Alice Evans

Looking from the outside, one might presume that Vietnam has 'been forced to be good'. But by interviewing Vietnamese policy makers, I realised there are domestic reformists, who strategically use these trade incentives in order to further & legitimise their pre-existing agenda.

Even back in the 1980s, domestic reformists privately sought trade union reform. But many have been nervous to speak out, fearing negative repercussions in an authoritarian state. So they stayed quiet, kept their heads down. Hence did not realise wider support.

Never seeing others speaking out, pushing for reform, even reformists presumed it was a forlorn hope. So stayed quiet These observations & expectations reinforced a 'despondency trap' Like what @timurkuran calls "preference falsification" (common in authoritarian regimes)

But then TPP negotiations started. To secure support from Congress (worried about US workers being undercut), Obama insisted on independent trade unions. This strict conditionality legitimised & incentivised open discussions on unions (hitherto seen as seditious).

During TPP negotiations, under the auspices of complying with ILO conventions, increasing market access, & joining the international community, Reformists could openly discuss independent unions (without fear of repression) Through speaking out, they realised wider support!

Realising wider support, reformists became even more outspoken, & strategically used trade negotiations in order to convince their conservative colleagues, & further their pre-existing agenda!

BUT then Trump pulled out of TPP, & there was no incentive to reform, nor legitimating cover for domestic reformists. Discussions were put on hold. Repression & crackdown increased.

Only now, to secure the EU FTA, the National Assembly announces that it will permit worker representative organisations. So key points: export incentives AND domestic activists.