Behind the Handshake: Vietnam's Military Sees U.S. as 'Belligerent' Threat Despite Strategic Partnership

HANOI — A confidential Vietnamese military document, completed in August 2024 and titled "The 2nd U.S. Invasion Plan," starkly contrasts with the public fanfare surrounding the upgraded U.S.-Vietnam partnership. The report, analyzed by human rights group The 88 Project and released Tuesday, reveals that Vietnam's defense establishment views the United States as a "belligerent" power and is actively preparing for a potential American "war of aggression."

The document, authored by the Ministry of Defense, underscores a persistent anxiety within segments of Vietnam's leadership that extends beyond geopolitical rivalry. It confirms a profound fear that external forces, primarily the U.S., could foment a "color revolution"—a popular uprising aimed at toppling the Communist Party—akin to those seen in Ukraine in 2004 or the Philippines in 1986.

"This isn't an isolated view from a paranoid fringe," said Ben Swanton, co-director of The 88 Project and the report's author. "There's a consensus across the government. The document provides a clear-eyed insight: Hanoi sees Washington as an existential threat, not a steadfast ally."

The military analysis traces a perceived escalation through three U.S. administrations, arguing that Washington's efforts to build a front against China in Asia could ultimately target nations that "deviate from its orbit." While assessing the immediate risk of war as low, the planners urge vigilance against the U.S. and its allies "creating a pretext" for invasion.

This internal stance exists in tension with Vietnam's diplomatic overtures. In September 2023, President Joe Biden signed a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership with Vietnam, elevating relations to a level reserved for only a few key partners like China and Russia. Yet, the 2024 military document warns that the U.S. simultaneously seeks to "impose its values" to gradually change Vietnam's socialist system.

Analysts say the document opens a window into a persistent internal divide. "The military has never been too comfortable with the rapid warming of ties with the United States," said Nguyen Khac Giang, a visiting fellow at Singapore's ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute. He points to a June 2024 incident where an army TV report accused the U.S.-affiliated Fulbright University of fomenting a "color revolution," a claim the Foreign Ministry swiftly rebutted.

Historical memory weighs heavily. "The Vietnamese military still has a very long memory of the war," noted Zachary Abuza, a professor at the National War College in Washington. While Western observers often assume China is Hanoi's primary concern, Abuza says internal documents consistently show the party's "biggest fear is that of a 'color revolution.'"

The election of Donald Trump to a second term has introduced new complexities. Under new Party General Secretary To Lam, Vietnam has moved to strengthen economic ties with the U.S., exemplified by the groundbreaking of a major Trump-branded resort project. However, Trump's aggressive foreign policy actions, such as the operation against Venezuela's Nicolás Maduro, have reinforced conservative anxieties about U.S. willingness to violate sovereignty.

"If something happens in Cuba, a close ally, it will send shock waves through Vietnam's political elites," Giang added, highlighting the delicate balancing act Hanoi must perform between its largest trade partner (China) and its largest export market (the U.S.).

The U.S. State Department declined to comment on the specific document but reaffirmed its commitment to the partnership, stating it "promotes prosperity and security for both nations." Vietnam's Foreign Ministry did not respond to requests for comment.

Reader Reactions:

David Chen, Regional Analyst in Singapore: "This is less about paranoia and more about realist calculus. Vietnam is adept at multi-alignment. The document is likely both a genuine contingency plan and a tool to placate conservative factions at home while engaging with Washington abroad."

Minh Tran, Historian in Ho Chi Minh City: "The scars of history are deep, but they shouldn't blind us to present opportunities. This document reflects an outdated siege mentality. Economic interdependence with the U.S. is our strongest safeguard, not military plans for an improbable invasion."

Eleanor Shaw, Foreign Policy Commentator in Washington D.C.: "It's sheer hypocrisy. We pour investment in, offer strategic partnership, and this is how the regime's military thinks of us? A 'belligerent' plotting invasion? It exposes the rotten core of a regime that fears its own people more than any foreign army. Our engagement is empowering our own strategic adversary."

Professor Kenji Tanaka, Security Studies, Tokyo: "The duality is rational. For Vietnam, China is an immediate territorial challenger, but the U.S. is perceived as the ultimate ideological and systemic threat. The document clarifies that for Hanoi, regime survival trumps all other strategic considerations."