4 | International Union Rights | 26/3 TOWARDS UNIVERSAL RATIFICATION OF C87 AND 98 Vietnam has Ratified ILO C98. How about China? Reflecting on the ILO’s mission in its centenary year, the articles carried in the recent International Union Rights issue Focus on the ILO at 100 lamented that globally labour rights and trade union rights are in the doldrums1. Fortunately one case is worth celebrating—Vietnam in June this year ratified ILO C98, which recognises the rights to organise and collective bargaining. Vietnam has promised to ratify C105 on forced labour by 2020 and C87 on freedom of association by 2023. While the majority of countries in the Southeast Asian region are undergoing rapid industrialisation in tandem with labour exploitation, labour unrest and anti-trade union government policies, Vietnam is heading in a different direction. Instead of choosing a repressive labour policy, Vietnamese leaders have been debating how to revamp the industrial relations system to allow workers to form their own unions. Vietnam originally was willing to take such an initiative because, before Trump’s election, it was eager to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) that was under negotiation, in order to enhance Vietnam’s prospects for more foreign direct investment and trade, especially with the United States. To become a member, Vietnam would have had to agree to establish an industrial relations system that accommodates freedom of association. To help fund this shift, the US government earmarked four million dollars in 2013 to the ILO in Vietnam to administer programs to assist the Vietnamese Ministry of Labour, Invalids and Social Affairs (MOLISA) to make this transition within five years. After Trump in early 2017 withdrew America’s willingness to enter the TPP, the eleven other countries that had negotiated the TPP engaged in renewed negotiations and formed the impending Comprehensive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP or TPP-11). This also contains a clause on freedom of association. In addition, to access the European market, Vietnam has signed a free-trade agreement (EVFTA) with the European Union that similarly stipulates freedom of association. Sceptics of Vietnam’s motives, die-hard critics of one-party states2, and those whose own constituencies would be losers in a new PPT deal, such as the American trade unions, were of the opinion that Vietnam was willing to sign on to freedom of association only because it was forced into it for economic reasons, and that genuine freedom of association is unlikely to materialise3. This view begs the puzzling question of why the VGCL, which has held a state-backed monopoly on representing Vietnamese workers, was the very group that lobbied the party-state to accept this challenge to allow independent unions to compete with the VGCL and thus democratise the industrial relations system. To address this puzzle I argue that the TPP and Vietnam’s economic interests explain only part of the story. There are also other factors--historical, political and structural—that contribute to the preconditions for change. To strengthen my argument and to provide a context I will use China as a comparator. Both countries are Asian and historically Confucian, both the Vietnamese and Chinese governments were born from Marxist-Leninist stock, authoritarian oneparty states that only have allowed one trade union, and are today steeped in a market economy. Yet Vietnam is opening up politically while China is becoming increasingly suppressive under the Xi Jinping regime. In China, the end of 2015 witnessed the mass arrests of labour NGO organisers followed in 2017-18 by arrests of Marxist students who had joined a workers’ strike. So while the two countries appear similar they are also on different trajectories. But the reasons for the two countries’ different current stances toward labour relations also go beyond these political trends. First, while the two countries’ respective trade unions, the VGCL and the ACFTU (All-China Federation of Trade Unions), are both social welfare arms of the Party, China’s ACFTU is much weaker than the VGCL within Vietnam’s political structure. The ACFTU has been entirely under party-state domination since 1949. After seven decades the ACFTU is today no more than a weak second-rate bureaucracy. The VGCL on the...