Việt Nam and China’s Cybersecurity Cooperation: Shared Control and Strategic Caution

Phong Cầm wrote this article in Vietnamese and published it in Luat Khoa Magazine on July 15, 2024.

Việt Nam and China share a long and complex history, marked by both strategic cooperation and deep-seated mistrust. While tensions often flare in the South China Sea, the two communist-led nations have found common ground in one critical area: the preservation of regime stability. One notable analysis explores how this shared goal has led to intensified cooperation in public security, particularly in the realm of cybersecurity and social control.

The analysis comes from Dr. Benoît de Tréglodé, in a 2022 article for France's Revue Défense Nationale titled "Vietnam – China: Cybersecurity and Social Control.” Dr. Tréglodé examines how the two governments have formalized cooperation to combat so-called "reactionary" forces online in a shared effort to protect the dominance of their ruling parties.

This cooperation is part of a 2008 strategic partnership agreement where both nations committed to building a “community with a shared future” in law enforcement and security, and protecting long-term mutual interests regardless of ongoing tensions or longstanding mistrust.

According to the article, the primary instrument for this control in both nations is the powerful Ministry of Public Security (MPS). The MPS oversees a vast range of responsibilities—from maintaining social order and combating corruption to regulating internet surveillance and protecting personal data. With a presence in all provinces and districts, it maintains tight nationwide control across six operational domains: the police, security, strategic intelligence, criminal enforcement, logistics in aiding arrests, and technological surveillance.

Within the MPS, specialized cybersecurity units lead the charge. These include A42, tasked with mobile phone surveillance, and A05 (the Department for Cybersecurity and High-Tech Crime Prevention), which was created in 2018. However, Dr. Tréglodé highlights that these highly centralized agencies often limit local authority and create overlapping jurisdictions within the security apparatus.

Increased Support from China

Việt Nam and China’s security cooperation functions both bilaterally and multilaterally. During the 2019 Belt and Road Forum, both sides agreed to collaborate on maintaining social stability in the digital age. According to Dr. Tréglodé, Việt Nam has since become a central actor in China’s cybersecurity outreach in Southeast Asia.

A key moment in this partnership occurred in June 2017, just five days after China’s Cybersecurity Law took effect, when Việt Nam’s Ministry of Public Security submitted a draft law closely modeled after it. The resulting Vietnamese Cybersecurity Law—effective Jan. 1, 2019—mirrors China’s, containing critical provisions that require tech companies with Vietnamese users to store data domestically and provide it to the MPS upon request, without a court order. Shortly after its enactment, Việt Nam’s government used it to accuse Facebook of allowing anti-state content.

Since then, cyber cooperation has ramped up. The two countries have held joint cybersecurity training, and Việt Nam has adopted Chinese data analysis tools to counter cybercrime and ensure social stability. The government is also integrating AI into its surveillance systems, including facial recognition technologies inspired by China, often partnering with major domestic firms like the FPT Corporation.

This technological push has led experts to speculate that Việt Nam could soon pilot its own social credit system. This would be a digital evolution of a long-standing practice; since the 1950s, Việt Nam has used Chinese-style citizen profiling systems (sơ yếu lý lịch) to record personal data like ethnicity, religion, and political affiliations. The current nationwide project to digitize these personal records is laying the necessary groundwork for such a system.

Still Wary of China’s Influence?

Despite growing security cooperation, Việt Nam remains cautious of China’s expanding influence. This caution is reflected in a long-standing rivalry between two key government bodies: the conservative, pro-China Ministry of Public Security (MPS) and the more reformist Ministry of National Defense (MND).

As cyber attacks were officially acknowledged as a major national security threat in the 2019 Defense White Paper, the MND was tasked with building out its own cybersecurity capabilities. This led to the creation of Force 47 in 2016, an online surveillance and propaganda unit, followed by the establishment of the Cyber Operations Command (Command 86) in 2017. Now considered Việt Nam’s “fifth military branch” (after land, sea, air, and space), Command 86 is charged with protecting national cyber sovereignty.

While both the MPS and the MND work to combat “ideological decline,” Dr. Tréglodé suggests the military may be maintaining its strategic options to avoid over-reliance on Beijing. He posits that Unit T1 of Military Intelligence may be cooperating with the United States to balance the MPS's dominance in cyberspace, a move likely influenced by the 2016 Chinese cyberattacks on Việt Nam’s airport systems.

The military also exerts significant control over the country's national frequency spectrum; it owns Viettel, the nation's largest telecom provider, which is responsible for building Việt Nam’s national firewall. Notably, several key figures in Việt Nam’s cybersecurity landscape also have ties to Viettel, namely, Major General Tống Viết Trung (Viettel’s former Vice-CEO) and Minister of Information and Communications Nguyễn Mạnh Hùng (former CEO).

Dr. Tréglodé concludes that this complex internal dynamic reflects Hà Nội's dual strategy of “cooperation and resistance.” While expanding security cooperation with China to maintain domestic control, Việt Nam is simultaneously building its own capabilities and courting other global allies to maintain its strategic autonomy.

Ultimately, Việt Nam's approach to cybersecurity and social control is a delicate, high-stakes balancing act. By adopting Chinese legal frameworks and surveillance technologies, Hà Nội strengthens its domestic stability. Yet, by simultaneously building an independent military cyber command and maintaining a wary distance, it hedges against becoming too dependent on its powerful northern neighbor. This dual strategy reveals a nation determined to maintain one-party rule at all costs, while navigating the treacherous geopolitical currents between global superpowers.