VZCZCXRO1465
RR RUEHCHI RUEHDT RUEHHM
DE RUEHHI #1814/01 1990330
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 180330Z JUL 06
FM AMEMBASSY HANOI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 2777
INFO RUEHHM/AMCONSUL HO CHI MINH CITY 1511
RUEHZS/ASEAN REGIONAL FORUM COLLECTIVE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 HANOI 001814 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR EAP/MLS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV PREL PINR VM
SUBJECT: HANOI MUSEUM EXHIBITION CRITICIZES VIETNAM'S PAST ECONOMIC 
POLICIES 
 
HANOI 00001814  001.2 OF 003 
 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary:  A new exhibition at the Vietnam Museum of 
Ethnology (VME) in Hanoi is currently enjoying considerable public 
interest and media attention, as the exhibit indirectly criticizes 
the GVN's past economic policies, while carefully praising current 
pro-market reforms.  The museum's director claimed that the GVN did 
not attempt to censor the exhibit, which was partly inspired by a 
Smithsonian exhibition on racial segregation in the United States, 
despite the exhibition's often strong critiques.  Although the 
exhibit does not likely reflect an overall trend towards cultural 
openness by the GVN, it does set a new precedent for careful 
political criticism.  End Summary. 
 
State Museum Attracts Vietnamese Visitors 
------------------------------------------ 
 
¶2. (SBU) On July 9, Pol and Econ interns visited the Vietnamese 
Museum of Ethnology's (VME) exhibit entitled "Hanoi Life Under the 
Subsidy Economy, 1975-1986" and met with the VME's Director, Dr. 
Nguyen Van Huy, and Vice Head of the Southeast Asian Department, 
Mrs. Nguyen Thi Thu Huong.  Located in the outskirts of Hanoi, the 
spacious and well-maintained museum houses the new exhibition in a 
large room alongside its permanent collection of traditional 
artifacts.  In stark contrast to other State museums, a large number 
of both foreign and Vietnamese visitors crowd the VME, which boasts 
multimedia displays and realistic reproductions.  At the entrance of 
the exhibition, mannequins stand in line at a life-size storehouse 
for food, setting the scene of the "Bao Cap" (Subsidy) Economy 
period, while Vietnamese adolescents take pictures of their friends 
pretending to be in line to receive rations. 
 
Subtle Criticisms of Past Policies 
---------------------------------- 
 
¶3. (SBU) With its collection of old photographs, authentic household 
objects and a reproduction of an insalubrious neighborhood, the 
exhibit depicts the poor living conditions of Hanoi residents prior 
to the GVN's implementation of the "Doi Moi" (Renovation) policy in 
1986 by the GVN. Numerous signs throughout the showroom describe the 
difficulties common people faced to acquire basic necessities: 
"Food was bought with coupons...Distribution of goods was dependant 
on the rank of the citizen...High-ranking officials were served at 
special shops."  To illustrate these experiences, ration coupons are 
displayed next to small stones with an individual's position in the 
line chalked on each rock.  These served to ensure people's place, 
should they need to leave temporarily.  The concluding sentence of a 
caption describing a food stall summarizes the prevalent sentiment 
of the time: "Queuing to buy rice was always a suffering." 
 
¶4. (SBU) Without openly blaming the Communist Party of Vietnam (CPV) 
or the GVN for these hardships, the exhibition nonetheless points to 
Bao Cap policies as the source of economic failure.  Signs and 
captions, in both English and Vietnamese, denounce the 
"socio-economic mismanagement, inefficient systems and inappropriate 
mechanisms of Bao Cap" and blame the system's breakdown on 
"production problems, corruption, fraudulent use or connivance 
between trade staff."  Exhibits also note that as a black market 
emerged, "Buying and selling coupons illegally was common."  On top 
of these economic problems, the exhibition also hints at GVN 
censorship and dissent within the country during the period. 
Adjacent to a sign describing the GVN's "cultural management" 
policy, a caption of a theatrical play book reads, "if a name in a 
local play of the bad character is the same as a local official, the 
play could be banned."  Under another sign explaining the gradual 
path to Doi Moi, novels, poems and "Tien Phong" (Pioneer) newspaper 
articles, all hostile to Bao Cap, are on display. 
 
¶5. (SBU) Despite these subtle criticisms, the exhibition does not go 
as far as directly blaming the GVN for Bao Cap.  Censorship of 
cultural expression is depicted as a "strict and rigid management of 
all art forms," but the only repercussions mentioned are "unequal 
opportunities for people to enjoy cultural experiences."  The entire 
exhibit mitigates the responsibility of the GVN and defines Bao Cap 
as a time when "the courage and the intelligence of millions of 
people were suppressed," without delving into the actual root 
causes.  While some video displays mention the debate during the mid 
1980s about economic reforms, the final sign of the exhibition 
praises the GVN's Doi Moi reforms, which led Vietnam from a 
subsidence economy to global markets integration.  Once the country 
instituted market reforms, "the energy of the people virtually 
exploded, creating a boom in socio-economic development."  The final 
photograph of the exhibit shows the signing of the U.S.-Vietnam 
Bilateral Access Agreement in May 2006, symbolizing a bright outlook 
ahead, as Vietnam prepares to enter the World Trade Organization 
"later this year."  One middle-aged Vietnamese visitor told Econ 
intern that the significance of the exhibition is that it depicts 
the contrast between today's prosperity and the hardships under Bao 
Cap, but "it is not a criticism of the GVN." 
 
 
HANOI 00001814  002.2 OF 003 
 
 
Exhibit Embraced by Vietnamese Public 
------------------------------------- 
 
¶6. (SBU) During the meeting with Huy, Pol intern noted that the 
exhibition differs greatly from other State museums' exhibits by 
offering a frank portrayal of Vietnam's history, and inquired 
whether this initiative marks Vietnam's new willingness to honestly 
reexamine its past and Socialist policies.  Without answering the 
question, Huy provided a detailed overview of the strong public 
interest in the exhibition.  Since its opening, the VME has seen an 
average of 800 to 900 visitors on Saturdays and Sundays, which 
"surprised everyone at the museum."  The VME was actually unable to 
accommodate all visitors during the first week, due to a shortage of 
tickets and parking spots. 
 
¶7. (SBU) Huy also pointed out that the exhibition attracts people 
from all levels of Vietnamese society.  While older Vietnamese come 
with their own sentiments and experiences, younger individuals visit 
the museum "to satisfy their curiosity."  "The newest Vietnamese 
generation does not know life under the Subsidy Economy and it is 
difficult for them to grasp the living conditions of that era," he 
added.  As a result, grandparents have to explain to their 
grandchildren their past hardships.  Lauding "this 
inter-generational communication," Huy mentioned that people also 
share their feelings and reconnect with each other through their 
common experiences.  Conveying visitors' reactions to the exhibit, 
Huy passionately explained that "people are truly happy to look back 
and witness the changes, but they also look forward to the future." 
 
 
American Advisor Participates in the Exhibition Design. 
--------------------------------------------- ---------- 
 
¶8. (SBU) Huy noted that the VME staff created the entire showing, 
but a lengthy preparation time was necessary to collect daily-life 
objects and conduct interviews with older Hanoi residents for a 
direct account of their experiences.  An American curator (NFI) from 
Alaska helped with the creation of a "community video," which 
allowed residents to freely recount their memories about the Bao Cap 
period.  This first-ever media experience in Vietnam was included in 
the exhibition's section dealing with the early debate about 
economic reforms.  Although the community film only relayed soft 
criticisms against Bao Cap, Huy insisted that "the initiative was 
entirely carried out by the people and the museum performed minimum 
edits without modifying the substance of the videos." 
 
No GVN Censorship of the Exhibition 
----------------------------------- 
 
¶9. (SBU) Pol intern speculated about possible GVN or CPV 
interference with the exhibit's contents and inquired whether the 
VME maintained its creative and intellectual freedom during the 
design process.  Huy candidly replied: "We were not censored." 
After the GVN approved the project last September, the VME worked on 
the exhibit without any constraint.  "I decided the content myself 
and no governmental agency objected," Huy declared.  The VME secured 
funding from the Vietnamese Academy of Social Sciences as part of 
its activities marking the 20th anniversary of Doi Moi.  Although he 
acknowledged that he planned this project for the past four years, 
Huy claimed that he did not have a clear vision for the exhibit 
other than "leaving an open-ended conclusion for visitors by 
reflecting different views from different people." 
 
¶10. (SBU) Finally, Huy noted that his inspiration for the exhibition 
stemmed from his visit to the Smithsonian Institution's National 
Museum of American History exhibition depicting racial segregation 
and the history of the Jim Crow era in the South.  Recollecting his 
sentiments after contemplating a display of a train with sections 
dividing white and black passengers, Huy praised the ability of 
American museums to objectively reexamine U.S. history and stated 
his belief that the VME could act in the same capacity for Vietnam. 
He noted that for this reason, the VME decided to display a famous 
Vietnamese poem by the exit of the Bao Cap exhibition.  Published 
shortly before the CPV's 6th Congress (which lead to the institution 
of Doi Moi), the piece strongly criticizes Bao Cap policies and 
condemns the Party for restricting the people's aspirations.  While 
the GVN condemned the poem at the time, Huy explained that the 
exhibit displays the work to recapture the end of Bao Cap.  Quoting 
one of the poem's verses -- "Who understands and who has to change" 
-- he concluded that, "I believe the Party had to change, that is 
why Doi Moi came." 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
¶11. (SBU) The VME's exhibition on Bao Cap provides an unprecedented 
critique of GVN socio-economic policies prior to Doi Moi.  The 
exhibit's implicit praise of Doi Moi policies is likely the main 
 
HANOI 00001814  003.2 OF 003 
 
 
reason the GVN tolerates these critiques.  Although the Bao Cap 
exhibit does not reflect an overall trend towards cultural openness 
by the GVN, it does set a new precedent for careful political 
criticism.  End comment. 
 
MARINE