Follow us on social

Vietnam tariffs trade

Vietnam's fortunes actually take a dramatic turn, and not for worst

For the US, maintaining robust relations with Hanoi are paramount for maintaining influence in the South China Sea

Analysis | Asia-Pacific

Vietnam’s trade fortunes have taken a dramatic turn.

Once slapped with a staggering 46% tariff in President Donald Trump’s initial “Liberation Day” trade offensive, the Southeast Asian nation now finds itself in a much better spot — benefiting from a reduced 10% tariff rate, in line with most other countries. It’s a striking reversal that highlights Hanoi’s stepped-up diplomatic hustle on the global stage.

Vietnam made a significant diplomatic stride recently by dispatching a high-level delegation to Washington, D.C., with the strategic goal of addressing trade imbalances and strengthening economic ties with the United States. In a move that underscored Hanoi's sense of urgency and determination, the Vietnamese government wasted no time in mobilizing its top talent, led by Deputy Prime Minister Ho Duc Phoc, signaling just how seriously the Vietnamese leadership views the issue of trade relations with the U.S.

Deputy Prime Minister Phoc’s visit was carefully orchestrated to engage with key figures in Washington's political and economic spheres. Among the high-profile meetings on the itinerary was a crucial dialogue with U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. Their Friday discussions reportedly centered on narrowing the trade gap between the two nations and pledges by Vietnam to tackle origin of goods fraud (China has been accused to shipping its products to be sold via countries like Vietnam to avoid tariffs). These and more fair and reciprocal trade practices that would benefit both economies were also reportedly discussed.

One of Trump's priorities has been to bring manufacturing back to the U.S. Textiles have all but moved overseas completely in the last 20 years resulting in the massive trade gap with Southeast Asian countries like Vietnam. Currently the U.S.trade deficit with Hanoi is $123.5 billion.

In anticipation of "Liberation Day" Hanoi cut its own tariffs on several U.S. products including LNG and cars, and also approved Starlink services, and pledged to bring in more imports from the U.S.

During the official visit last week, in addition to engaging with select members of former President Trump’s cabinet, the Vietnamese delegation also sought to strengthen ties within the U.S. legislative branch by meeting with key members of Congress. Notably, they held discussions with Republican Senators Bill Hagerty of Tennessee and Steve Daines of Montana, both of whom have demonstrated a strong interest in Asian economic affairs and the stability of global supply chains.

These meetings provided Vietnam with an opportunity to broaden its support base on Capitol Hill and reinforce bipartisan interest in deepening economic cooperation. By engaging lawmakers with strategic interests in the Indo-Pacific, Vietnam is positioning itself as a reliable partner in efforts to diversify supply chains and promote regional stability — an increasingly important priority amid shifting global dynamics.

The diplomatic charm offensive extended beyond just official meetings. The Vietnamese team engaged with think tanks, trade groups, and other stakeholders throughout the Capital Beltway, aiming to strengthen long-term partnerships and build goodwill. The delegation's proactive approach, clear messaging, and high-level representation were widely seen as a diplomatic win for Hanoi.

The stakes are high for Vietnam since they have the third-largest trade surplus with the U.S. after China and Mexico and export more than $100 billion in goods to the U.S. annually, including Nike shoes.

After all, the original punitive tariff imposed by Washington on Vietnam had threatened to strain ties between the two nations at a critical moment — just as they mark 50 years since the fall of Saigon on April 30. As strategic comprehensive partners, the U.S. and Vietnam have built a relationship centered on economic cooperation, regional stability, and shared security interests in the Indo-Pacific.

“As we near the 50th anniversary of Saigon’s fall, the U.S.-Vietnam relationship rests on pragmatism more than sentiment. Vietnam’s youth — over half its population is under 35 — barely recall the war. They’re focused on iPhones, K-pop, and global brands flooding Hanoi’s malls,” claims Alison Huynh, a Silicon Valley investor and host of the Vietnam Summit at Mar-a-Lago, dedicated to fostering U.S.-Vietnam economic ties.

Under the leadership of Communist Party Secretary-General Tô Lâm, Vietnam is charting an ambitious course toward a more advanced economic future. The country has set its sights on becoming an upper-income, knowledge-based, and tech-driven economy by 2045. To achieve this transformation, Hanoi is aiming for annual growth rates approaching 8%, backed by major investments in education, innovation, and digital infrastructure.

This strategic shift comes at a time when Vietnam’s global trade position is gaining new momentum. For American consumers, especially in the post-NCAA championship shopping rush for Nike and Adidas gear (much of it made in Vietnam), the lower tariffs mean more competitive prices. But for Vietnam, it’s more than a short-term win: it’s a signal that the country is ready to play a bigger role in the global economy, not just as a manufacturing hub, but as a rising player in tech and innovation.

Over the past few decades, the U.S. and Vietnam have worked steadily to rebuild and strengthen their relationship, culminating in a formal upgrade to a “comprehensive strategic partnership.” This partnership has been grounded in robust economic cooperation, mutual interests in maintaining regional stability, and shared security concerns across the Indo-Pacific.

However, the sudden imposition of a steep tariff risked more than just short-term economic pain. It threatened to disrupt key supply chains, rattle investor confidence, and weaken diplomatic trust — potentially nudging Vietnam closer to alternative economic alliances, including with China or regional blocs less aligned with U.S. strategic goals.

The recent decision by Washington to reduce and pause tariffs on Vietnam could also play a strategic role in managing tensions in the South China Sea. This move is more than an economic gesture — it signals a broader geopolitical alignment. As territorial disputes and regional rivalries escalate in the Indo-Pacific, particularly with China's growing assertiveness in the South China Sea, Washington’s approach to Vietnam reflects an effort to solidify alliances and partnerships in the region. By easing economic pressures, the United States is extending a hand to a key Southeast Asian partner, potentially bolstering Vietnam's economic resilience and encouraging closer diplomatic cooperation.

In an era marked by intensifying great power competition, maintaining relations with Vietnam is not only beneficial for trade but also pivotal for sustaining U.S. influence in the region. Vietnam occupies a strategic position both geographically and politically, sharing maritime boundaries with several contested zones in the South China Sea. Strengthening economic ties through tariff relief could deepen trust and pave the way for greater collaboration on security and regional stability. In this context, economic diplomacy becomes a tool for geopolitical strategy, helping to counterbalance China’s dominance and reaffirm the U.S. commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific.

From Vietnam's side of the court, by capitalizing on favorable trade conditions and embracing forward-looking reforms, Tô Lâm's team is positioning itself to not only maintain momentum, but also redefine its economic identity on the global stage. While the reduced tariffs may be a temporary advantage, if Vietnam sticks to its game plan, the rewards could be lasting.


Top photo credit: People walk past a gate of the Samsung Electro-Mechanics factory, following U.S. President Donald Trump's imposition of a tariff rate of 46 per cent on Vietnam — later paused — in Thai Nguyen province, Vietnam, April 9, 2025. REUTERS/Thinh Nguyen
Analysis | Asia-Pacific
Trump ASEAN
Top photo credit: U.S. President Donald Trump looks at Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., next to Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim when posing for a family photo with leaders at the ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, October 26, 2025. Vincent Thian/Pool via REUTERS

‘America First’ meets ‘ASEAN Way’ in Kuala Lumpur

Asia-Pacific

The 2025 ASEAN and East Asia Summits in Kuala Lumpur beginning today are set to be consequential multilateral gatherings — defining not only ASEAN’s internal cohesion but also the shape of U.S.–China relations in the Indo-Pacific.

President Donald Trump’s participation will be the first by a U.S. president in an ASEAN-led summit since 2022. President Biden skipped the last two such summits in 2023 and 2024, sending then-Vice President Harris instead.

keep readingShow less
iran, china, russia
Top photo credit: Top image credit: Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov and and Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi shake hands as Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu looks on during their meet with reporters after their meeting at Diaoyutai State Guest House on March 14, 2025 in Beijing, China. Lintao Zhang/Pool via REUTERS

'Annulled'! Russia won't abide snapback sanctions on Iran

Middle East

“A raider attack on the U.N. Security Council.” This was the explosive accusation leveled by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov this week. His target was the U.N. Secretariat and Western powers, whom he blamed for what Russia sees as an illegitimate attempt to restore the nuclear-related international sanctions on Iran.

Beyond the fiery rhetoric, Ryabkov’s statement contained a message: Russia, he said, now considers all pre-2015 U.N. sanctions on Iran, snapped back by the European signatories of the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA) — the United Kingdom, France, Germany — “annulled.” Moscow will deepen its military-technical cooperation with Tehran accordingly, according to Ryabkov.

This is more than a diplomatic spat; it is the formal announcement of a split in international legal reality. The world’s major powers are now operating under two irreconcilable interpretations of international law. On one side, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany assert that the sanctions snapback mechanism of the JCPOA was legitimately triggered for Iran’s alleged violations. On the other, Iran, Russia, and China reject this as an illegitimate procedural act.

This schism was not inevitable, and its origin reveals a profound incongruence. The Western powers that most frequently appeal to the sanctity of the "rules-based international order" and international law have, in this instance, taken an action whose effects fundamentally undermine it. By pushing through a legal maneuver that a significant part of the Security Council considers illegitimate, they have ushered the world into a new and more dangerous state. The predictable, if imperfect, framework of universally recognized Security Council decisions is being replaced by a system where legal facts are determined by political interests espoused by competing power blocs.

This rupture followed a deliberate Western choice to reject compromises in a stand-off with Iran. While Iran was in a technical violation of the provisions of the JCPOA — by, notably, amassing a stockpile of highly enriched uranium (up to 60% as opposed to the 3.67% for a civilian use permissible under the JCPOA), there was a chance to avert the crisis. In the critical weeks leading to the snapback, Iran had signaled concessions in talks with the International Atomic Energy Agency in Cairo, in terms of renewing cooperation with the U.N. nuclear watchdog’s inspectors.

keep readingShow less
On Ukraine and Venezuela, Trump needs to dump the sycophants
Top Photo Credit: (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

On Ukraine and Venezuela, Trump needs to dump the sycophants

Europe

While diplomats labored to produce the Dayton Accords in 1995, then-Secretary of Defense Bill Perry advised, “No agreement is better than a bad agreement.” Given that Washington’s allies in London, Paris, Berlin and Warsaw are opposed to any outcome that might end the war in Ukraine, no agreement may be preferable. But for President Trump, there is no point in equating the illusion of peace in Ukraine with a meaningless ceasefire that settles nothing.

Today, Ukraine is mired in corruption, starting at the very highest levels of the administration in Kyiv. Sending $175 billion of borrowed money there "for however long it takes" has turned out to be worse than reckless. The U.S. national sovereign debt is surging to nearly $38 trillion and rising by $425 billion with each passing month. President Trump needs to turn his attention away from funding Joe Biden’s wars and instead focus on the faltering American economy.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.