HANOI MUSEUM EXHIBITION CRITICIZES VIETNAM'S PAST ECONOMIC

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