After Resolution 68, the private sector was, for the first time, named “one of the most important drivers” of the economy.

Soon after, Resolution 79 was introduced, reaffirming the “leading, pioneering and development-shaping role” of the state economy.

Placed side by side, the two resolutions naturally raise a question: do these two drivers interfere with one another in practice?

The question echoes across development projects, past debates over electricity price adjustments, and the concerns of state-owned enterprises about balancing market rules with social objectives.

For that reason, the discussions around Resolution 79 at a recent seminar hosted by Tien Phong newspaper were not merely academic - they reflected the realities of development.

Leading cannot rely on role alone.

When the state economy is required to operate under market principles with full accounting, competition with the private sector becomes inevitable.

The real issue is whether that competition will create joint development - or mutual erosion.

If state-owned enterprises lack real capabilities, the notion of “leading” easily slips into formality.

They cannot open new paths if they themselves are still searching for one.

Resolution 79 is correct in its goals and direction, but it needs a clear roadmap to avoid becoming strong on paper yet slow in practice.

More importantly, if the boundaries between the state and private sectors are not clearly defined, the resolution may unintentionally weaken the spirit of Resolution 68.

When “leading” is misinterpreted as “doing on behalf of” or “encroaching upon,” the most important growth driver can be harmed.

Experience from transport infrastructure reveals a long-standing paradox: a state enterprise may be assigned multiple national expressway projects, yet its charter capital remains small compared to its total assets and investment scale.

Such a capital structure limits the enterprise’s ability to raise additional resources, forcing it to miss critical opportunities.

Only when capital is increased in a substantive way does the picture change.

The enterprise accelerates immediately, undertaking multiple large projects at once, including PPP initiatives.

The lesson is clear: assigning a leading role without providing adequate resources exposes the enterprise to unnecessary risk.

Therefore, Resolution 79 should not be interpreted as making state-owned enterprises stronger to expand or overshadow others.

It places them in the position of doing precisely what they are meant to do - operating in core sectors with real spillover effects.

An economy that invests only in guaranteed-win projects will struggle to create breakthroughs.

Leading under Resolution 79 means moving first and accepting controlled risks, especially in new sectors, high-tech industries, and strategic infrastructure - areas where the private sector is not yet ready.

This requires not only more flexible evaluation mechanisms but also proper protection for those willing to take on responsibility for the common good.

If every risk is treated as wrongdoing, no one will have the courage to lead.

Market discipline and difficult decisions

A notable shift is that some major state corporations are approaching Resolution 79 not by asking for more mechanisms, but by tightening their own operations.

Operating under market principles means facing difficult, even sensitive decisions.

Electricity offers a clear illustration.

Complying with market rules does not mean ignoring social objectives, but it also requires transparency in costs, correct price signals, and efficient resource use.

The boundary between market logic, social welfare and political tasks is where the leadership role of state-owned enterprises is tested most clearly.

Alongside this, governance reform is no longer abstract.

Many state enterprises have begun pushing digital transformation, standardizing processes, and improving operational efficiency - creating real value instead of cosmetic changes.

This demonstrates that, when enforced seriously, market discipline can indeed produce “sweet fruit.”

One often oversimplified point of Resolution 79 is that it is not only about state-owned enterprises.

Its deeper focus is on managing the entirety of state economic resources - capital, land, infrastructure, public assets and investment funds.

Public assets belonging to the entire population do not mean only the state sector should be prioritized to use them.

What matters is efficient allocation for society as a whole through transparent, market-based mechanisms.

State-owned enterprises are merely one tool - not an end in themselves.

This approach helps Resolution 79 avoid falling back into the old pattern of “talking again about SOEs,” and instead moves toward a more modern perspective: the state leads by organizing and allocating resources, not by replacing markets.

Bottlenecks lie in institutions and people

A resolution, no matter how correct, will struggle to take effect if institutionalization is slow or unclear.

For Resolution 79, the hardest phase is no longer direction-setting but turning words into action - building specific mechanisms and programs that are clear enough to implement yet flexible enough not to constrain those carrying them out.

But ultimately, people remain the decisive factor.

With the same mechanism, some places perform exceptionally well while others barely move.

The difference lies in capability, resolve and accountability - especially among leaders.

Viewed as a whole, Resolution 79 does not seek to expand the state economy in breadth but to refine it for greater efficiency.

Leading is not about overshadowing the private sector; it is about paving the way for better market functioning, more efficient resource allocation and stronger long-term growth foundations.

If implemented properly, Resolution 79 will not conflict with Resolution 68 but complement it.

Together, they form two parallel pillars: the state fulfilling its role in strategic guidance, while the market - with the private sector as the main engine - receives enough room to grow.

In the end, the real test of Resolution 79 lies in whether there is sufficient determination and capability to turn “leadership role” into substantive action.

That answer will emerge in each project, each decision and the economic outcomes that follow.

Tu Giang