A previously undisclosed military document authored by Vietnam’s Ministry of Defense in August 2024, known as “The 2nd U.S. Invasion Plan,” reveals a striking divergence between Hanoi’s cultivated diplomatic ties with Washington and its persistent internal caution. While officially elevating its relationship with the United States to a “Comprehensive Strategic Partnership” in 2023, the document characterizes the U.S. as a potential “belligerent” and underscores ongoing preparations against the possibility of American aggression, including concerns about fomented “color revolutions.”

According to reporting by the Associated Press, the document reflects deep-seated fears within the Communist leadership—particularly its military-aligned factions—that the U.S.’s promotion of “freedom, democracy, human rights, ethnicity and religion” may serve as cover for ideological intervention aimed at destabilizing Vietnam’s socialist system. Those internal anxieties persist despite the formal diplomatic upgrade agreed under President Biden. The analysis was published by The 88 Project, a human rights organization that obtained the internal documents. The U.S. State Department declined to comment specifically on the document but reaffirmed that the partnership “promotes prosperity and security” for both countries. A “strong, prosperous, independent and resilient Vietnam,” the State Department said, “benefits our two countries and helps ensure that the Indo-Pacific remains stable, secure, free and open.”

Independent observers, such as Nguyen Khac Giang of Singapore’s ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute, interpret the document as revealing internal friction: Hanoi’s diplomatic expansion with Washington is not uniformly supported across the Communist Party, with the military faction remaining particularly skeptical. June 2024 tensions flared publicly when army-run media accused U.S.-linked Fulbright University of plotting a color revolution—an allegation that drew a rare defense from the Foreign Ministry of the institution. Zachary Abuza, a professor at the National War College, adds that historical memory of the U.S.-Vietnam War continues to inform military concerns, and that fears of ideological contagion overshadow even those relating to Chinese territorial threats.

Why this matters locally—and beyond
Vietnam’s approach underscores the complexity of contemporary geopolitics in Southeast Asia. Its balancing act—simultaneously welcoming increased U.S. trade and strategic engagement while continuing to guard against ideological threats—mirrors broader regional caution. Many U.S. allies in the Indo-Pacific tread a similar line, weighing practical benefits against potential political risks. For analysts tracking U.S. diplomatic outreach, this reveals how even formal partnership structures may mask underlying distrust.

Moreover, Vietnam’s posture reflects the persistent influence of ideological continuity in communist systems, where internal security considerations shape external engagements. The decisions and documents shaping foreign policy may not always align smoothly with public messaging.

This revelation also serves as a reminder that formal diplomatic labels cannot assume uniform internal agreement. Institutions like the military, domestic security apparatuses, or regional party factions may interpret international overtures differently—even in regimes where power is centralized.

It remains to be seen how such internal communications will affect Vietnam’s evolving stance on U.S. strategic initiatives, including its participation in regional forums, defense dialogues, and economic integration—all areas with direct relevance to global and regional stability.

Sources:
Associated Press: “Pushing for trade, preparing for war: A document reveals Vietnam’s dual approach toward the US”
Associated Press report via WSB Radio and other outlets