V. M. MAZYRIN. REFORMS OF THE TRANSITION PERIOD IN VIETNAM (1986-2006): DIRECTIONS, DYNAMICS, RESULTS. MOSCOW: Klyuch-S, 2007. 336 p.; il.

The publication of V. M. Mazyrin's monograph can be considered an event in Russian linguistics. Its relevance is determined by the fact that the publication coincided with the 20th anniversary of the "doi moi" ("renewal") reforms carried out in Vietnam, which was widely celebrated in the country, including in the scientific community; the peer-reviewed work fits well into this context, presenting a view of the problem "from the outside". The serious economic successes that the country has achieved in a relatively short historical period require a scientific explanation. The reader will look for answers to many questions about the nature of the Vietnamese phenomenon in the book by V. M. Mazyrin - the first fundamental scientific study in Russian historiography, which analyzes the stages, methods and results of the Doi Moi reforms over 20 years of the declared long transition period. Someone who wonders, " Where is Vietnam going?" - will find the answer in the author's interpretation, which is based on the recognition of no alternative the so-called liberal project, or, as the author writes, "a common historical path of development, the movement along which was interrupted with the victory of the Communists in the North in 1945 and in 1975 in the South" (p.8).

Following this logic, the author interprets the term "my doy" itself not as a generally recognized "renewal", but as a "rebirth", with which one cannot immediately agree, since this fundamentally changes the meaning of the term itself and the reforms. Vietnam is undergoing a renewal of what it is, including a radical change in the model of economic development, but not a revival of something from the past. I should also note that the term "doi moi" is not a discovery of twentieth - century Vietnamese political culture, as the text of the book suggests. It was used precisely in the sense of" renewal "in the 19th century, as evidenced by the Vietnamese historical chronicle"Dai Nam Thik Luk".

The monograph is written in a wide range of different sources and literature, the author has shown his awareness in publications on Vietnam by Western authors, as well as his familiarity with Western concepts of models of social development of a broader plan. It is safe to say that not only in Russian historiography, but also in Western historiography, there is no such fundamental work. An economist by training, V. M. Mazyrin also knows all the modern methods of scientific analysis, is familiar with the latest achievements of domestic and foreign political science thought and economic schools.

Vietnam has made very serious progress in 20 years of reforms. Vietnam's economy ranked second in terms of development rates in East Asia after China and became the most dynamic in the ASEAN area, demonstrating a success example for the members of this regional organization. Vietnam is the world's second largest exporter of rice and seafood, and has recently taken the same place in terms of coffee exports (after Brazil). On the world stage, Vietnam appears as one of the most socially and politically stable countries with a clear program of action for the future: by 2010, "Vietnam's scientific and technological potential should reach the level of advanced countries in the region in some important areas" [Dang Cong San..., 2006, p. 98]. Vietnam has established itself not only in the region, but also at the global level, having taken a seat in the UN Security Council in 2007 as a non-permanent member for 2008-2009.

page 192
Having studied the achievements of Vietnam over 20 years and predicting its further successful development, the author of the monograph, following other analysts, ranks Vietnam among those countries (the VISTA group) that can become new world leaders in the first half of the XXI century (The author mentions five such countries from the VISTA group that demonstrate high economic potential: Vietnam, Indonesia, South Africa, Turkey, Argentina.) There is a similar, no less interesting and, so to speak, more recent approach to the problem. In November 2007, former World Bank President J. R. R. Tolkien Wolfonson urged to abandon the North-South formula (rich and poor countries) as outdated in the era of globalization and proposed a new division of the world's countries into four groups, depending on their level of development. According to this scheme, Vietnam is likely to belong to the second group of economies that "have emerged recently and challenge the economic dominance of rich countries." The group includes about 30 poor and middle-income countries, including China and India, which make up 50% of the world's population (Wolfensohn, 2007). It is clear that such a division of the countries of the world, as well as the mentioned VM. Mazyrinym VISTA, generally removes the problem of "socialism or capitalism" in the approach to certain countries, making the discussion on this topic a purely academic exercise.

The author of the monograph uses these concepts, and one of the goals of his book is just to confirm (he calls it verification) his hypothesis that Vietnam belongs to the category of "not socialist states.., but to countries of transition type, and distinguished by Eastern specifics" (p. 4). As follows from all subsequent authors However, the Socialist Republic of Vietnam is at a transition stage to capitalism.

But in Vietnam, as in China, we are dealing with the leadership of the Communist Party, which has consistently stated for decades that the goal of economic market reforms in the country is to build a socialist society. And the 10th Congress of the Communist Party of Vietnam in April 2006 once again confirmed that Vietnam is in transition to socialism, specifying that "doi moi" does not mean abandoning the goal of socialism, but contributes to a more correct understanding and more effective construction of it. General Secretary of the CPV Central Committee Nong Duc Manh, in a speech dedicated to the 90th anniversary of the VOSR on November 7, 2007 in Hanoi, called the collapse of the USSR and subsequent events "the death of one specific model of building socialism, and not the collapse of socialism as such in the process of historical development." The CPV Charter, adopted by the Xth Party Congress, states the following: "The party's goal is to transform Vietnam into an independent, democratic, rich country, a strong state, a just, civilized society, where there is no more exploitation of man by man, and socialism and ultimately communism are successfully built." [Vietnam..., 2007, p. 129]. At the same time, the Vietnamese communists openly admit that they are following an unknown path, that the country "has not overcome the signs of deviation from the goals of socialism", that " the theory has not yet answered some questions about the implementation of the doi moi reforms and the construction of socialism in Vietnam, especially with regard to resolving the gap between growth rates and quality economic growth and social justice gaps. .. between independence and sovereignty, on the one hand, and proactive participation in international economic integration, on the other." All these" traps "of the transition period" in the process of implementing a socialist-oriented market economy " are seen by the leaders of the Socialist Republic themselves and do not try to hide them from others [Dang Cong San..., 2006, p. 69].

At the same time, the leaders of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam set themselves the task of continuing to study and summarize all these numerous issues. "We have not chosen the model of a market capitalist economy, but our market economy is not yet a socialist market economy, it must go through a long process of its construction." At the same time, they believe that "the system of theoretical views on the doi moi reforms, on socialism and the path to it in Vietnam has developed in its main features" [Dang Cong San..., 2006, p. 17].

In this regard, the fundamental defect in the overall very interesting work of V. M. Mazyrin, in my opinion, is the almost complete disregard of the official Vietnamese concept of reforms "doi moi". Moreover, the author himself claims (and this can hardly be called anything other than "scientific snobbery") that he "deliberately limited access to official documents and statements, as well as comments and opinions of experts that express the attitudes, intentions, and views of the Vietnamese leadership and at the same time do not give an adequate representation." on the ongoing processes " (p. 4). It is hardly possible to seriously consider that the texts of some Western authors, to which there are many references in the book, with all due respect, yes-

page 193
they provide a more adequate understanding of the processes involved. V. M. Mazyrin's concept, in short, boils down to the fact that the country is at a transition stage to capitalism, and in this sense it is directly opposite to the official Vietnamese approach.

From a scientific point of view, the work would only benefit if the author still turned to official documents and statements that express the views of the Vietnamese leadership, as well as to the works of political scientists and economists of Vietnam, and, as necessary, entered into an open discussion with them, so that the reader could understand the essence of the problems for himself, while as a chosen "default figure" doesn't make them any clearer.

Discrepancies in the approach of V. M. Mazyrin and the official Vietnamese authorities can be seen in a separate, but principled concrete example. The author cites Vietnam's integration into the world market as one of the signs of the country's transition to capitalism, while Vietnamese leaders consider participation in "international economic integration an indispensable condition for the transition period to socialism" [Dang Cong San..., 2006, p. 18]. This is a missed opportunity to argue with the representatives of the Vietnamese official approach to the problem. The lack of scientific polemics does not make the work more interesting.

The book also does not present much of the points of view of Russian scientists, who in one way or another considered the peculiarity of the process of national modernization in Vietnam during the "doi moi"reforms. Its main feature, according to E. V. Kobelev, a well-known expert on Vietnam, is that it is not accompanied by the same radical political reforms as in the economy, and when reforming politics, it is guided by several fundamental principles: the unconditional preservation of political stability, strengthening the leadership role of the CPV as a guarantor of renewal, reforms, gradual, dosed democratization of social and political life under the control of the party and the state on the basis of the principle "democracy must be managed", a strong rejection of multiparty and political pluralism [Kobelev, 2007, p. 56].

In the section "Modernization of socio-political institutions and methods of public administration", the author showed how the authorities managed to " make the transition period manageable... adapt to external influences, preserve the stability, integrity, and sovereignty of the state" (p. 107). The national elite, having demonstrated such qualities as competence, pragmatism, flexibility, internal unity, was able to rebuild itself in new historical conditions and established relations with all world centers. The author comes to an important conclusion that the quality of the political elite largely determined the success of reforms and the implementation of the regulatory role of the state in Vietnam.

V. M. Mazyrin is convincing when he says: "Going to deepen international integration... Vietnam considers political independence as a fundamental condition for the development of its statehood and national identity." When there is an obvious clash with the interests of, for example, the donor community, which does not hide its interest in radical political reforms in Vietnam, "the Vietnamese state demonstrates the ability to pursue its policy in the face of strong external pressure" (p.108).

Among the achievements of the transition period, the author also refers to a greater openness of the authorities and the creation of prerequisites for the formation of a civil society. He notes the balance of market system supporters and conservatives in the Vietnamese leadership as a factor that protects the country from a forceful change in the political system. But he sees in the future, with the completion of the transition to a market economy, the possibility of a peaceful change in the socio-political system. As a result, the author makes a bold, but, in my opinion, at least debatable conclusion about the actual beginning of the formation of "a new social system of a mixed type, the dominant elements of which are state capitalism and the corporate organization of power" (p.107).

The topics discussed in this section, especially "The Communist Party of Vietnam in the process of reform", " The role of the state in the process of reform, the Law enforcement system "(Chapter 4) and "The development of social movements" (Chapter 5), do not give grounds to speak about any serious signs of the formation of a new socio-political system in Vietnam. And the title of chapter 1- "A new political course for the country's development" - is a kind of exaggeration of real changes in the political sphere, where the leadership is really following the path of updating the existing institutions of power, including the CPV itself, but without any radical steps that will lead to a change in the political sphere.

page 194
it could be called a "new political course". This is exactly what is said in the article quoted above by E. V. Kobelev.

But even if we agree with V. M. Mazyrin's hypothesis about the possibility of changing the socio-political system in Vietnam, he stipulated earlier that " more radical political changes associated with the establishment of Western-style democracy, while if they were not in demand" (p. 108), then after the brilliant and flattering characterization of the Vietnamese ruling class given to them by V. M. Mazyrin, one cannot refrain from asking the naive question: why "change the political system more radically "(with unpredictable results), if under the current system, the country's leadership is effective and pragmatic in implementing reforms is it doing its own work focused on national interests and preserving sovereignty? At the same time, of course, the authorities understand that the logic of a market economy objectively dictates adequate changes in the political sphere, and in these "political and economic scissors" there is a serious danger of destructive changes from the point of view of the authorities.

But it is not for nothing that the leaders of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam call their market economy an economy of "socialist orientation", and perhaps here we should look for answers to the question of how to avoid threats to the political system associated with the market economy.

In this context, the position of the Vietnamese leaders becomes clearer, who for many years have not removed the question of the need to confront the impending danger "from hostile forces plotting "peaceful transformation", about turmoil, using the map of "democracy", "human rights", in the hope of changing the political system in our country" [Dang Cong San..., 2006, p. 22, 325].

And of course, in this regard, we should emphasize the special role of the centuries-old Vietnamese culture with its powerful creative energy and vivid national identity, which, as a valuable resource of national solidarity, as the "spiritual foundation of society" (some philosophers call it the socio-cultural bonding of society), the Vietnamese political class calls for all its efforts to protect and develop. It should be noted that the Vietnamese political culture is distinguished by its ability to combine the seemingly incongruous: Confucianism with Marxism, and revolution with tradition... Attempts to "reconcile" capitalism with socialism in the course of market reforms are in the same row.

For a long time, Vietnamese political science did not lose sight of the "who's who" problem in relation to the possibilities of capitalism and socialism in a country where the August Revolution of 1945 had already won, but the balance of power depended on many internal and external reasons. The problem, as we can see, has not lost its relevance today. But perhaps the author is in no hurry to deprive Vietnam of its socialist perspective, categorically talking about "the dismantling of socialist mechanisms, the emergence of a convergent economy" (p. 222), presenting the realities of a transit nature as almost the end result of reforms, besides deciding to make serious generalizations and raising the Vietnamese experience of the far-from-completed transition period to a new level of development. "an answer to the question of the fate of socialism and free capitalism" (p. 222) in favor of capitalism, of course, in the author's understanding.

It seems that the Vietnamese experience of the "doi moi" reforms of the transition period does not contribute to the concept of defining the historical limits of socialism. On the contrary, it works for its perspective, although the "scissors" of possible development, as mentioned above, are very large. What kind of socialism it will be (if it will be) depends on many factors, not least on the global geostrategic situation in the world, where there is already a struggle for its new redistribution, and on the place that China will occupy in this world.

The critical comments made should be considered as an attempt to enter into a scientific dispute with the author of the book under review, but they do not detract from its many advantages. Moreover, we have a ready-made study, where many important questions are raised, to which there are no simple answers.

list of literature

Vietnam. Prospects for 2020 Hanoi: Tezoi Publ., 2007.

Kobelev E. Vietnam: "Doi moi" policy - 20 years old // Problems of the Far East. 2007. N 1. Bang Cong San Viet Nam Van Kien dai hdi dai bieu loan quoc Ian thu X (Documents of the X Congress of the CPV). On Noi, 2006.

Wolfensohn J.D. A New World in Four Tigers // The Straits Times. 27.11.2007.

Permanent link to this publication: