of the nation. Stability in this context means national unity and the absence of political and religious conflict. This is not just the result of communist ideology. Rather, it reflects long-standing cultural values and ideas of power. The U.S. must be clear minded about the need for the Lao government to make progress on human rights and religious freedom at a pace acceptable to its social context but energetically motivated by engagement with the international community.

Engaging Laos on Religious Freedom

So how should the U.S. engage Laos on religious freedom given its own geopolitical concerns to mitigate China’s influence and encourage economic prosperity? This question can be answered by taking the USCIRF (2015b) Report’s recommendations seriously: The U.S. needs to integrate “concerns about religious freedom into its bilateral agenda when engaging with central government and provincial Lao authorities.”

The U.S. should continue and increase foreign assistance and do more to encourage American business investment. But the U.S. also needs to ramp up its commitment to helping the Lao protect and implement religious freedom. Specifically, this engagement needs to be done in such a way that empowers and fuels the momentum the Lao have already made on religious freedom.

The U.S. can empower Laos’ progress on religious freedom by building the capacity of government officials to (1) understand and implement the rule of law, (2) appreciate and protect religious freedom and diversity, and (3) learn the skills of peace building and conflict resolution. This will require investment in educational and training programs.

The U.S. can fuel the momentum on religious freedom by partnering with the Lao government (specifically the Lao Front) to raise the level of public awareness about religious freedom issues in Laos. This can be done by (1) creating international religious exchanges between Laos and the U.S. that would give religious leaders in both nations opportunities to see and discuss how religious freedom is implemented and experienced in other nations (not only in the U.S.), (2) creating a public dialogue in partnership with the Lao Front and other state media departments on religious freedom issues, and (3) publicly applauding Laos’ progress on religious freedom while privately pressing their government to resolve specific cases in which religious freedoms appear to be denied (and urging U.S. allies to do the same).

We can either focus on Laos’ failures in the past, or we can lean into its progress and help Laos build a sustainable social environment protecting human rights. We recommend that the future presidential administration take the latter approach. More specifically, the U.S. needs to more intentionally integrate religious freedom into U.S. policy as we realize that the implementation and protection of human rights like religious freedom are foundational to political and economic stability at home and abroad. A new and positive engagement between the U.S. and Laos could make all the difference.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Hien Vu

Hien Vu is the Vietnam Program Manager at the Institute for Global Engagement.

Stephen Bailey

Stephen Bailey is the Laos Program Officer at the Institute for Global Engagement. He is also a Professor of Intercultural Studies at Simpson University.

James Chen

James Chen is the Vice President for Programs at the Institute for Global Engagement.