The Diploma Global Politics field visit hosted by the Canadian Embassy Hanoi.

As the world moves on from deep-COVID, countries are again looking to maximise their advantage on the global stage. With this in mind, the UNIS Hanoi global politics in a risk society class of 2024 (GPS) had the opportunity to take part in a series of expert discussions from the diplomats themselves engaged in international relations hosted at the Canadian Embassy Hanoi.

We were happy that we braved the traffic because the discussions were fascinating. We were welcomed by Albert J. Lee who is the Head of Trade in the Canadian Embassy to Vietnam who also served as one of our expert panelists. Albert spoke to us about the growing importance of economic interdependence between Vietnam and Canada, a relationship that is mutually beneficial to both countries.

Albert’s discussion promoted a number of questions from us GPSers. For example, Huyen Anh wanted to know “To what extent is Canada’s approach to its foreign policy considered soft power, and what implications does it have on its relationship with Vietnam?” while Chau Anh was curious about “…How has Vietnam and Canada maintained a vital trade relationship by using soft power and hard power throughout the year? What are the differences and main takeaways about the relationship between Vietnam and Canada in recent years? How does this trade relationship affect both Vietnam and Canada economic affairs and the country’s development?”

Duy wanted to know “…in regards to the APTA (Asia-Pacific Trade Agreement), what are the implications of lowering tariffs on foreign goods in relation to Vietnamese domestic businesses. From recent history, the NAFTA trade agreement has been controversial for reducing employment in certain sectors. In what regards are these two treaties similar? Should Vietnam consider this trade agreement?”.

While Chatham House Rules limit the extent to which we can report back here on Albert’s responses, rest assured that we are wiser now about this relationship than before.

We also heard from Mr Cesar Guedes, a man who is no stranger to the GPS class and who played a key role in the management of the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime. During which he noted several incidents he had to solve such as a Bolivian diplomatic crisis with the United States and his role in brokering a deal between the governments of Afghanistan, Iran & Pakistan.

Again, Chatham House Rules apply but suffice it to say, we were again wowed by Cesar’s tenacity and enthusiasm.

Thomas Wiersing, Deputy Head of Delegations from the European Union delegation in Vietnam discussed some of the bigger picture issues related to the EU-Vietnamese economic and political relationship.

In this context, Joaquin asked “…to what extent is Vietnam reliant on foreign aid programs by governments like Canada? How do you see the future of foreign aid in Vietnam develop over the years?”. The response from Thomas regarding the role of the People’s Republic of China in the global economy led Yannic to wonder “…how does the European Union Global Gateway Strategy affect EU relations with countries in South East Asia including Vietnam, and how does it counter the Chinese ‘Belt and Road Initiative’?” while Ivan added “…given that Vietnam and the European Union have been pursuing closer ties, does the political climate of the Vietnamese government affect the relationship between the two parties and to what extent?”. 

Thomas ended with his response to Shinno’s thought about “…the EU’s establishment of foreign relations with Vietnam in the 1990s with the purpose of encouraging sustainable economic development and integration into the global economy, with Vietnam becoming more economically stable, what are other areas to be addressed in the following decades?”.

Guess what? Chatham House Rules once again but it is clear to us now that the European Union’s role will increase over the coming years.

We also heard from Nataliya Zhynkina, Deputy Mission Head of the Ukrainian Embassy in Vietnam who discussed the annexation of the Crimean peninsula in 2014, how it had set the stage for the war today and what solutions are necessary for nation-states to prevent further war or cases like the invasion of Ukraine. 

Ivan wanted to know “…given Russia’s gross violations of international law with the invasion of Ukraine, what steps can the international community take to further discourage world superpowers from doing such things? As the current conflict sets a dangerous precedent as to what the international community can and can’t do in order to keep the peace.” while Annie inquired whether “…with the growing number of deaths in Ukraine, how will the war crimes committed by Putin and the Russian troops be punished in the future?”

Nataliya was about to answer these questions as well as one from Melanie about “…how has the Russia-Ukraine conflict seen an impact on individuals who have relations in both countries?” and Johnny “…what aid could help the people of Ukraine the best, and if you are comfortable sharing, how has the war affected you?” when she showed us on her phone, in real time, an air raid alert for all of Ukraine. She has family and friends as well as colleagues being impacted by this right now.

This was a moment for all of us to reflect on the importance of peace building between nations, a message that each of our expert panelists underscored and encouraged.

We are extremely grateful to Albert and the Canadian Embassy for hosting and to Nataliya, Thomas, Cesar and Albert for sharing their perspectives and expertise with us.