• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Nguyễn Khắc Giang"
  ],
  "type": "commentary",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie China",
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "Carnegie China Commentaries"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie China",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "regions": [
    "Southeast Asia",
    "China"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}
Vietnam's Top Leader To Lam meets with young representatives from China and Vietnam participating in the "Red Study Tours" at the Great Hall of the People on April 15, 2026 in Beijing, China. T

Source: Getty

Commentary
Carnegie China

Why Vietnam Is Swinging in China’s Direction

Hanoi and Beijing have long treated each other as distant cousins rather than comrades in arms. That might be changing as both sides draw closer to hedge against uncertainty and America’s erratic behavior.

Link Copied
By Nguyễn Khắc Giang
Published on Apr 24, 2026

For all the reasons that should bind Hanoi and Beijing together—ideological alignment, regime anxiety, export dependence, the weight of geography—they have not forged any real alliance. In fact, just the opposite. The two communist states have long kept each other at arm’s length, which meant that Washington treated Vietnam as one of Southeast Asia’s key “swing states.” That view was pronounced under the Biden administration.  

Yet it appears that instead of swinging toward the United States, Vietnam is moving in the other direction as of late. It would be a mistake to view this shift as Hanoi’s newfound affection for Beijing. What has changed is the mutual desire to hedge against a world running adrift. In this environment, pragmatism rules the day. Under new leadership, Hanoi now appears as receptive as Beijing is in welcoming the opportunity to enhance the relationship. Indeed, Vietnam needs an insurance policy against a world increasingly skeptical of American guarantees. China, for its part, has every reason to lock in a consequential Southeast Asian partner in a region the Trump administration has jolted with erratic tariffs and vanishing summitry. 

During President Tô Lâm’s recent state visit to Beijing, the elevation of bilateral ties was crystallized in the joint statement which said, “community with a shared future of strategic significance at a higher level in the new era.” Though verbose, it reflects a shifting relationship that is going to rest more on business and trade than on political alignment. 

This wasn’t always the case. Under former general secretary Nguyễn Phú Trọng, Vietnam leaned heavily on ideology, party discipline, and socialist fraternity. But alignment on ideology was never quite sufficient to overcome the memory of the 1979 border war, quarrels at sea, or Vietnam’s default instinct to keep its giant neighbor at bay. What has changed under Tô Lâm is the shape of the offer, and the shape of the man receiving it. After a career running the Ministry of Public Security, Tô Lâm is a secret-policeman-turned-pragmatist—one who has concentrated both party and state power into a single leader, a rare feat in Vietnam’s consensus-driven politics.  

A pragmatist with enormous political capital is music to Beijing’s ears, given its predilection for working through a single point of decisionmaking. What’s more, Tô Lâm has carried out radical reforms in an attempt to re-engineer the Southeast Asian “star” economy under the banner of a “new era of national rise.” He may speak Vietnamese, but he speaks the same vernacular of economic development that Beijing understands well.  

When Tô Lâm arrived in Beijing exactly one year after Xi’s last trip to Hanoi, Beijing had honed its pitch effectively. Xi sold Tô Lâm on infrastructure, supply chains, and a discreet seat at Beijing’s multilateral table.  

The economic package China offered is in line with what it does in numerous developing markets: “we can help you build things quickly and cheaply, and by the way, we’re very good at trains.” The offer of building and financing three cross-border, standard-gauge railways connecting Vietnam’s northern belt to Yunnan and Guangxi provinces—starting with a $7.2 billion line from the border town of Lao Cai to the port of Hai Phong via Hanoi—isn’t a huge surprise. High-speed rail was added as a technology field, a not-so-subtle Chinese bid for a slice of Vietnam’s $67 billion north–south HSR megaproject, which is due to break ground by year-end. Tô Lâm, as if to underscore the pivot, took two rides on China’s bullet trains during his trip and lavished public praise on it.  

Around the railways sits a wider architecture of economic convergence. The two sides signed thirty-two cooperation documents during the visit, while the joint statement set out plans on supply chains, customs, science and technology, subnational cooperation, and cross-border development. It also gave prominence to transport and logistics connectivity, which fits the broader turn in the relationship: away from grand slogans alone and towards the mechanics of movement, production, and resilience. For Hanoi, that is sensible enough. China is already Vietnam’s largest trading partner, and if the relationship is to remain politically viable, it must produce more than just a swelling trade deficit. 

Beijing touts multilateralism but, of course, strongly prefers countries to join its membership-only clubs, not the other superpower’s. On that front, Tô Lâm’s signals were significant. The joint statement spoke warmly of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and said Hanoi was ready to maintain exchanges on the possibility of becoming an SCO partner. It also reaffirmed support for co-operation under China’s four global initiatives. For a country that has long preferred strategic ambiguity and careful wording, this was notable. Hanoi may not be signing up to the Chinese bloc yet, but it is becoming more receptive, at least in language, to Chinese alternatives as the world grows more unpredictable. 

None of this amounts to Vietnam abandoning its strategic autonomy. Quite the opposite: it shows Hanoi hedging harder in a more turbulent world. A smaller state living next door to a giant does not need to love that giant to tighten ties. It merely needs to conclude that the external environment is becoming nastier and the old balancers are less dependable. 

Three lessons follow. First, China has become increasingly adept at tailoring its package to placate different stakeholders. For the Vietnamese: ideology for the ideologues, infrastructure for the pragmatists, and security coordination for both. Second, the grammar of Vietnam’s hedge is changing. It is now expressed less through distance and more through selective embrace: warmer language, denser institutional links, but continued effort to preserve room for maneuver. Third, in a region rattled by uncertainty, influence belongs not to the power that moralizes eloquently, but to the one that can finance railways, stabilize supply chains, and promise political reassurance without demanding political fealty. For Hanoi, Beijing has made an offer it cannot refuse.

About the Author

Nguyen-khac-giang

Nguyễn Khắc Giang

Visiting Fellow, ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute

Nguyễn Khắc Giang is a visiting fellow with the Vietnam Studies Programme at the ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute in Singapore and previously head of the Political Research Unit at the Vietnam Institute for Economic and Policy Research in Hanoi.

Nguyễn Khắc Giang
Visiting Fellow, ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute
Nguyễn Khắc Giang
Foreign PolicySoutheast AsiaChina

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Gas station attendant gesturing while a woman gets her motorcycle refilled
    Commentary
    Emissary
    Fuel Subsidies Are an Easy Fix for the Iran War’s Energy Price Shock—and the Wrong One

    Instead, governments should adopt climate-friendly measures to address the impact of rising prices.

      • Henok Asmelash

      Henok Asmelash

  • Servers
    Article
    The Geopolitical Debates Over Controlling Cloud Compute

    If U.S. policymakers continue down the path of restricting China’s access to frontier AI, they will eventually have to implement some sort of restriction on cloud access.

      Noah Tan

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Europeans Are Quiet Quitting the United States

    European leaders have now not only lost faith in Donald Trump’s U.S. presidency, but also in America’s hegemony as a whole. But short-term challenges make an immediate divorce unwise.

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Azerbaijan Looks to Tap Ukraine’s Military Expertise With Raft of New Deals

    Baku’s backing for Ukraine is less about confronting Russia than about quietly broadening the mix of partners it relies on.

      Zaur Shiriyev

  • A Ukrainian flag is seen attached to a burned car at the site of a heavily damaged residential building following Russian air strike in the city of Ternopil, on November 19, 2025, amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
    Paper
    In Fraught Geopolitical Times, Accountability for Russian Aggression Remains Crucial Despite U.S. Policy Reversals

    As the war in Ukraine enters its fifth year, it is worth examining where accountability efforts currently stand, how U.S. policy on Russian aggression has shifted, and what the Ukrainian experience reveals about the challenges of holding international aggressors to account.

      • Federica D'Alessandra

      Federica D’Alessandra

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.