RE: Hie^.p U*o*'c Ma^.u Di.ch (HUMD) Vie^.t My?

[tuan pham <tuan.pham@unsw.edu.au>]

>Nhu+ng ne^'u ba'c ky' vo+'i mo^.t ddie^`u kie^.n ba^'t lo+.i thi` co' 
>pha?i la` "thie^.t tho`i lo+'n lao" kho^ng?
>
>To^i la^'y vi' du. mo^.t khi ba'c pha?i mo+? tung ta^'t ca? mo.i cu+?a 
>ma` ngu+o+`i ba'c ye^'u kha? na*ng ba'c nga~ be^.nh na*.ng la` ra^'t cao 
>thi` ba'c co' mo+? toang he^'t cu+?a kho^ng, hay ba'c mo+? tu+` tu+` cho 
>co' kho^ng khi' trong la`nh, nhu+ng cu~ng kho^ng ga^y ca?m ddo^.t ngo^.t.
>

Hi ba'c NHThaxh, Hoang & all

I think the thing that is nagging at most people's mind
is not the trade agreement taken in isolation, but the
whole pattern of economic reform (or lack of it) in the 
last few years, and the accompanying leadership paralysis 
on the whole topic, with the government often going one way
and the politburo another. Into this pattern the shilly-shallying
on the trade agreement fits perfectly. This big pattern is 
far more important, in my mind, than any microanalysis of
the trade agreement. To wait for detailed reasons of the
hesitancy is IMO pointless, since the nature of Vietnamese
leadership is that the people don't need to know, so we would
have to depend on independent Western analysis anyway and 
there has not been a single favourable opinion, though 
professional economists may know better. I suggest bac
Thach starts doing his own analysis for the benefit of vnsa.

Cheers
Tuan Pham