• The Southeast Asian review
• /
• v.28 no.1
• /
• pp.21-51
• /
• 2018

This article takes several approaches in explaining recent developments in Vietnam. First, it draws upon an array of sources that idealize Vietnam's embrace of capitalism and integration into the global market in order to sketch out its economy's progress in 2017. Second, it observes, evaluates, and diagnoses recent changes in the Vietnamese economy in the medium to long term by incorporating conflicting perspectives on Vietnam's performance as a capitalist country. Third, this article traces the power shifts that have risen from internal struggles in the Communist Party over political and social issues. Fourth, it elaborates on the aforementioned impact that foreign relations have had on socio-political developments in Vietnam, as well as the government's response. In so doing, it also attempts to evaluate, however briefly, the significance of the 25th anniversary of South Korea-Vietnam relations. Finally, it examines the public's reaction to the post-reform transitions in light of recent sociocultural changes. 2017 was a memorable year for Vietnam: a continuous march toward capitalism; the resulting expansion of the Vietnamese people's demands; political controversies and government control; the looming instability of United States-China relations and various attempts to address the situation. These events will inevitably replicate themselves in the future as the ostensibly socialist Vietnam adopts a capitalist model. The problem is that it is unclear whether these experiences will continue with the consent of the people of socialist Vietnam or engender resistance. It is difficult to achieve meaningful consent in the status quo of worsening inequalities, widespread corruption, monopoly on power, and sustained use of unskilled low-wage workers. In other words, when concerns such as welfare, public health, and the environment are set aside in favor of economic development and commercialization as they have been, discontent, rather than consent, will prevail. It is thus important to keep a watchful eye on the viability of the nominal economic growth, surface-level political stability, and strategic responses to foreign relations that took place in 2017.

• Journal of the Korean Geographical Society
• /
• v.38 no.2
• /
• pp.312-323
• /
• 2003

This writer absolutely agrees with the government that regional disequilibrium is severe enough to consider moving the administrative capital. Pursuing this course solely to establish a balanced development, however, is not a convincing enough reason. The capital city is directly related to not only the social and economic situation but, much more importantly, to the domestic political situation as well. In the mid-1970s, the proposal by the Third Republic to move the capital city temporarily was based completely on security reasons. At e time, the then opposition leader Kim, Dae-jung said that establishing a safe distance from the demilitarized zone(DMZ) reflected a typically military decision. His view was that retaining the capital city close to the DMZ would show more consideration for the will of the people to defend their own country. In fact, independent Pakistan moved its capital city from Karachi to Islamabad, situated dose to Kashmir the subject of hot territorial dispute with India. It is regrettable that no consideration has been given to the urgent political situation in the Korean peninsula, which is presently enveloped in a dense nuclear fog. As a person requires health to pursue his/her dream, a country must have security to implement a balanced territorial development. According to current urban theories, the fate of a country depends on its major cities. A negligently guarded capital city runs the risk of becoming hostage and bringing ruin to the whole country. In this vein, North Koreas undoubted main target of attack in the armed communist reunification of Korea is Seoul. For the preservation of our state, therefore, it is only right that Seoul must be shielded to prevent becoming hostage to North Korea. The location of the US Armed Forces to the north of the capital city is based on the judgment that defense of Seoul is of absolute importance. At the same time, regardless of their different standpoints, South and North Korea agree that division of the Korean people into two separate countries is abnormal. Reunification, which so far has defied all predictions, may be realized earlier than anyone expects. The day of reunification seems to be the best day for the relocation of the capital city. Building a proper capital city would take at least twenty years, and a capital city cannot be dragged from one place to another. On the day of a free and democratic reunification, a national agreement will be reached naturally to find a nationally symbolic city as in Brazil or Australia. Even if security does not pose a problem, the governments way of thinking would not greatly contribute to the balanced development of the country. The Chungcheon region, which is earmarked as the new location of the capital city, has been the greatest beneficiary of its proximity to the capital region. Not being a disadvantaged region, locating the capital city there would not help alleviate regional disparity. If it is absolutely necessary to find a candidate region at present, considering security, balanced regional development and post-reunification scenario of the future, Cheolwon area located in the middle of the Korean peninsula may be a plausible choice. Even if the transfer of capital is delayed in consideration of the present political conflict between the South and the North Koreas, there is a definite shortcut to realizing a balanced regional development. It can be found not in the geographical dispersal of the central government, but in the decentralization of power to the provinces. If the government has surplus money to build a new symbolic capital city, it is only right that it should improve, for instance, the quality of drinking water which now everyone eschews, and to help the regional subway authority whose chronic deficit state resoled in a recent disastrous accident. And it is proper to time the transfer of capital city to coincide with that of the reunification of Korea whenever Providence intends.