When policy gives people the power to rise

To mark the 80th anniversary of the traditional day of the state management agency for ethnic affairs, May 3, 1946 - May 3, 2026, VietNamNet held an online discussion titled “80 years of ethnic affairs - A journey of great national unity and the aspiration to rise.”

The discussion was joined by Hoang Xuan Luong, former Deputy Minister and Vice Chairman of the Committee for Ethnic Minority Affairs; Be Trung Anh, a full-time National Assembly deputy at the Committee for Deputy Affairs of the 16th National Assembly and standing member of the Ethnic Council of the 15th National Assembly; and Ha Van Sang, Deputy Director of the Department of Ethnic and Religious Affairs under the Central Commission for Propaganda and Mass Mobilization.

The two stories are different, but they point to one shared truth: when policy gives people the power to act and awakens their inner strength, ethnic communities do not merely escape poverty. They begin to shape their own future. This was the shared view of the guests in the next part of VietNamNet’s discussion titled “80 years of ethnic affairs - A journey of great national unity and the aspiration to rise.”

Mr. Hoang Xuan Luong, from your observations and real-life experience, could you share a specific story about a village, community or individual that changed when policy was designed and implemented in the right way?

Hoang Xuan Luong: In the process of building ethnic policies and working at the grassroots level for many years, I was especially impressed by a commune of ethnic people in the Central Highlands, Ia Blang in former Chu Se, Gia Lai Province.

When I visited in 2015, people there were still mainly engaged in traditional agriculture and upland farming, and the poverty rate was more than 70 percent. When I returned in 2025, ten years later, Ia Blang was completely different. Households were developing pepper, coffee and rubber farms; some owned three to four hectares. In particular, ethnic minority people in Ia Blang had connected with others to become agents involved in import and export, while also forming processing and production groups. Their lives had changed in a very impressive way. I asked local officials in Ia Blang and learned that the poverty rate had fallen to below 2 percent, compared with more than 70 percent ten years earlier.

There are many villages like this in Vietnam, such as Muong Long in Ky Son, Nghe An, or villages in the Northwest. These are the clearest examples of the consistency in the ethnic policy of the Party and the State over the past 80 years.

Mr. Ha Van Sang, culture is increasingly described as a development resource, especially for ethnic minority communities, which have rich and diverse cultural life. How can we both preserve identity and respect legitimate beliefs and religious life, while turning culture into inner strength, livelihoods and a development driver without allowing it to be commercialized, distorted or stripped of its original value?

Ha Van Sang: This question touches on a very difficult point. Recent resolutions, directives and conclusions have all emphasized turning culture into a resource. But saying that is one thing; doing it is very hard.

This must be defined as a strategy. Relevant ministries and sectors, especially the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, together with localities, must discuss it very carefully and proceed step by step.

In my view, preservation must first be identified as the foundation. Exploiting culture on that foundation is a different matter. If we treat culture as a resource to be dug up and sold, culture will soon be gone. Culture is the soul of a nation. When culture remains, the nation remains; when culture is lost, the nation is lost.

The colorful cultural identities of Vietnam’s ethnic groups create a very vibrant national picture. We must identify core values such as language, sacred rituals and the knowledge of local ethnic communities. Values with broader appeal, such as cuisine, costumes and festivals, can be shared more widely.

But what to select, and how to develop it into a product, must follow clear standards. If sacred elements are exploited without understanding their sacredness, then even when they are promoted, no one will understand them. If offerings and festivals are staged without interpretation or concrete explanation, festivals everywhere will look the same, and people will not understand the identity behind them.

Second, the role of ownership must be given to the communities themselves. Take the Long Tong festival, for example. In the past, district-level authorities and district culture offices organized it, not the people. But if a festival in a village is organized by the village head or hamlet leader, they will know what to introduce to outsiders, what to preserve, and how to participate directly in the process. Only then can tourism be developed while filtering out what is unsuitable and preserving what is valuable.

Third, livelihoods built from culture must be connected to sustainable value chains. Organizing a festival must be linked with OCOP products, community tourism products and improved product quality. A plum festival may be held in many places, but plums from Son La or Bac Ha must each carry their own story and origin. When people eat a plum and think of that story, the product gains distinction and brand value. Only then can culture truly become a resource.

There must also be value-chain connectivity. Without it, there will be no connection between one activity and another, one region and another, or one product and another. Tourists should not simply arrive at one place and leave. They need a chain of experiences with spiritual and cultural value that also creates resources for the locality.

Fourth, boundaries must be established to prevent commercialization. Otherwise, staging culture can become arbitrary, especially in sacred rituals; adaptations may distort meaning; and outsiders may impose exploitation while those inside the community do not benefit.

Fifth, investment must be made in people. To develop culture, we must invest in people who deeply understand the culture of each region, each community and the sacredness of each ritual. Only then can culture be turned into a resource in the true sense, preserving its core while developing related elements such as handicrafts, costumes and tourism products.

Ethnic communities must be the owners. They must know how to filter out what is harmful, abandon backward customs, decide what to preserve and how to receive the new. In the end, the soul must remain, and the sacredness must remain.

Be Trung Anh: What Mr. Sang said is very accurate in practice. Without understanding, we may cause the culture of ethnic communities to fade away.

I once visited Sung hamlet of the Dao people in Da Bac, former Hoa Binh. This hamlet received support from an Australian non-governmental organization. They did not build individual homestays, but a villagestay, meaning the whole village engaged in ecological tourism. They reviewed the entire hamlet, planned where stone-paved paths should be built, where signs were needed, and then developed the project.

The important point is that the whole community participated. If only one household runs a homestay while others do not, the shared space is still damaged. So they assigned one household to weave fabric, another to cook, another to host overnight guests, another to guide visitors on mountain treks, and another to specialize in singing and dancing. The community established a management board, shared benefits among participating households and received training on how to organize activities.

After completion, the destination was placed on the tourism map, promoted online and began welcoming international visitors. The whole village was excited because a new life had opened up. I see this as a very civilized model of self-management, one that requires a comprehensive view of the community’s identity.

From that, I think we need to redefine the term “preservation.” In the past, we thought preservation meant keeping the old unchanged. But if we preserve cultural identity without turning culture into a development resource, without connecting it to the lives of ethnic communities, then only the form remains, while the soul has already died.

Ha Van Sang: Preservation is the foundation, but exploitation on that foundation must be led by the communities themselves. They are the ones who know what to awaken, what to keep and what they can do better for their community.

Here, reputable people, village elders and village heads are extremely important. In the Northwest today, Protestantism has developed quite strongly. Some villages are 100 percent Protestant, and the head of a religious group may also be the village head, acting as an extended arm of the political system. If this role is promoted well, everything becomes much more favorable.

In addition to reputable people, village elders and village heads, there are now teachers, border guards, folk artisans and even Facebookers - people who influence young people. Ethnic minority youth go to work in lowland areas and industrial parks, where they are exposed to many cultures and technologies. When they return, if their potential is properly promoted, they can also become a strong force in preserving, safeguarding and developing culture.

When policy gives people the power to rise

From livelihoods to community tourism, two village models reveal how ethnic policy can unlock self-reliance and lasting change.

social news

ethnic affairs

features

Hot news