Archives par mot-clé : Tuong Vu

H-Diplo Roundtable XIX, 8 on Vietnam: A New History

[ndlr] Parution de la tribune H-Diplo consacrée à l’ouvrage de Christopher Goscha. Une excellente tribune à lire.

Roundtable Review
Volume XIX, No. 8 (2017)
23 October 2017

Roundtable Editors: Thomas Maddux and Diane Labrosse
Roundtable and Web Production Editor: George Fujii

Introduction by Thomas Maddux

Christopher Goscha.  Vietnam: A New History. New York: Basic Books, 2016. ISBN: 9780465094363 (hardcover, $35.00).

URL vers le PDF en ligne :

Voir aussi :

© 2017 The Authors.

Nation-Building in War: The Experience of Republican Vietnam, 1955-1975 – Berkeley, 17-18 octobre 2016

[ndlr] Le renouveau des études sur l’expérience républicaine au Sud Viêt-Nam se poursuit. Annonce d’un important colloque sur la construction de l’État-nation au Sud entre 1955 et 1975 (co-organisé par le Centre des Études de l’Asie du Sud Est de l’Université de Berkeley, Californie et le Journal of Vietnamese Studies).


Nation-Building in War: The Experience of Republican Vietnam, 1955-1975


October 17 | 8:30 a.m.-6 p.m.

October 18 | 8:30 a.m.-1 p.m.

180 Doe Library

★ ★ ★

Center for Southeast Asia Studies

Saigon © John Dominis

This symposium is about the experience of nation-building in Republican Vietnam during 1949-1975. During this period, many Vietnamese sought a non-communist future for their country with the support of the United States. Over more than two decades, these men and women worked together toward that goal as much as fought against each other over differences in visions and policies. This took place within the broader context of large-scale military conflicts (the civil war between North Vietnam and South Vietnam and the Cold War between the superpowers).

Scholarship on the subject has focused mostly on that broader context of warfare while overlooking the project of nation-building carried out by South Vietnamese. In fact, much more took place in politics, society, culture, and the economy than in the military realm. Another bias of scholarship is its obsession with external intervention and its corresponding neglect of Vietnamese agency. While the U.S. played a crucial role in the viability of South Vietnam as an independent entity, South Vietnamese efforts have not been fully appreciated.

This symposium hopes to document and analyze such Vietnamese efforts in both military and other areas of nation-building by presenting panels of South Vietnamese officials, politicians, academics, and journalists who were active participants in historical developments, paired with panels of young scholars who will be asked to place the testimonies of participants in their contexts and to evaluate their significance.

Organizers: Peter Zinoman, Professor of History, UC Berkeley; Tuong Vu, Professor of Political Science, University of Oregon


  • Col. Trần Minh Công, Commandant of RVN Police Academy
  • Nguyễn Đức Cường, Minister of Trade and Industry
  • Kiều Chinh, Actress
  • Huỳnh Văn Lang, Director of Foreign Exchange Agency and secretary of the Can Lao Party’s Joint North-South branch, founder of Bách Khoa Review and the Association for the Development of Popular Culture
  • Phạm Kim Ngọc, Minister of Economy
  • Hoàng Đức Nhã, Presidential Advisor and Minister of Mass Mobilization and Open Arms
  • Nhã Ca, Writer
  • Dr. Nguyễn Hữu Phước, National Director of Elementary Teacher Training & In-Service Training, Ministry of Education
  • Lt. Col. Bùi Quyền, Deputy Commander, Third Airborne Brigade
  • Dr. Võ Kim Sơn, Lecturer, Faculty of Education, University of Saigon
  • Cao Văn Thân, Minister of Land Reform and Agricultural Development
  • Vũ Quốc Thúc, Central Bank Governor and Minister of Reconstruction and Development
  • Vũ Thanh Thủy, War Correspondent
  • Phạm Trần, Journalist
  • Lâm Lễ Trinh, Minister of Interior and Ambassador
  • Sean Fear, Postdoctoral Fellow in U.S. Foreign Policy and International Security, Dartmouth College
  • Kevin Li, Ph.D. candidate, History, UC Berkeley
  • Ryan Nelson, Ph.D. candidate, History, UC Berkeley
  • Huong Nguyen, Ph.D. candidate, History, University of Washington
  • Nathalie Huynh Chau Nguyen, Associate Professor of Australian Studies, Monash University
  • Van Nguyen-Marshall, Associate Professor of History, Trent University (Canada)
  • John Schafer, Emeritus Professor of English, Humboldt State University
  • Simon Toner, Postdoctoral Fellow in Southeast Asian Studies, Columbia University
  • Nu-Anh Tran, Assistant Professor of History and Asian American Studies, University of Connecticut
  • Alex-Thai Dinh Vo, Ph.D. candidate, Cornell University
  • Tuong Vu, Professor of Political Science, University of Oregon
  • Peter Zinoman, Professor of History, UC Berkeley

The program of October 18 includes a book launch from 1:00 – 2:00 p.m., by Prof. Nathalie Huynh Chau Nguyen (Monash University), who will discuss her new book South Vietnamese Soldiers: Memories of the Vietnam War and After (2016)

CA,, 510-642-3609

[Programme des deux journées à télécharger]

CSEAS Vietnam Program UPDATE

Source : CSEAS

Tuong Vu : The United States isn’t the only country still trying to figure out the Vietnam War

[ndlr] Article de Tuong Vu sur la signification et le poids de la guerre pour le Viêt-Nam d’aujourd’hui.

Forty years ago this month, the savage war in Vietnam ended dramatically with North Vietnamese tanks crashing through the gates of the Presidential Palace in Saigon. As Americans continue to struggle over the legacies of the Vietnam War, it may surprise many of us that our former enemy who won that war is confronting a crisis over its meaning.

Ever since the end of the war, Hanoi leaders have sought to capitalize on their military victory to legitimize their rule. Every year the event is celebrated with great fanfare, as “the day when South Vietnam was liberated and the country reunified.” The victory on that day, Vietnamese are told again and again, epitomized the 4,000-year history of Vietnamese struggle for independence. Its greatness validated the eternal mandate of the Communist Party to rule the country.

Yet public opinion inside Vietnam about the meaning of the war has quietly shifted in the last two decades as Vietnamese gained the freedom to travel abroad, as scholars gained access to previously classified documents, and as the internet broke the government’s monopoly on access to information. The internet has been the government’s chief adversary more than anything else. Most Vietnamese were born after the war, and without the internet they would not have been able to know what really happened during the war and in its aftermath.

In this June 1965 photo, South Vietnamese civilians, among the few survivors of two days of heavy fighting, huddle together in the aftermath of a battle to retake a Vietcong-held post at Dong Xoai, Vietnam © AP Photo/Horst Faas.


Much to the government’s chagrin, Vietnamese now view the war as a proxy war and civil war rather than one for national liberation and unification (Tuong Vu).

Lire la suite / Read more : History News Network, 20/04/2015.

A native of Vietnam and an associate professor of political science at the University of Oregon, Tuong Vu has authored many books and articles about the Cold War, the Vietnam War, and the Vietnamese revolution. He can be reached at

David G. Marr: Vietnam – State, War, and Revolution (1945-1946) [H-Diplo]

Marr_VietnamStateWarRevolution[ndlr] Un H-Diplo important sur le dernier ouvrage du grand historien David G. Marr. Introduction de Stein Tonnesson, analyses de Pierre Brocheux, Shawn McHale, Pham Quang Minh et Tuong Vu suivies de la réponse de l’auteur. A lire sur H-Diplo.

Vietnam: State, War, and Revolution (1945–1946) is a work of immense value for future debates about such issues, because it brings so many previously unknown facts to the table. The book is likely to attract many Vietnamese readers. Books like these cannot yet be produced by Vietnam-based Vietnamese scholars, who are not free to undertake independent research on topics of major political importance. Once Marr’s book appears in a complete and fully reliable Vietnamese translation – as Pham Quang Minh says it must – it is likely to become a work of reference in Vietnam. My hope is that it will set a standard of historical craftsmanship for future generations of Vietnamese historians (Stein Tonnesson).

Accéder aux textes (PDF) :

H-Diplo Roundtable on David G. Marr. Vietnam: State, War, and Revolution (1945-1946)
3 June 2014


Vietnamese Political Studies and Debates on Vietnamese Nationalism – by Tuong Vu

Does a Vietnamese nation exist? Is it an ancient entity, or a modern invention? Is national consciousness to be found only among political elites, or do the masses also hold such sentiments? What is the nature of Vietnamese nationalism: is it a psychological sense of patriotism, an anticolonial ideology, or a quest for political power? What is the Vietnamese national character? What is the relationship between Vietnamese nationalism and communism? This review of the state of Vietnamese political studies (1) in the United States since the 1950s finds that these questions have preoccupied scholars of Vietnamese politics and political history more than any other topic.

Over the last fifty years, the field has undergone two growth spurts, one in the mid 1960s and the other since the mid 1980s. The first took place as the United States deepened its involvement in Vietnam, while the second occurred at the end of the Cold War. At both turning points the fieldexpanded rapidly, both in quantitative and qualitative terms, reflecting the profound impact of political events on scholarship. At the same time, the growth spurts foreshadowed shifts in the substantive debates on the Vietnamese nation and nationalism. In particular, before the mid 1960s debates were implicit and mild in tone. Diverse views existed, but pessimism about the Vietnamese nation and doubts about its unifying power and moral character were pervasive. Despite the belief in the modern origins of nations that was prevalent among social scientists at the time, in Vietnamese Studies only a few believers in Vietnam as an ethnic nation existed. At the same time, some adopted an alternative concept that defined the Vietnamese nationality not along the primordial-modern dimension but as a communal identity to be found at the village level. And as for Vietnamese nationalism, most analysts viewed it as contradicting and being threatened by communism.

As the war escalated and the field experienced its first growth spurt after the mid 1960s, the tone of debate became increasingly combative and its character more polemic. The earlier pessimism was replaced in this new, more sophisticated scholarship by an optimism about the Vietnamese nation. This nation was now seen primarily as an ethnic group whose identity had been shaped over the centuries out of repeated resistance to foreign invasions. There was also a new belief in the possible affinity for and benefit of an alliance between nationalism and communism. Reflecting an important trend in the social sciences and the normative concerns of analysts, Vietnamese nationalism was now conceptualized simply as anticolonialism. Overall, the new scholarship of this period made major contributions to the understanding of Vietnamese politics, but it was also highly partisan—that is, its arguments and evidence were often deployed in not-so-subtle ways to justify certain policy positions. While no scholarship can ever be free of ideological biases, these were more pronounced and sometimes explicitly proclaimed in works written during this period.

Since the early 1980s, as the field gathered steam for a second expansive phase, the debates have become less polemic and ideological. New ways to conceptualize the Vietnamese nation have emerged that challenge earlier thinking. The existence and power of the Vietnamese nation are no longer assumed or denied in a simplistic manner, while the processes by which the nation was created or sustained receive a new scrutiny. In sync with developments in social science theory, the Vietnamese nation is now primarily viewed as a modern social construct or cultural artifact. Vietnamese nationalism is treated not only as resistance to foreign rule but also as a cover for power politics. The affinity between communism and nationalism is rejected. A welcome development is the more direct engagement of Vietnam scholarship of this third period with broad theories in the social sciences. By productively applying these theories to old questions or by using Vietnamese cases to criticize them, current scholarship gives the topic a renewed salience and offers new vistas for future exploration.

This review is organized into three parts, corresponding to the three periods the field has experienced. In each part, I will begin by discussing political events, theoretical trends in the social sciences—especially regarding the study of nations and nationalism—and trends in related fields such as Asian or Southeast Asian Studies. The bulk of each section is devoted to the debates on questions about the Vietnamese nation and nationalism. In the conclusion I will speculate about future trends in the field, which appears to be moving away from these questions. Three areas of potential fruitful research are suggested, including changing Vietnamese loyalties in the era of globalization, the ethnic dimension of the modern Vietnamese nation, and the relationship between nationalism, socialism, and state building in the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (DRV) during the war.

Read more on pdf

Ref. : Journal of Vietnamese Studies 2: 2 (August 2007), pp. 175-230.

Tuong Vu (Visiting Research Fellow, Project on Democracy and Development; September 2011–June 2012). Vu is an associate professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Oregon.  His research interests include state formation and development, the politics of nationalism, the role of ideology and identity in domestic and international conflicts, and the role of communist ideology in the Vietnamese revolution.  He is the author of Paths to Development in Asia, South Korea, Vietnam, China, and Indonesia (2010) and coeditor of Dynamics of the Cold War in Asia: Ideology, Identity, and Culture (2009). While at Princeton, Vu will work on two projects: a book that examines the role of ideology in the Vietnamese revolution as a case of radical politics in the periphery, and a paper that examines the role of capital and coercion in the formation of modern East Asian states. Ph.D. University of California, Berkeley.

See Tuong Vu profile