News (Media Awareness Project) - CN ON: Editorial: Vietnam's Barbarism |
Title: | CN ON: Editorial: Vietnam's Barbarism |
Published On: | 2000-04-28 |
Source: | Ottawa Citizen (CN ON) |
Fetched On: | 2008-09-04 20:22:15 |
VIETNAM'S BARBARISM
Canada is right to review its relations with Vietnam following this week's
barbaric and unjustified execution of Nguyen Thi Hiep in a Vietnamese
prison. But its initial protest measures are too timid.
Ms. Nguyen, a naturalized Canadian born in Vietnam, was sentenced to death
in 1997 for smuggling heroin. Early Monday, she was killed by firing squad.
That action surprised Canadian officials; they had been lobbying Hanoi to
show clemency, particularly in light of fresh evidence from Toronto police
that might have saved her life. That new information was given to the
Vietnamese two months ago and it suggested that Ms. Nguyen may have been an
unwitting stooge of drug traffickers who duped her into trying to smuggle
5.5 kilograms of heroin into Canada in 1996.
Foreign Minister Lloyd Axworthy rejects Vietnam's claim that her execution
was a "humanitarian" act intended to prevent the threat posed by illegal
drugs. He's also talking tough, promising a full review of Canada's
relations with Hanoi. But the measures he unveiled yesterday -- withdrawing
some training for Vietnamese officials and boycotting events marking the
25th anniversary of the end of the Vietnam war -- are little more than a
diplomatic slap on the wrist and will not persuade Hanoi to repent for Ms.
Nguyen's death.
According to a recent report from the U.S. State Department, combatting
illicit drugs is one of Vietnam's highest national priorities, second only
to reducing poverty. Hanoi has implemented an intensive counter-narcotics
campaign targeting Vietnam's drug users and anyone caught trying to smuggle
illegal drugs into or out of the country. In 1999, it prosecuted 3,310
drug-related cases with 35 people sentenced to death and 21 others jailed
for life.
This get-tough approach is motivated in part by Vietnam's adherence to a
1998 UN convention against drug trafficking, but even more important is its
desire to be seen as co-operating with U.S. anti-drug efforts.
Those efforts to appease Washington appear to be working, as U.S. President
Bill Clinton recently certified that Vietnam is taking adequate measures
against illegal drugs. Without that certification, Hanoi would not be
eligible for most U.S. foreign aid and would be subject to American efforts
to block any funding by multilateral development banks.
Vietnam is also anxious to curry favour in Washington so that it can receive
U.S. security and military aid. With American attention focused on this
weekend's events marking the anniversary of the end of the Vietnam war,
Hanoi knows that now is not the time to appear soft on drug traffickers --
even if they may have been wrongly convicted.
Solving the drug dilemma is important, but not at the expense of fundamental
justice. Vietnam was wrong to have killed Ms. Nguyen before the new evidence
could be properly reviewed. It should not be rewarded -- by Canada, the
United States or any other democratic country -- for putting political
expediency ahead of the rule of law.
Canada is right to review its relations with Vietnam following this week's
barbaric and unjustified execution of Nguyen Thi Hiep in a Vietnamese
prison. But its initial protest measures are too timid.
Ms. Nguyen, a naturalized Canadian born in Vietnam, was sentenced to death
in 1997 for smuggling heroin. Early Monday, she was killed by firing squad.
That action surprised Canadian officials; they had been lobbying Hanoi to
show clemency, particularly in light of fresh evidence from Toronto police
that might have saved her life. That new information was given to the
Vietnamese two months ago and it suggested that Ms. Nguyen may have been an
unwitting stooge of drug traffickers who duped her into trying to smuggle
5.5 kilograms of heroin into Canada in 1996.
Foreign Minister Lloyd Axworthy rejects Vietnam's claim that her execution
was a "humanitarian" act intended to prevent the threat posed by illegal
drugs. He's also talking tough, promising a full review of Canada's
relations with Hanoi. But the measures he unveiled yesterday -- withdrawing
some training for Vietnamese officials and boycotting events marking the
25th anniversary of the end of the Vietnam war -- are little more than a
diplomatic slap on the wrist and will not persuade Hanoi to repent for Ms.
Nguyen's death.
According to a recent report from the U.S. State Department, combatting
illicit drugs is one of Vietnam's highest national priorities, second only
to reducing poverty. Hanoi has implemented an intensive counter-narcotics
campaign targeting Vietnam's drug users and anyone caught trying to smuggle
illegal drugs into or out of the country. In 1999, it prosecuted 3,310
drug-related cases with 35 people sentenced to death and 21 others jailed
for life.
This get-tough approach is motivated in part by Vietnam's adherence to a
1998 UN convention against drug trafficking, but even more important is its
desire to be seen as co-operating with U.S. anti-drug efforts.
Those efforts to appease Washington appear to be working, as U.S. President
Bill Clinton recently certified that Vietnam is taking adequate measures
against illegal drugs. Without that certification, Hanoi would not be
eligible for most U.S. foreign aid and would be subject to American efforts
to block any funding by multilateral development banks.
Vietnam is also anxious to curry favour in Washington so that it can receive
U.S. security and military aid. With American attention focused on this
weekend's events marking the anniversary of the end of the Vietnam war,
Hanoi knows that now is not the time to appear soft on drug traffickers --
even if they may have been wrongly convicted.
Solving the drug dilemma is important, but not at the expense of fundamental
justice. Vietnam was wrong to have killed Ms. Nguyen before the new evidence
could be properly reviewed. It should not be rewarded -- by Canada, the
United States or any other democratic country -- for putting political
expediency ahead of the rule of law.
Member Comments |
No member comments available...