Family friends and country Nguyen Thi Binh

[14] Trịnh Đức Dụ was subsequently Việt Nam’s ambassador to Great Britain.

[15] Boutros Boutros-Ghali (1922-) earned his bachelor’s degree at Cairo University and a

doctorate in international law from the Sorbonne. He was Egypt’s acting foreign minister in the
late 1970s and served as general secretary of the United Nations from January 1992 through
December 1996. The United States vetoed the possibility of his serving a second term. Boutros
Boutros-Ghali was general secretary of Francophonie from 1997 until 2002. After that post, he
continued his work with international law and conflict resolution.

[16] Phạm Hưng was president of the People’s Supreme Court from 1981 to 1997. After

retiring, he served as president of the Vietnamese Lawyers Association until 2004.

[17] Nông Đức Mạnh (1940-) from the Tày ethnic minority was born in Bắc Kạn Province

in the Northern Region. He studied forestry at the Central-Level Forestry School in Hà Nội,
joined the Party in 1963, and then studied for five years at the Forestry University in Leningrad
(St. Petersburg). He held many positions in forestry institutions in Viet Nam. From 1986 until
1989, he was Party general secretary for Bắc Thái Province; he was elected to the Party Central
Committee in 1989 and also to the National Assembly. Nông Đức Mạnh served as president of
the National Assembly from 1992 to 2001 and as Party general secretary from 2001 to 2011.

[18] The Party general secretary holds the most important position in Việt Nam.

[19] Vũ Dũng (1949-) spent much of his time while vice foreign minister working on the

Foreign Ministry Committee Regarding the Border, examining issues involving the land border
between Việt Nam and China. Upon retiring, he undertook a two-week assignment as Việt Nam’s
representative at human-rights meetings sponsored by the United Nations.

[20] Phan Văn Khải (1933-) is from Củ Chi District, the famous revolutionary base in what

is now Hồ Chí Minh City. He joined the Revolution in 1947, while still in his early teens. He
regrouped to the North in 1954 and studied foreign languages and then studied in Moscow until
1965. He served on the Re-Unification Committee in Hà Nội. After 1975, Phan Văn Khải
returned to Hồ Chí Minh, where he served as vice president of the Hồ Chí Minh City People’s
Committee. He was president of the People’s Committee from 1985 to 1989. Phan Văn Khải was
prime minister of Việt Nam from 1997 to 2006.

[21] Củ Chi District is the site of the famous tunnels that ran under the US base, Johnson

City.

[22] Nguyễn Văn Trỗi: See Chapter 8, “Memories and Deeply Held Thoughts,” footnote

20, p. 279.

[23] Trần Thị Lý (1933-1992), a revolutionary activist, was a soldier with the Liberation

Army during the War of Resistance Against France and the War of Resistance Against the United
States. She was especially famous for her bravery.

[24] Dr. Lê Cao Đài (1928-2002) was the medical director and military commander of the

major hospital in the Southern Front during the American War. His journal, The Central
Highlands, is the best account in English of Vietnamese soldiers’ experience on the Hồ Chí Minh
Trail. Dr. Đài was among the first Vietnamese researchers on residual dioxin and a key
Vietnamese partner for the 10-80 / Hatfield research. This Vietnamese-Canadian cooperation
narrowed the question of residual dioxin to “hot spots,” the sites where defoliants were stored
and loaded on US and ARVN bases. These hot spots are rather like “superfund” toxic-waste sites
in the United States.

[25] The Hồ Chí Minh Medal is Việt Nam highest award.

14.

Retired and Busy

After fifty years of activism, I thought that perhaps the time had come
to retire. I would care for my family and go visiting with friends.
However,—

However, the country’s situation remained unsettled. Officials and the
people were better off than before, but many Vietnamese were still living
in difficult straits. The Cold War had ended, but the arms race continued.
Armed conflicts and wars of aggression exploded here and there. One
could say that, world-wide, there has never been a day of peace.

I boiled with anger at the Iraq War, which destroyed that country. The
conflicts between nation states and classes of people continue. The large
countries still oppress and dominate the small countries; they squeeze the
developing nations economically. Workers remain poor. International
political activists point out that the disparity between the rich and poor
widens, with the rich growing richer and the poor, poorer.

These international and domestic situations have affected our people’s
spirit. Although most Vietnamese are worried, they believe our people’s
choice has been correct and that we must continue on the road we have
chosen, but with adjustments. However, others are alarmed. They believe

we have lost our direction. They are pessimistic and even stand in
opposition.

Our material life is much better, but in general our society has become
far more complicated. People say the wartime days were cruel and
difficult yet simpler. Many people speak about our cultural decline, which
is truly worrying. Ethical and moral standards have collapsed. The current
tendency is to follow individual interests and race after money and status;
that tendency is increasing. When a society is changing, its general
psychological character can become confused and wavering. Our society
needs to follow established laws. We need to be straight-forward,
acknowledging that we have just passed through a very long war and that
thus we lag behind neighboring nations in many fields.

Could it be that the Party and State paid too much attention to
economic matters and too little to cultural affairs, to the quality of
people’s lives, to the structure of our society? When will we have a society
that is truly democratic, equal, and cultured?

These dynamics continue to harass me. I can’t sit still. I must continue
to take full part in life. And so, my years since official retirement have
been very busy, at times even busier than before. Perhaps it is my “fate”
from when I was young: I want always to be deeply involved and
committed in my work. I don’t know how to stand on the outside.

The year of 2003 began with a series of fascinating activities. One of
these involved the thirtieth anniversary in of the signing of the Paris Peace
Agreement on Việt Nam (January 27, 1973). On January 25, 2003, I took
part in a conference in Paris, with the theme “The Việt Nam War and
Europe.” Academic comrades, Bùi Văn Thanh (historian at the Social

Sciences Institute) and Dr. Nguyễn Hồng Thạch (expert at the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs’ Institute of International Relations), joined me. The
French Center for Strategic and Diplomatic Studies organized the event
with financial assistance from the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The
keynote speakers among the hundred participants were primarily
researchers in politics and history from European countries and from the
United States. In addition to our delegation, the organizers had invited Bùi
Diễm,[1] the ambassador from the Republic of Việt Nam (“South Việt
Nam”) to the United States in 1967 and 1968.

The speakers presented information, documents, and analyses of the
attitudes of European countries toward the American War in Việt Nam. In
general, these presentations were objective and concentrated on events,
legal documents, and official government pronouncements. Of course,
each person had his or her own individual viewpoint, with the result that
the conference portrayed many different angles. In particular, the
participants looked at the huge movement opposing the American War in
Viet Nam, not just the communist parties and the leftists in France, Italy,
and other countries, but also the socialist parties of northern Europe,
especially in Sweden. They spoke about the peace forces among the
religious groups, particularly the Christians. They also mentioned the
strong attitude of Europe’s intelligentsia, including those who had
participated in the Bertrand Russell Tribunal.[2]

During the American War Against Việt Nam, European governments
did not allow the United States to pull them in, even though the Americans
wanted NATO countries to participate if only symbolically. Some
participants at the conference affirmed that the American War in Việt Nam
had caused Europe—the “old continent”—to grow farther away from the

United States on the “new continent.” Many French speakers mentioned
former President de Gaulle’s statement in 1966 and the French
government’s contributions in facilitating negotiations at the Paris
Conference on Việt Nam.

Bùi Diễm and I were the two key representatives of the Vietnamese
sides. We had no personal conflict, but of course our two points of view
were entirely different. Bùi Diễm could not accept the name “American
War” because, he said, the war was between nationalists and communists.
He held that the Republic of Việt Nam was the “nationalist side, with
support from the United States,” while we were the “communists in the
socialist faction, with support from the Soviet Union and China.” In
addition, he said, the communist victory had relied on “violence in drastic
ways, causing countless deaths and massive destruction.”

I tried to control myself. I read my prepared speech, presenting our
system and processes as they developed in resisting American aggression.
I described the principles of the Democratic Republic of Việt Nam and the
National Liberation Front / Provisional Revolutionary Government of the
Republic of South Việt Nam, which we had established in order to secure
independence and re-unification, just as we had done during our War of
Resistance Against French Colonialism from 1945 until 1954. I spoke
strongly: “The strength of our resistance came from our patriotic spirit and
the solidarity of all our people. Those who were communists stood at the
forefront in the resistance and sacrificed the most for the Homeland and
our people. That is the truth, which no one can deny.”

One participant at the conference asked, “Don’t documents show that
three hundred thousand Chinese troops arrived to fight alongside your

army?”

I answered, “The Chinese people helped Việt Nam both politically and
materially. But only the Vietnamese Liberation Army fought in the South.”

The conference lasted two days. Surely, we will organize many more
international conferences and write many books and magazine articles in
various countries in the effort to understand our Resistance War Against
the United States, for this was a major event during the twentieth century.

A little more than a month later, the Vietnamese Foreign Ministry also
organized a conference for the thirtieth anniversary of the signing of the
Paris Agreement with the goal of drawing lessons from our experiences in
diplomatic struggle. Our meaningful lessons included the use of sound
negotiating principles, our diplomatic timing, the coordination between
diplomacy and the battlefield, and our use of international solidarity,
especially with the Soviet Union and China.

There was also this question: In 1954, should Việt Nam have continued
its resistance to the end in order to liberate the entire country and re-unite
the nation? Stopping with the Geneva Agreement forced us to accept
division at the 17th parallel. Did we cast aside the opportunity to avoid
another war?

As I see it, the Geneva Agreement reflected the situation that embodied
the advantages and disadvantages of the two sides in 1954. It also allowed
us to see the complicated international relationships at that time. As a
result, we could ensure that the Paris Agreement was more complete and
more rigorous, because we could incorporate the valuable experience and

lessons we had drawn from the Geneva Agreement. This assessment
reflects the skilled leadership of our Party and the strength of our people.

*

**

From 2003 until 2013 and the fortieth anniversary of the signing of the
Paris Agreement, many international political activists and historians were
researching and evaluating the American War in Việt Nam. They will
continue to do so for many years. The questions they ask again and again
include: Why did the United States invade Việt Nam? What was the source
of the Vietnamese people’s victory? Might it have been possible for the
war to end earlier? What was the intention behind the Paris Agreement?
And so on. Through many conferences and many individual conversations,
I’ve had occasion to engage in dialogue and to explain the answers.

Several years ago, in a speech, Mr. Henry Kissinger[3] accepted the US
failure. The causes, he said, were the lack of a clear US purpose and a lack
of support within the United States.

A number of experts on the United States and the war in Việt Nam hold
that the United States engaged in the war from 1961 to 1964 with the aim
of limiting the communists in accordance with principles operative during
the Cold War. Then, in 1967, when the United States saw that the war in
Việt Nam was not based on directives from Russia and China, the
Americans’ purpose was only to help South Việt Nam stand up and to keep
South Việt Nam from falling into the hands of the communist North
Vietnamese. That’s when the United States thought about withdrawing its
troops and “Vietnamizing the war.”

This is a simplistic explanation for a war that lasted twenty years,
destroyed a country, and killed several million people. For us, the US
purpose was clear. The purpose was to change South Việt Nam into a
colony according to a new, American model and to limit communism in
Southeast Asia. However, the United States did not have the right to
transform the war into an invasion. That was a violation of international
law, a violation of a nation’s rights, and a violation of the legitimate choice
a nationality had made. Because of these violations, the Americans were
immediately opposed both inside the country and across the world. This
dynamic is the primary source of the American defeat. In truth, France
was like the United States in not understanding our history and the
Vietnamese people. These are the basic reasons both wars of invasion met
defeat.

As to the relationship between South Việt Nam and North Việt Nam,
they should remember that in 1945, following the August Revolution, the
Vietnamese people from North to South stood up and seized their
independence, choosing for themselves the route of a “democratic
republic.” Thus, when the United States destroyed the 1954 Geneva
Agreement and established the “Sài Gòn” administration, the people in the
South had to continue their resistance, with assistance from the North, in
order to complete the unfinished goal of securing independence and re-
unification of our Homeland.

And so, how then can anyone say that the North invaded the South?

*

**

In April 2003, several comrades and I organized the Việt Nam
Foundation for Peace and Development to respond to the nation’s needs
and duties in our new situation with Renovation.

Peace is the great wish of every nation but particularly of Việt Nam,
which bore decades of continuous war. Only if we have peace can we
develop our nation and assure security and contentment for our people.
Việt Nam is an active participant in the world peace movement and a
member of the World Peace Council. These movements contributed a great
deal to our victory in the War Against American Aggression. These days,
we must continue to struggle to protect peace for our own interests and for
the world’s people.

Developing our nation in a globalized world, which the strong and
wealthy countries control, is a difficult assignment filled with challenges.
We must quickly learn from the experience of other countries and work in
solidarity with widespread and equal cooperation. We must use fair and
skillful competition, while also opposing oppression from adversaries.
Việt Nam is now a member of the large economic, financial, and
commercial institutions. This development should create more favorable
conditions for economic development, although we must also overcome
new challenges.

Even though the Việt Nam Foundation for Peace and Development has
had challenges in terms of personnel and financing in previous years, we
have contributed to our country’s development. I am indebted to and
appreciative of the Foundation’s executive committee members, who have
been committed and responsible.

*

**

At the end of 2003, a delegation from the Association of International
Democratic Lawyers visited Việt Nam. This international organization had
zealously supported our wartime people’s struggle against the United
States. In particular, this group helped shape the famous Bertrand Russell
International Tribunal, which in 1967 raised accusations against the
Americans’ cruelty in Việt Nam, including the use of chemical warfare.

The leader of this delegation was Mr. Sharma, an Indian and long-time
friend of Việt Nam. Like other international democratic organizations,[4]
this association did not have the financial means to be as active as before,
even though its members are prestigious lawyers from many countries,
including the United States. The visiting delegation was concentrating on
the after-effects of war.

These lawyers said our people had the right to sue the United States for
damages resulting in so much pain and loss in Việt Nam. They pointed out
that the war’s after-effects are still serious, particularly the effects of
Agent Orange. All American veterans who served in Việt Nam between
1962 and 1975 were deemed to have been exposed to Agent Orange, even
if only indirectly. They are eligible to receive assistance from the US
government. Thus, the lawyers said, there was no reason for the United
States not to accept responsibility for damages inflicted on the Vietnamese
people. They suggested that we needed to establish immediately an
association for victims of Agent Orange to represent the rights of the
several million Vietnamese plaintiffs.

On January 10, 2004, we formally established the Vietnamese
Association of Victims of Agent Orange (VAVA), with Lieutenant General

Đặng Vũ Hiệp[5] as president. He was a veteran, who had spent ten years
fighting in the Central Highlands, an area the Americans had heavily
sprayed. I was invited to serve as the Association’s honorary chair.

On January 30, 2004, the association represented the victims of Agent
Orange in suing the thirty-seven American chemical companies that had
produced the defoliants, such as Agent Orange and its impurity, dioxin.
The United States had sprayed the defoliants on forests and fields in South
Việt Nam, with the poison affecting several million Vietnamese, including
warriors and ordinary people. Thousands had died; countless victims have
disabilities. Even more painful and more prolonged are the victims—both
men and women—who gave birth to children and then even had
grandchildren with severe disabilities. Taken together, this greatest cruelty
from the American War and the war’s most toxic residue have created the
huge debt that US authorities owe the Vietnamese people.

The case was heard in a New York court, which did not rule in Việt
Nam’s favor. Then the case was appealed. We know we must prolong this
difficult struggle, which requires determination and firmness. However,
now, world public opinion understands the serious after-effects of the
thirty-year war (1945-1975) the United States perpetrated on Việt Nam.
The legal case kindled an international movement supporting Vietnamese
Agent Orange victims. Many people perceive this as the world’s struggle
for peace and justice to stop war and stop the use of the arms (including
biological and chemical weapons) that kill masses of people.
Unfortunately, American courts have refused to settle in our favor
regarding the cruel US actions in Việt Nam. Nevertheless, the Association
of International Democratic Lawyers announced, “Humanity’s court of
conscience has decided.”

*

**

I continue to serve as chair of the Fund for the Protection of Children,
as president of the Fund for the Kovalevskaya Prize,[6] and as president of
the Phan Châu Trinh Cultural Foundation. In addition to these activities, I
cannot refuse to work in education and training, which I consider the keys
to development. Under the auspices of the Việt Nam Foundation for Peace
and Development, I have sponsored research on educational methodology
and, with my Foundation brothers and sisters, have organized informal
discussions and conferences on education in hopes of contributing to this
crucial cause.

*

**

My younger siblings and my children keep reminding me that I must
retire. However, I cannot abide a passing day when I do not work, as long
as I am still able to contribute.

My hopes and happiness reside in my two grandchildren—Long
(paternal) and Đông (maternal). Both have been assiduous students. Long
is studying banking and finance at a university in Great Britain. When he
returns to Việt Nam, he hopes to work on national financial policy in a
State office. Such a wish is not easy to implement, but I am supportive and
encouraging. Đông has chosen architecture and wants to learn the skills
needed to rebuild his grandparents’ house. That’s also a beautiful vision.

I am pleased and happy that, even though I have retired, I am fortunate
to have many friends come to visit. In addition, every day there are new
friends—brothers and sisters, who come to share their confidences with
me and ask for my ideas on shared questions and private matters.

On my eightieth birthday, comrade Vũ Khiêu,[7] a friend and brother
who was then over ninety, presented me with a beautiful pair of parallel
sentences:[8]

Việt Nam has not only men of gifts,

Tây Hồ also has a woman of talent.

The year 2006 was special for my family, for we commemorated the
eightieth year of the passing of Elder Phan Châu Trinh, my maternal
grandfather. We organized two seminars—one in Đà Nẵng and one in Hồ
Chí Minh City. In 1994, the State had designated Elder Phan’s Temple a
National Cultural and Historical Site. In 2006, we organized a large
commemoration ceremony at the temple. Participants included Elder
Phan’s many descendants, our friends, representatives of the Hồ Chí Minh
City Department of Culture and Information, and officials from the Tân
Bình District Office of Culture and Information.

The workshop involved historians from research institutes and
universities. It clarified and unified assessment of Elder Phan’s important
political role. Some people held contrary ideas. They objected, for they
worried that lifting up Elder Phan would diminish the great status of
President Hồ Chí Minh. I completely disagreed. Evaluating each event and
actor during our country’s complicated twentieth-century history is
difficult. However, time will permit us gradually to lift up and perceive
historical truths clearly, precisely, and calmly. We can explore each
person’s role in defining the principles for the founding of our nation. We

can determine each person’s influence at decisive times and afterwards,
even a very long time afterwards.

*

**

I began writing this memoir in the beginning of 2007, when I turned
eighty; I finished it at the end of 2009. After I’d set down my pen, I still
had many conflicting thoughts, a jostling of worries and hopes.

We can perhaps say that my generation is the last of the Vietnamese
who took part in our two Resistance Wars and who, after thirty years of
constant struggle, were still alive and could contribute to healing the
wounds of war and to rebuilding our nation. We are more fortunate than
many of our brothers and sisters, our comrades who died along the way for
the cause.

I have come to understand the pain of war and the difficulty of
establishing peace.

My own life, in concert with the life of our nation, has helped me
understand that seizing political power and demanding independence were
extremely difficult, particularly when opposing the colonialists and
imperialists. However, maintaining political power and building a nation
—particularly a nation fitting the people’s wishes and hopes for a truly
pure life of freedom and happiness—is much more difficult.

Nelson Mandela, the pre-eminent South African political leader, said,
“For to be free is not merely to cast off one’s chains, but to live in a way
that respects and enhances the freedom of others.”

We in Việt Nam must draw upon our human resources so that our
people can use their own self-determination and capabilities to build an
independent and free nation. I hope that at some time not long from now
we will have a generation of Vietnamese with sufficient self-confidence,
humanity, and intelligence to create a democratic and cultured society in a
strong country, which the Vietnamese have built from their own self-
direction and with their own hands. For this reason, I continue to suggest
that the Party and State implement a basic and comprehensive reform of
our educational system, thereby also improving our national culture and
our nation’s future. Education remains the most decisive factor in our
nation’s success.

If there is an issue on which I concentrate and about which I worry, it is
the question of our nation’s internal strength.

We made it through a war of national liberation, which was extremely
cruel and lasted for so long. The war pushed our country’s economy to its
lowest ebb and severely injured our nation’s culture and society. We lack
trained administrators with expertise in economics, technology, education,
culture, and management. Perhaps speaking from the piles of ashes, we
can move forward with the wish to build a developed country, returning to
us a life where all our people have their basic needs met, are free, and
content. We strive toward that goal, which is totally appropriate, but the
road is filled with obstacles and challenges in a world now brimming with
serious conflicts on every side, particularly regarding economics and
technology.

We understand that we must protect our political independence with
economic independence and national-defense security but above all, with

an independent economy.

Thus, in order to protect our independence and national rights and in
order to develop our country, we have no other route than the necessity of
establishing a strong, independent, and sustainable economy that is not
beholden to anyone, that is cooperative but is not dependent on any other
nation. Our spirit of patriotism and the unification of people must be
strong in self-sufficiency and labor to build our country so that our own,
internal, national strength becomes stronger.

Our own internal strength must build a democratic society, a nation of
laws and justice—using the strength of our people’s heart and their unity
—to create the base for all our various strengths.

Our nation has never before had such advantages and resources. Many
people say we have a “golden opportunity.” However, life is such that
when opportunities are greater, challenges are also greater. Can we
overcome our challenges and achieve the objectives and dreams of the
generations who sacrificed everything to bring us to where we are today?
The answer rests with the comrades, the brothers and sisters who bear
heavy leadership responsibilities. The answer also rests with our people
and especially with our youth—the primary force building and defending
our Homeland.

I believe in the destiny of our Homeland—a country and nationality,
which has struggled in heroic sacrifice during our long history. Our
Homeland has earned the right to a splendid future. Surely we Vietnamese
have the strength and will to create that future. Those who lead our
country must accept that responsibility, while the youngest generation
must prepare to shoulder responsibility for the future.

We must remember our ancestors’ priceless historical lessons. We must
place shared interests first. Regardless of hardships, we must strictly
follow the chosen way to assure our people’s freedom and contentment.
Then, the happiness of our nation will become our children’s happiness.

I like to compare our Homeland to a small river boat carrying all
Vietnamese. Despite countless whirlpools, our Homeland will reach the
sea and a new horizon!

Completed, end of 2009.

Supplemented, 2013-2015.

[1] Bùi Diễm (1923-) came from Ha Nam, a province in Việt Nam’s Northern Region. He

studied at Bưởi (now, Chu Van An) School and was active with the Vietnamese government
established by the Japanese authorities after the Japanese imprisoned the Vichy French
administrators in Việt Nam on March 9, 1945. Bùi Điễm served as the ambassador from the
Republic of Việt Nam (“South Việt Nam”) to the United States from 1967 to 1972. He left for the
United States in 1975.

[2] The Bertrand Russell Tribunal on War Crimes (1967): See Chapter 8, “Memories and

Deeply Held Thoughts,” footnote 4, p. 259.

[3] Henry Kissinger: See Chapter 6, “The Longest Peace Negotiation in History,” footnote

69, p. 210.

[4] These international democratic organizations had originated in the former Soviet

Union.

[5] Đặng Vũ Hiệp (1928-2008) came from Hưng Yên Province in the Northern Region and

studied at Bưởi (Chu Văn An) School in Hà Nội. He commanded the 1969 Đăc Tô Campaign. In
1982, Đăng Vũ Hiệp was elected to the Party Central Committee. He was president of VAVA
from 2003 to 2008.

[6] The Kovalevskaya Prize is given each year to a Vietnamese woman who has made a

major contribution to science. The prize is in memory of Sofia Kovalevskaya (1850-1891), the
first major woman mathematician in Russia.

[7] Vũ Khiêu (1916-, a.k.a. Đặng Vũ Kiêu) came from Nam Định in the Northern Region. A

researcher in Vietnamese culture, he was head of the Social Sciences Institute and also served as
deputy director of Vietnam News Agency.

[8] Parallel sentences, câu đối, are a Vietnamese literary form where the second line

changes two key words in the first line to create a play on words. Here “Việt Nam” is changed to
“Tây Hồ,” which means “West Lake” (a key Hà Nội landmark) but is also a pen name of Phan
Châu Trinh, Nguyễn Thị Bình’s maternal grandfather. The change from “men” to “a woman” is
more obvious.

Chronology

May 26, 1927 Born, Tân Hiệp Commune, Sa Đéc District, Đồng Tháp
Province; birth name: Nguyễn Thị Châu Sa, daughter of Mr. Nguyễn Đồng
Hợi (1900-1969) and Ms. Phan Thị Châu Lan (1907-1943)

1927-1940 Spends childhood in Việt Nam’s southwestern provinces

1940 Moves to Cambodia with family, studies at Lycée Sisowath

1943 Meets future husband, Đinh Khang; mother passes away

1944 Participates in Overseas Vietnamese Patriots’ Association in
Phnom Penh, Cambodia

May 1945 Moves back to Sài Gòn with family; joins Việt Minh

August 25, 1945 August Revolution in Sài Gòn: Sài

Gòn Revolutionary Administration and Sài Gòn Provisional Committee

seize political power in Sài Gòn

September 2, 1945 Declaration of Independence event in Sài Gòn: Sài
Gòn Revolutionary Administration and Sài Gòn Provisional Committee
organize a large meeting in Notre Dame Square in concert with Hồ Chí
Minh’s reading of Việt Nam’s Declaration of Independence in Hà Nội,
announcing formation of the Democratic Republic of Việt Nam (DRVN)

September 23, 1945 French troops with American weapons arrive on
British ships and attack the newly formed Việt Minh administration in Sài
Gòn; War of Resistance Against France begins in Sài Gòn and then spreads
throughout Việt Nam’s Southern Region

January 6, 1945 Serves as secretary of Resistance Committee, Hồng
Ngự District, Đồng Tháp Province; takes part in independent Việt Nam’s
first general election

May 1946 Returns to Sài Gòn, joins secret activities (Association of
Women for National Salvation, Association of Youth for National
Salvation, etc.); takes alias, Yến Sa

November 1946 French invade Hải Phòng northern port city and then
push toward Hà Nội, the DRVN capital

December 19, 1946 President Hồ Chí Minh promulgates his “Call for
Nationwide Resistance”; War of Resistance Against France spreads across
all of Việt Nam

1948 Joins Indochinese Communist Party

1949 Works as Party grassroots organizer with Lawyer Nguyễn Hữu
Thọ

April 1951 - early 1954 Arrested as a “spy;” intervention by high-
level French associates of her grandfather (Phan Châu Trinh) in Paris
prevents her execution; held in Chí Hòa Prison, Sài Gòn

November 1954 Arrives in the North as part of regrouping after the
Geneva Agreement; works as secretary for president of the Central-Level

National Women’s Union

December 1, 1954 Marries Mr. Đinh Khang, a military engineer after
a nine-year separation during the French War

1956 Đinh Nam Thắng (son) is born

1957-1959 Studies at the Nguyễn Ái Quốc Political Academy

1960 Đinh Thúy Mai (daughter) is born

December 20, 1960 Establishment of the National Liberation Front
(NLF) of South Việt Nam

1961 Works for the Reunification Commission in Hà Nội;
concentrates on NLF people-to-people diplomacy; takes a new alias,
Nguyễn Thị Bình (“Peace”)

1962-1968 Through NLF activities, builds international support for
Việt Nam by lobbying with individuals, international organizations, and
foreign governments

June 1962 Attends World Democratic Students’ Congress in Budapest,
Hungary

July 1962 Attends World Democratic Youth Congress in Leningrad,
Soviet Union (now St. Petersburg, Russia)

Late 1962 Visits Indonesia, meets President Sukarno and Dipa
Nusantara Aidit, general secretary, Indonesian Communist Party; Prof.
Nguyễn Văn Hiếu, NLF secretary general, is head of delegation

March 1963 Attends the third congress of the Asia-Africa Solidarity
Committee in Tanzania as head of the NLF delegation

1964 Visits Indonesia for the second time

Late 1964 Attends International Women’s Congress as head of
delegation representing the Women’s Association from Liberated Areas of
South Việt Nam

1967 Meets representatives of the American anti-war movement in
Bratislava, Czechoslovakia (now the capital of Slovakia)

November 4, 1968 Arrives in Paris as deputy head of the NLF
delegation to the Paris Conference on Việt Nam

January 25, 1969 Official opening of the Paris four-sided conference

April 1969 Visits the United Kingdom, delivers a speech on the NLF
at Trafalgar Square

May 1969 Father, Nguyễn Đồng Hợi, passes away

May 8, 1969 Announces the NLF’s Ten-Point Position at Kléber
International Convention Center, Paris

June 6, 1969 Establishment of the Provisional Revolutionary
Government (PRG) of the Republic of South Việt Nam; becomes foreign
minister and head of the PRG delegation at the Paris Conference

Early 1970 Visits Sweden at the invitation of Prime Minister Olof
Palme

July 1970 Official visit to India and Sri Lanka as PRG foreign
minister

September 17, 1970 Announces the PRG Eight-Point

Position demanding US total withdrawal before June 30, 1971

September 1970 Travels to Lusaka (Zambia) to lobby for PRG’s
admission to the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM)

Early 1971 Visits Cuba during Cuba’s International Year for Việt
Nam

July 1, 1971 Announces the PRG’s Seven-Point Position demanding
US total withdrawal and establishment of a government of national
concord

January 11, 1972 Announces the PRG’s Two-Point Position—US
withdrawal and Establishment of a Coalition Government consisting of the
PRG, the Sài Gòn Administration, and the Third Force

March 1972 Troops of the Liberation Army attack eastern regions of
the South

September 1972 DRVN Special Advisor Lê Đức Thọ presents US
National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger with the Draft Paris
Agreement on Ending the War and Restoring Peace in Việt Nam

December 18-29, 1972 United States bombs Hà Nội and Hải Phòng
with B-52s during what Westerners call the “Christmas Bombing” and
Vietnamese call “Điện Biên Phủ in the Air”; Vietnamese Air Defense
shoots down or disables a significant percentage of the US B-52 fleet

January 23, 1973 Lê Đức Thọ and Henry Kissinger initial the Paris
Agreement

10 o’clock, January 27, 1973 Thirty-two documents of the Paris
Agreement on Ending the War and Restoring Peace in Việt Nam are each
signed by the foreign ministers of four nations: the DRVN (Nguyễn Duy
Trinh), the PRG (Nguyễn Thị Bình), the Republic of Việt Nam (Trần Văn
Lắm), and the United States of America (Williams P. Rogers)

February 27 - March 2, 1973 International Conference on Việt Nam
in Paris

March 2, 1973 International Act on the International Conference on
Việt Nam signed on March 2, 1973 by foreign ministers of twelve nations:
(DRVN, PRG, ROV, and the USA as signatories to the Paris Agreement;
Canada, China, France, Great Britain, Hungary, Indonesia, Poland, and the
Soviet Union as additional signatories to the International Act, with the
UN secretary general present but not a signatory

April 1973 Leaves Paris for Hà Nội

April 1973 - April 1975 Continues work in formal diplomacy and
people-to-people diplomacy; lobbies governments and people’s
organizations for implementation of the Paris Agreement by the United
States and the Sài Gòn Administration

July 1973 PRG achieves official admission to the Non-Aligned
Movement (NAM)

1974 Receives the Ben Barka Medal for Afro-Asian Solidarity

June 1974 Visits Afghanistan to lobby for diplomatic recognition of
the PRG

September 1974 Travels the Hồ Chí Minh Trail as a member of the
delegation led by PRG President of Government Hùynh Tấn Phát for a
visit to the Cambodian Resistance Movement against the US-backed Lon
Nol administration

April 30, 1975 Liberation of the South; sixty-five governments have
established formal relations with the PRG

May 1, 1975 Reunion after twenty-one years with her brother, Nguyễn
Đông Hà, just released from the “tiger cages” on Côn Sơn (Côn Đảo)
Island

May 13, 1975 Sài Gòn grand meeting to celebrate liberation of the
South

June 17, 1975 Meeting between the NLF of the South (PRG) and Việt
Nam Fatherland Front (DRVN)

July 1975 Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) foreign ministers’ meeting
in Lima (Peru); lobbies for admission of the DRVN to NAM

October 1975 Visits Arab states to “borrow” petrol; meets Saddam
Hussein and manages to borrow 1.5 million tons of petro at preferential
interest rate

1976-2002 Elected a deputy to Việt Nam’s National Assembly, VIth
through Xth sessions

1976-1987 Minister of education; unites the management of Việt
Nam’s educational system; organizes literacy training for the former
South; institutes expanded teacher training and a modernized curriculum

1977-1978 Thousands of northern teachers volunteer to teach in
southern Việt Nam

January 11, 1979 Politburo promulgates Resolution 14 on educational
reform

1978 - 1979 Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge genocide in Cambodia; Khmer
Rouge incursions into southwestern Việt Nam; Southwest Border War with
the Khmer Rouge begins

February 1979 China invades Việt Nam’s northern border provinces

April 1980 National Conference on Education in Yên Dũng (Bắc
Giang Province) concentrates on teachers’ living standards

1981 Elected to the Central Committee of the Vietnamese Communist
Party

1982 to present Elected deputy chair of Afro-Asian Peoples’
Solidarity Organization (AAPSO)

1983 Adjustment of salary scales for teachers; introduction of
seniority system and awards, “People’s Teacher” and “Merited Teacher;”
decision to make November 20 “Teachers’ Day”

Summer 1983 Sầm Sơn Statement on Education

1984 Establishes the Education Services Company

December 1986 Vietnamese Communist Party’s VI Party Congress
promulgates its policy of Renovation

Mid-1987 Becomes deputy chair of the Party Committee for External
Relations; president of the Union for Peace, Solidarity and Friendship;
chair of the National Assembly Committee on External Relations; lobbies
for removal of US embargo and sanctions

December 25, 1989 Husband Đinh Khang passes away

1991 Becomes chair of Fund for Care and Protection of Children

1992-2002 Vice president of Việt Nam; works in diplomatic relations,
education, health care, judicial reform, and Việt Nam’s emulation and
awards system

1994 Visits West African countries, meets Jacques Diouf of UN Food
and Agriculture Organization (FAO); opens up cooperation in agricultural
production between Senegal and Việt Nam and then with other African
countries

1995 Attends summit of French-speaking countries, meets French
President Jacques Chirac

1997 Việt Nam hosts the seventh conference of the French-speaking
nations in Hà Nội; chairs the conference meetings

1998 Honorary chair of the Agent Orange Victims Fund

April 2001 Presented with the Hồ Chí Minh Medal, the highest award
in Việt Nam

August 2002 Retires from State positions

April 2003 to Present Chair, Việt Nam Foundation for Peace and
Development

January 1, 2004 to Present Honorary chair, Việt Nam Agent Orange
Victims Association (VAVA)

January 30, 2004 VAVA sues thirty-seven US chemical companies on
behalf of Vietnamese Agent Orange Victims

2006 until Present Chair, Phan Châu Trinh Cultural Foundation

1

Family























2

Activism Inside Việt Nam
1960-1976