Return to Vietnam

President Clinton's trip to Vietnam is a fitting and symbolic gesture at the end of his second presidency term

President Clinton's trip to Vietnam is a fitting and symbolic gesture at the end of his second presidency term. Having opposed the Vietnam war in his youth, he overcame much of the hostility that generated after he became president, lifting a harsh trade embargo in 1994 and establishing diplomatic relations the following year. This July he signed a trade agreement which provided a platform for this journey of political reconciliation and economic opportunity. That is an honourable record in opening up relations with Vietnam, which were so severely damaged by the war's dreadful casualties and damage to the country's social and physical infrastructure. The US lost the war and has been slow indeed to recover from the blow to its pride as a superpower, military morale and international standing. The Vietnam victory profoundly affected Asian and world politics. It gave the communists control of a devastated and isolated country with over one million people dead and 300,000 missing in action. The last generation has seen a painfully slow effort to re-develop the country. This has quickened in recent years, as market reforms took root. They are now well established and should be given a boost with investment decisions taken by the many corporations accompanying Mr Clinton.

As he put it, "in our national memory Vietnam was a war, but Vietnam is also a country". It is fitting that the US should finally give Vietnam a boost by encouraging the regeneration that can flow from opening up its economy to trade, investment and technology transfers. The Vietnamese people are well able to respond to such opportunities, as their legendary capacity for hard work and the remarkable academic and entrepreneurial achievements of their compatriots in the US demonstrate. Conditions have improved in the last five years, when over-regulation and corruption were tackled. Rates of growth and employment now mirror those of other Asian tiger economies. So far there is little sign that the communist one-party system is threatened by these developments, making a significant relaxation of its repressive rule more possible.

Mr Clinton's every word will be scrutinised for expressions of regret about the damage done by the war and sympathy for its victims. Although he is not expected to apologise, he is in a position at the end of his term to be as open as possible on the subject and to turn a decisive new page in US-Vietnam relations. He seems assured of an enthusiastic welcome from Vietnamese who recognise that he opposed the war and has done a lot to heal the wounds it caused. That also sends a positive message to American public opinion and to other Asians who value the US role in their region.