Advertisement - Click to support our sponsors.
Editorials
Monday, July 17, 2000Trade agreement
with former enemyA quarter of a century after South Vietnam fell to the Communists, the Clinton administration has signed a trade agreement with the Hanoi regime, opening the way to normal commercial relations. It's about time.The issue: President Clinton has reached a trade agreement with Vietnam.
The agreement, which must be ratified by Congress, will be no huge bonanza for the American economy. Vietnam is poor -- one of the poorest countries in Asia. But it has nevertheless attracted some U.S. companies in recent years. It is these business interests that have pushed for the agreement, which would enable them to compete on equal terms with rivals from Japan, Taiwan, Australia and Western Europe.
Trade and investment with Vietnam already exist on a limited scale, but probably would grow. Hawaii businesses with an international focus could benefit.
Two-way trade currently runs about $1 billion a year. A World Bank report forecast that under the agreement Vietnamese exports to the United States could more than double from $338 million in 1996.
Under the agreement, Vietnam agrees to cut tariffs on U.S.-manufactured goods and farm products and provide stronger protection for U.S. investors and intellectual property. In addition, Hanoi must allow investment in areas now largely closed, such as telecommunications, insurance and banking.
After their military victory in 1975, the Communists imposed orthodox Marxist economic policies on the South, with disastrous results. In the 1980s, with the economy in shambles, Hanoi reversed course and invited foreign investors to come in. But the United States hung back.
Normalization of relations with Hanoi was stalled for years by animosities generated by the Vietnam War and refueled by the POW/MIA issue.
In 1991 the Bush administration moved to end the diplomatic impasse by outlining the steps the Vietnamese would have to take to achieve normalization. Under the plan, Washington would ease its sanctions as Vietnam increased efforts to account for the missing Americans.
In 1992, citing progress in POW/MIA investigations, President Bush allowed U.S. firms to set up offices in Vietnam, hire office workers and sign tentative contracts for future business.
After succeeding Bush, President Clinton in 1993 eased the terms of the economic embargo on Vietnam and announced that he would not oppose efforts by France and other countries to help Hanoi refinance its debts. He also allowed American firms to bid on Vietnamese development projects.
In 1994 Clinton ended the embargo and the following year established diplomatic relations.
In announcing diplomatic recognition, Clinton was joined by Sens. John McCain of Arizona and Bob Kerrey of Nebraska, both Vietnam War veterans who strongly supported the move, as did business leaders.
In 1997 former Rep. Douglas "Pete" Peterson of Florida, who had been a prisoner of war in Vietnam, was appointed ambassador to Hanoi.
With ratification of the trade agreement still pending, the last piece remains to be placed in the structure of normalization. But the two countries have come a long way since the war. After 25 years, it's time Americans put the war and the bitterness of defeat behind them by treating Vietnam like any other country.
Unlicensed drivers
must be kept off roadIT'S not hard to believe that unlicensed drivers are a menace. But putting numbers on that notion gives it a grim perspective. Hawaii, with one of the worst problems in the nation, should do something about it.
A national study by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety found that Hawaii has the fifth highest percentage of illegal drivers involved in fatal crashes -- 22 percent. The national average was 13.8 percent.
Of the Hawaii drivers without proper licenses, 70 percent drove although their driving privileges had been suspended or revoked for drunken driving or other offenses. The study examined data from 1993 through 1997.
Those driving despite revocation of their licenses were nearly four times more likely to be intoxicated behind the wheel, 20 times more likely to have had a drunken-driving conviction and 31 times more likely to have three or more license suspensions than legal drivers.
Clearly, suspending or revoking licenses doesn't keep some people from driving. And driving without a license rarely results in a stiff sentence in the courts.
What more can be done?
California impounds thousands of cars every year from owners caught driving without proper licenses. But impounding and storing vehicles can be expensive.
Honolulu Police Capt. Bryan Wauke said the government could accomplish the same thing at less cost by taking vehicle license plates from repeat drunken-driving offenders.
Another approach: There is an ignition interlock device that involves a breath-alcohol test. The driver blows into the device to prove he isn't drinking. The device beeps at intervals while the car is in operation, requiring further proof that the driver isn't drinking.
In California a suspended driver may get his license restored sooner if he agrees to the installation of this device. Hawaii should look into this -- while considering impounding vehicles or confiscating license plates. Let's increase the penalty for illegal drivers.
Published by Liberty Newspapers Limited PartnershipRupert E. Phillips, CEO
John M. Flanagan, Editor & Publisher
David Shapiro, Managing Editor
Diane Yukihiro Chang, Senior Editor & Editorial Page Editor
Frank Bridgewater & Michael Rovner, Assistant Managing Editors
A.A. Smyser, Contributing Editor
