Vietnam takes a risk and a chance on BRICS
On June 13, 2025, BRICS officially welcomed Vietnam as 'a partner country', marking a significant milestone in Hanoi's foreign policy. This decision reflects a carefully planned strategy, developed over years, to diversify Vietnam's international relations and strengthen its position in a multipolar world.
By aligning with BRICS – a bloc comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, and recently expanded to include other emerging economies –Vietnam aims to reduce its dependence on specific partners while navigating complex global dynamics.
Vietnam's relationship with the United States, elevated to a comprehensive strategic partnership in September 2023, has faced challenges since the re-election of President Donald Trump.
The Trump administration has imposed stringent tariff barriers and scrutinized Vietnam's trade practices, particularly its role as a potential conduit for Chinese goods entering the US market.
Hanoi, acutely aware of these tensions, seeks to balance its economic ties with the US by deepening engagement with other global players. Joining BRICS is a strategic step in this direction, aligning Vietnam with a bloc that collectively represents over 40% of the world's population and a significant share of global GDP.
Vietnam's accession to BRICS, even as a partner rather than a full member, carries both opportunities and risks. On one hand, it enhances Hanoi's access to economic resources, particularly from China, a dominant BRICS member.
Recent agreements with Beijing, including financing for a high-speed railway project connecting Vietnam and China and other infrastructure initiatives, underscore Vietnam's reliance on Chinese loans and technical expertise.
These projects are critical for modernizing Vietnam's economy, which remains heavily dependent on foreign investment to sustain growth. BRICS membership also offers Vietnam a platform to advocate for a more equitable global economic order, aligning with the bloc's calls for reforming institutions like the United Nations and the World Bank.
However, this move risks straining relations with the US under the Trump administration, which targets China's economic influence. The US has expressed concerns that Vietnam serves as a transit hub for Chinese goods relabeled to evade US tariffs.
If Hanoi fails to address these concerns, it could face punitive sanctions, disrupting its export-driven economy, which relies heavily on the US market. Such measures could also destabilize Vietnam's domestic political landscape, as economic downturns often fuel public discontent.
To mitigate this, Vietnam has intensified efforts to enhance transparency in trade practices. Recent nationwide crackdowns in Vietnam by the economic police and the Market Management forces on goods lacking clear origins or invoices demonstrate Hanoi's commitment to aligning with international trade standards.
Vietnam has also made diplomatic gestures to maintain cordial ties with the US, such as facilitating projects by the Trump Organization. While these moves signal Hanoi's desire to avoid antagonizing Washington, they are unlikely to resolve the core issue of Vietnam's trade practices.
The Trump administration's focus on 'America First' policies leaves little room for compromise, placing Vietnam in an unstable position.
Moreover, BRICS's push for global institutional reform highlights Vietnam's own domestic challenges. The country has faced international criticism over issues like transparency, institutional accountability and restrictions on freedom of speech.
Without substantial internal reforms, Vietnam's participation in BRICS risks being perceived as symbolic rather than substantive. For instance, Hanoi's anti-corruption campaign, while notable, has yet to fully address systemic governance issues that could undermine its credibility within a bloc advocating for global equity.
Vietnam's status as a partner country, rather than a full BRICS member, reflects a cautious foreign policy, aligning with its 'bamboo diplomacy.' This half-step allows Hanoi to engage with the bloc without fully committing to its geopolitical agenda, which is heavily influenced by China and Russia.
However, this approach may limit Vietnam's ability to shape BRICS's vision for a new global economic order. Amid post-Covid economic recovery, Vietnam faces pressure to attract foreign capital from both China and the US while preserving its strategic autonomy.
Joining a China-Russia-led alliance raises questions about Hanoi's ability to maintain its foreign policy of 'independence, self-reliance, diversification and multilateralization of relations', especially given ongoing disputes with Beijing in the South China Sea, where China's assertive claims challenge Vietnam's maritime rights.
Vietnam's entry into BRICS as a partner country offers opportunities to diversify its economic and diplomatic ties but also poses critical challenges. Hanoi must navigate US-China tensions, address domestic governance issues, and clarify its trade practices to fully capitalize on BRICS membership.
Without internal reforms and strategic foresight, Vietnam risks being caught in a geopolitical tug-of-war, undermining its aspirations for independence and influence in a rapidly changing global order.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Asia Times
27 minutes ago
- Asia Times
Trump makes mockery of G7 at critical diplomatic juncture
When the world teeters on the brink of another full-scale regional war, diplomacy—however imperfect—becomes the thin thread that prevents catastrophe. It is precisely during these moments that multilateral institutions like the Group of Seven (G7) must function with unity, sobriety and respect for each other's contributions. Unfortunately, the latest summit in Canada revealed more fissures than cohesion, and not due to structural disagreement on trade, finance or even Ukraine. Rather, it was the unnecessarily sharp personal rebuke issued by US President Donald Trump against French President Emmanuel Macron that punctured the diplomatic atmosphere. At issue was Macron's assertion to reporters that Trump was leaving the G7 early to potentially broker a ceasefire between Israel and Iran. 'There is indeed an offer to meet and exchange,' Macron said, adding that the United States had 'assured they will find a ceasefire and since they can pressure Israel, things may change.' Whether borne of informed speculation or confidential briefings, Macron's tone was hopeful, hinting that the United States—despite its own political tumult—might bring its considerable leverage to bear in ending a volatile conflict in the Middle East. Trump, however, was quick to scoff at Macron's remarks, dismissing them as 'wrong,' and asserting that his abrupt departure from the G7 had nothing to do with any potential ceasefire. In a statement posted to his own platform, Social Truth, Trump ominously advised, 'Everyone should evacuate from Tehran'—a message that may have caused more confusion than clarity, not least for the citizens of Tehran and the diplomats working to contain hostilities. But Trump's derision goes far beyond a semantic quarrel. It points to a deeper pattern of undermining traditional allies, resisting the norms of collective diplomacy and reducing serious multilateral efforts to public theater. The G7, for all its shortcomings, has historically operated on a delicate balance of peer respect and strategic coordination. To have one of its most powerful members lash out against another, particularly when the latter is attempting to steer attention toward peace efforts, corrodes that balance. This is not the first time Trump has treated France—and by extension, Europe—as an adversary rather than a partner. In previous summits, he dismissed the importance of NATO, mocked French concerns over climate change, and refused to support multilateral trade mechanisms that form the bedrock of European economic stability. Yet what happened in Canada is different: it occurred not merely against the backdrop of a policy disagreement but amid the specter of regional war. Israel and Iran are currently in a perilous dance of escalation. With Israeli strikes reportedly targeting Iranian military sites and Iran retaliating via drone and missile launches, the region is careening toward a wider confrontation. A war that could suck in neighboring states, global energy markets and even non-regional actors like Russia and China. It is precisely in such moments that the G7 must act as a stabilizing force—not an arena of personal vendettas. To suggest that Macron was out of line for voicing what many suspected—that Trump's early exit may have been motivated by a secret diplomatic mission—is disingenuous. Even if Macron's remarks were premature, they reflected a yearning for progress, not a challenge to Trump's authority. The French president, after all, is a seasoned leader who understands the need for discretion but also recognizes the value of positive signaling. His comment was an opening, an invitation for diplomacy to flourish. Trump chose instead to shut that window with a tweet and a rebuke. Moreover, Trump's declaration that 'everyone should evacuate from Tehran' only adds to the confusion. What does it signal? An imminent strike? A covert operation gone awry? Or merely another instance of bluster designed to unnerve adversaries and allies alike? In the absence of clarity, the message contributes to anxiety, not resolution. For diplomats in the region, such ambiguity can be paralyzing. For ordinary citizens in Tehran, it may very well provoke panic. One must also question the wisdom of using a social media post to relay potential security warnings, rather than relying on established diplomatic channels. The State Department or the National Security Council is equipped to issue warnings with nuance and legal authority. When leaders bypass these institutions to score points or spread fear, the result is a governance vacuum. Beyond the immediate implications, this latest episode raises a larger concern about the erosion of diplomatic norms in the post-2020 world order. The G7 was once a forum for proactive global leadership: addressing financial crises, coordinating humanitarian relief, and charting climate policy. Today, it often appears more performative than practical, with headline-grabbing gestures replacing substantive commitments. Trump's consistent sidelining of allies, whether France, Germany, Canada, or Japan, has contributed to this decline. His transactional worldview—where friends are judged not by shared values but by personal loyalty—makes stable cooperation difficult. By treating Macron's olive branch as an insult, Trump not only insults France but signals to the rest of the G7 that independent thought will be met with disdain. This is a dangerous precedent. For when diplomacy becomes personalized and weaponized, its primary function—to reduce conflict through dialogue—evaporates. If leaders at the G7 cannot even agree on the tone of their own statements, let alone on a strategy for peace in the Middle East, then the institution is at risk of irrelevance. To be clear, Macron is not beyond critique. His own record on foreign policy has been mixed. But in this instance, his attempt to steer global attention toward a ceasefire should be viewed not as meddling, but as leadership. That Trump cannot—or will not—see this speaks volumes about his priorities. If President Trump is indeed in a position to facilitate a ceasefire between Israel and Iran, then let him proceed. But undermining an ally who voices hope for that possibility serves no one—not the G7, not the Middle East and certainly not the credibility of the United States on the global stage. In diplomacy, perception matters as much as action. And at this critical moment, the perception is clear: Trump prefers deflection over dialogue, and derision over diplomacy. Phar Kim Beng, PhD, is professor of ASEAN Studies, International Islamic University Malaysia, and Cambridge Commonwealth Scholar Ruhanas Harun is professor at the Department of Defense and Strategic Studies, National Defense University Malaysia.
RTHK
2 hours ago
- RTHK
HK stocks end down as Mideast fears weigh on markets
HK stocks end down as Mideast fears weigh on markets The Hang Seng Index ended down 80.69 points, or 0.34 percent, to close at 23,980.30. File photo: RTHK Mainland Chinese and Hong Kong stocks ended lower on Tuesday as sentiment was weighed down by fresh signs of Middle East tensions after US President Donald Trump urged Iranians to evacuate Tehran. In Hong Kong, the benchmark Hang Seng Index ended down 80.69 points, or 0.34 percent, to close at 23,980.30. The Hang Seng China Enterprises Index fell 0.4 percent to end at 8,694.67 while the Hang Seng Tech Index fell 0.15 percent to end at 5,291.85. On the mainland, the benchmark Shanghai Composite Index closed down 0.04 percent at 3,387.40 while the Shenzhen Component Index closed 0.12 percent lower at 10,151.43. The ChiNext Index, tracking China's Nasdaq-style board of growth enterprises, lost 0.36 percent to close at 2,049.94. The retreat came as Israel and Iran attacked each other for a fifth straight day. Trump left the Group of Seven summit in Canada a day early due to the situation in the Middle East, the White House said on Monday, prompting broad risk-off sentiment in global financial markets. "One thing that is clear is that the situation continues to be highly uncertain and risks of escalation should not be ignored," analysts at Maybank said in a note. "Safe havens should continue to be better bid and the US dollar should be better supported." Oil and gas shares were an outperformer, as the geopolitical tensions drove crude prices higher. A sub-index tracking the sector gained 0.92 percent. Apart from the Middle East tensions, the focus was also on the annual Lujiazui Forum this week, traders and analysts said. "The Lujiazui forum is likely to be the key window for financial and yuan internationalization-related policies, while the July Politburo economic meeting is likely to provide further guidance on the monetary and fiscal stance for H2 this year," said Ju Wang, head of Greater China FX and rates strategy at BNP Paribas. (Reuters/Xinhua)
South China Morning Post
2 hours ago
- South China Morning Post
Israel, Iran trade fire for fifth day as global alarm mounts
Israel and Iran exchanged missile fire for a fifth consecutive day on Tuesday, as US President Donald Trump abruptly left the G7 summit and warned Tehran residents to 'immediately evacuate' amid rising fears of a wider conflict. The Israeli military said it targeted multiple missile and UAV sites in western Iran, including surface-to-surface missile infrastructure, surface-to-air launchers and drone storage facilities, in a statement accompanied by black-and-white footage showing missile launchers exploding. Shortly after, air raid sirens sounded in parts of Israel. Loud booms were heard over Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, as the Israeli army warned of incoming missiles launched from Iran. 'Sirens sounded in several areas across Israel following the identification of missiles launched from Iran,' the military said, adding the air force was 'operating to intercept and strike where necessary to eliminate the threat'. 02:09 Iran state TV resumes live broadcasts after service stopped during Israeli air strike Iran state TV resumes live broadcasts after service stopped during Israeli air strike Around 20 minutes later, the army said people could leave protected spaces. Police said shrapnel fell in Tel Aviv, causing damage but no casualties. The fire service said its teams were on the way to battle a blaze in the commercial hub. Despite mounting calls to de-escalate, neither side has backed off from the missile blitz that began Friday, when Israel launched an unprecedented aerial campaign targeting Iranian nuclear and military facilities.
