Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-v2bm5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T08:00:25.991Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Viet Nam’s Dynamic Approach to Lawfare

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2025

Tien-Duc NGUYEN Open the ORCID record for Tien-Duc NGUYEN [Opens in a new window]
Tien-Duc NGUYEN*
Affiliation:
Institute of State and Law, Vietnam Academy of Social Sciences, Hanoi, Vietnam
*
Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article reviews the emergence of “lawfare” as a term in vogue in recent years. Despite its complexity, lawfare is widely used by scholars and policy-makers in a disparaging and polemical sense. Efforts have been made to attribute a neutral tone to the term with a clearer analytical framework. Taking Viet Nam and the South China Sea disputes as an illustration, the article probes whether and how a small, peripheral country works out a lawfare strategy. It finds that Viet Nam has employed elements of lawfare strategy to counter China’s expansionist claims at sea by recalibrating its national interests and legal positions over time. Lawfare is a long game, yet it holds out hope for Viet Nam, a peripheral country, amidst intense superpower rivalry.

Keywords

lawfarelegal warfareSouth China Seathe law of the seaViet Nam
Type
Notes and Comments
Information
Asian Journal of International Law , First View , pp. 1 - 12
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Asian Society for International Law.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Orde F. KITTRIE, Lawfare: Law as a Weapon of War (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016) at 6.

2 Ibid., at 4–5.

3 Ibid., at 40.

4 Ibid., at 40–43.

5 See e.g. Li ZHAOJIE, “China” in Simon CHESTERMAN, Hisashi OWADA, and Ben SAUL, eds., The Oxford Handbook of International Law in Asia and the Pacific (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019).

6 E.g. Congyan CAI, The Rise of China and International Law: Taking Chinese Exceptionalism Seriously (New York: Oxford University Press, 2019) at 271.

7 See e.g. Tien Duc NGUYEN and Thu Thuy Thi TRAN, “The Limits of Vietnam’s Incrementalism towards the Abolition of Capital Punishment for Drug Offenses” (2022) 17 Asian Journal of Comparative Law 222.

8 Kittrie, supra note 1 at 48–50.

9 See e.g., G.I. TUNKIN, “The Contemporary Soviet Theory of International Law” (1978) 31 Current Legal Problems 177.

10 Trang (Mae) NGUYEN, “International Law as Hedging: Perspectives from Secondary Authoritarian States” (2020) 114 AJIL Unbound 237 at 237.

11 Charles DUNLAP, “Law and Military Interventions: Preserving Humanitarian Values in 21st Conflicts” (29 November 2001), online: Duke  https://people.duke.edu/∼pfeaver/dunlap.pdf.

12 US Department of Defense, “The National Defense Strategy of The United States of America” (March 2005), online: ETH Zurich https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/154941/US%20National%20defense%20strategy%202005.pdf.

13 David LUBAN, “Carl Schmitt and the Critique of Lawfare” (2010) 43 Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law 457.

14 Ibid.

15 Ibid.

16 Kittrie, supra note 1 at 6–7.

17 Charles DUNLAP, “Lawfare Today: A Perspective” (2008) Yale Journal of International Affairs 146; Charles DUNLAP, “Lawfare 101: A Primer” (2017) 97 Military Review 8.

18 Ibid.

19 Ibid., at 146.

20 Kittrie, supra note 1 at 8.

21 Joel P. TRACHTMAN, “Integrating Lawfare and Warfare” (2016) 39 Boston College International and Comparative Law Review 267.

22 Jill I. GOLDENZIEL, “Law as a Battlefield: The U.S., China, and Global Escalation of Lawfare” (2020) 106 Cornell Law Review 1085 at 1096.

23 Ibid., at 1097.

24 Kittrie, supra note 1 at 8.

25 Cai, supra note 6 at 272.

26 Goldenziel, supra note 22 at 1099.

27 Ibid.

28 Ibid.

29 “UNCLOS: Hiến Pháp Của Đại Dương” Nhân Dân (6 December 2022), online: Nhân Dân https://special.nhandan.vn/UNCLOS/index.html.

30 Hong Thao NGUYEN, “Vietnam’s South China Sea Policy” in zou KEYUAN, ed., Routledge Handbook of the South China Sea (New York: Routledge, 2021) at 231.

31 DO Thanh Hai, Vietnam and the South China Sea: Politics, Security and Legality (New York: Routledge, 2017) at 90–91.

32 Statement of the Government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam on the Territorial Sea, the Contiguous Zone, the Exclusive Economic Zone and the Continental Shelf 1977; Statement of the Government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam on the Baseline used to Measure the Width of Vietnam’s Territorial Sea 1982.

33 The National Assembly, The Law of the Sea of Viet Nam 2012 [18/2012/QH13] Art. 4(3).

34 “Vietnam Welcomes Hague Ruling” Vietnam Law Magazine (13 July 2016), online: Vietnam Law Magazine https://vietnamlawmagazine.vn/vietnam-welcomes-hague-ruling-5441.html; “South China Sea Disputes Must Be Settled through Diplomatic and Legal Processes: Spokesperson” Vietnam News (12 July 2021), online: Vietnam News https://vietnamnews.vn/politics-laws/991437/south-china-sea-disputes-must-be-settled-through-diplomatic-and-legal-processes-spokesperson.html.

35 Tom JONES, “Vietnam Weighs South China Sea Claim” Global Arbitration Review (7 May 2020), online: Global Arbitration Review https://globalarbitrationreview.com/article/vietnam-weighs-south-china-sea-claim

36 Thi Thanh Ha NGUYEN, “Vietnam and the South China Sea” in Leszek BUSZYNSKI and Do THANH HAI, eds., The South China Sea: From a Regional Maritime Dispute to Geo-Strategic Competition (New York: Routledge, 2019), 80.

37 DO, supra note 31 at 90–91.

38 Hong Thao NGUYEN, “Vietnam’s Position on the Sovereignty over the Paracels & the Spratlys: Its Maritime Claims” (2012) 5 Journal of East Asia and International Law 161 at 200–201.

39 DO, supra note 31 at Chapter 7.

40 See e.g., Thi Lan Anh NGUYEN, “Award of the Republic of Philippines v. the People’s Republic of China: Legal Implications on the South China Sea Disputes” (2015) 21 Asian Yearbook of International Law 34 at 43.

41 Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, “Outer Limits of the Continental Shelf beyond 200 Nautical Miles from the Baselines: Submissions to the Commission: Partial Submission by Malaysia in the South China Sea” (12 April 2024), online: UN https://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/submission_mys_12_12_2019.html.

42 NGUYEN Hong Thao, “South China Sea: Battle of the Diplomatic Notes among China and Non-Claimant States” (2023) 8 Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy 128.

43 VO Ngoc Diep, “Viet Nam’s Note Verbale No.22/HC-2020: A Commentary” Maritime Issues (7 May 2020), online: Maritime Issues http://www.maritimeissues.com/law/viet-nams-note-verbale-no22hc2020-a-commentary.html

44 Ibid.

45 NGUYEN Hong Thao and NGUYEN Thi Lan Huong, “Viability of the South China Sea Arbitration Award: An Analysis” Vietnam Law Magazine (8 April 2021), online: Vietnam Law Magazine https://vietnamlawmagazine.vn/viability-of-the-south-china-sea-arbitration-award-an-analysis-37884.html.

46 Carlyle A.THAYER, “U.S. FONOPS, Vietnam and The South China Sea” (2018) Thayer Consultancy Brief; Linh PHAM, “Vietnam Reaffirms Respect to Free Maritime Navigation as US Ship Sails near Paracels” Hanoi Times (9 January 2019), online: Hanoi Times https://m.hanoitimes.vn/vietnam-reaffirms-respect-to-free-maritime-navigation-as-us-ship-sails-near-paracels-1528.html.

47 See more in Kevin LEDDY, “Competing Claims: The Developing Role of International Law and Unilateral Challenges to Maritime Claims in the South China Sea” (2023) 54 Vanderbilt Law Review 785.

48 ANI, “World Meteorological Organization Removes China’s “nine-Dash Line” after Vietnam’s Request” ThePrint (27 August 2022), online: ThePrint https://theprint.in/world/world-meteorological-organization-removes-chinas-nine-dash-line-after-vietnams-request/1102927/

49 See e.g. “Vietnam Requests Removing Chinese Film with Nine-Dash Line Scene” VOV (9 July 2023), online: VOV https://english.vov.vn/en/culture/vietnam-requests-removing-chinese-film-with-nine-dash-line-scene-post1031566.vov; Linh PHAM, “Rampant Violations of Vietnam’s Sovereignty Found on Apps” Hanoi Times (5 December 2020), online: Hanoi Times https://hanoitimes.vn/rampant-violations-of-vietnams-sovereignty-found-on-apps-315130.html; “Vietnam Blocks Sony’s Action Movie “Uncharted” over South China Sea Map” Financial Post (12 March 2022), online: Financial Post https://financialpost.com/pmn/business-pmn/vietnam-blocks-sonys-action-movie-uncharted-over-south-china-sea-map

50 See e.g. North Sea Continental Shelf (Federal Republic of Germany v. Denmark) [1969] I.C.J. Rep 53.

51 Keyuan ZOU, “Joint Development in the South China Sea: A New Approach” (2006) 21 The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 83 at 91.

52 Hong Thao NGUYEN, “Khái Niệm ‘Hợp Tác Cùng Phát Triển Trên Biển’ [The Concept of ‘Cooperation for Mutual Development’]” (2018) 1 Tạp chí Nhà nước và Pháp luật [State and Law Review] 70 at 72–74.

53 Ibid., at 73.

54 Ibid.

55 “Chinese Patrols in Disputed South China Sea Hit New Peak amid High Tensions” The Straits Times (31 January 2023), online: Straits Times https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/chinese-patrols-in-disputed-south-china-sea-hit-new-peak-with-tensions-high.

56 NGUYEN, supra note 52 at 74.

57 Ibid.

58 Ibid., at 75.

59 Ibid.

60 Ibid.

61 Ibid., at 75–76.

62 DO, supra note 31 at 251.

63 Khac Giang NGUYEN, “Vietnam’s Response to China’s Militarised Fishing Fleet” (4 August 2018), online: East Asia Forum https://eastasiaforum.org/2018/08/04/vietnams-response-to-chinas-militarised-fishing-fleet/

64 Haoran CUI and Yubing SHI, “A Comparative Analysis of the Legislation on Maritime Militia Between China and Vietnam” (2022) 53 Ocean Development & International Law 147 at 160.

65 Ibid.

66 Ding DUO, “What’s behind Vietnam’s Maritime Militia Construction?” China Daily (1 July 2022), online: China Daily https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202201/07/WS61d7a545a310cdd39bc7fb50.html.

67 Linh PHAM, “Vietnam Rejects Accusations of Building Armed Militia in East Sea” Hanoi Times (20 January 2022), online: Hanoi Times https://hanoitimes.vn/vietnam-rejects-accusations-of-building-armed-militia-in-east-sea-319822.html.

68 Phuong Hoa NGUYEN, “Một Số Vấn Đề về Tổ Chức và Hoạt Động Của Lực Lượng Dân Quân Tự vệ Biển [Some Issues Regarding the Organization and Operation of the Maritime Militia and Self-Defence Force]” Tạp chí Quốc phòng toàn dân [National Defence Journal] (20 March 2017), online: Tạp chí Quốc phòng toàn dân  https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:tapchiqptd.vn/vi/nghien-cuu-trao-doi/mot-so-van-de-ve-to-chuc-va-hoat-dong-cua-luc-luong-dan-quan-tu-ve-bien/9901.html&sca_esv=44ea874260aa60b7&rlz=1C1CHBF_enVN873VN873&strip=0&vwsrc=0.

69 Khac Giang NGUYEN, “The Vietnamese Maritime Militia: Myths and Realities” (21 July 2022), online: RSIS https://www.rsis.edu.sg/rsis-publication/idss/ip22040-the-vietnamese-maritime-militia-myths-and-realities/.

70 Ibid.

71 Ibid.

72 The Phuong NGUYEN, “Vietnam’s Maritime Militia Is Not a Black Hole in the South China Sea” (22 May 2020), online: AMTI https://amti.csis.org/vietnams-maritime-militia-is-not-a-black-hole-in-the-south-china-sea/.

73 Nguyen, supra note 69.

74 Paul W. GRIMM et al., “Playing the Long Game: The Role of International Courts and Tribunals in the Russo-Ukrainian War” Judicature International (2023), online: Duke https://judicature.duke.edu/articles/playing-the-long-game-the-role-of-international-courts-and-tribunals-in-the-russo-ukrainian-war/.