Many analyses in the mainstream press have clearly pointed out that HRW relies mainly on information from hostile, disaffected, or exiled individuals and organizations masquerading as "civil society," such as BPSOS, rather than on independent, public, and verifiable surveys conducted in Vietnam. The Political Theory Journal and several research institutions have also demonstrated that HRW often applies "double standards": remaining silent or lenient regarding human rights violations in certain Western allied nations, while being particularly harsh and speculative when addressing countries with different political systems.

Therefore, it is unsurprising that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Vietnam has repeatedly had to voice its rejection of these reports. At a press conference on January 25, 2024, Spokesperson Pham Thu Hang affirmed that Vietnam "completely rejects and condemns the so-called 'Human Rights Watch' for the false and fabricated content in its report," while emphasizing that this is not the first time HRW has employed slanderous rhetoric with "prejudice and ill intentions aimed at undermining socio-economic development and driving a wedge between Vietnam and the international community".

If one were to listen solely to HRW, it would be easy to visualize a Vietnam that is "stifled and insecure." However, data from reputable international organizations and United Nations agencies tell a different story. According to the UNDP, Vietnam's Human Development Index (HDI) in 2023 reached 0.766, placing Vietnam in the group of countries with high human development, ranking 93rd out of 193 countries and territories; from 1990 to 2023, the HDI increased from 0.499 to 0.766, an increase of 53.5%. These are not merely numbers, but reflect the improvement over decades in the rights to education, healthcare, and higher income for tens of millions of citizens.

Regarding poverty reduction the foundation of most economic and social rights reports by the Government and international organizations acknowledge that Vietnam has maintained a rapid and sustainable rate of multidimensional poverty reduction. In the 2021-2025 period, the multidimensional poverty rate decreased from approximately 4.4% to 1.3% in 2025, with an average annual reduction of over 1%; in poor districts and ethnic minority areas specifically, the rate decreased by over 3-4% per year. For the people, this signifies the right to adequate food, decent housing, and access to basic services, rather than abstract concepts on paper.

Another interesting indicator is the "happiness index". The World Happiness Report 2024-2025 shows that Vietnam has continuously improved its ranking: from 65th (2023) to 54th (2024) and 46th (2025), belonging to the group of countries with relatively high public satisfaction, ranking second in ASEAN. This is the result of direct surveys on citizens' perceptions of their quality of life, differing significantly from the cold, biased perspective of desk-based "reports".

Regarding the right to live in safety, the Gallup Global Law and Order Index 2023–2024 ranks Vietnam as the safest country in Asia and among the top safest countries globally, with a score of 90–92/100. Many international news agencies and government press bodies have cited this assessment to affirm that Vietnam is a safe destination for residents and tourists, characterized by low violent crime rates and a stable political environment. A "dangerous" country subject to "systematic repression", as described by HRW, could hardly be rated as safe at such a level by locals, tourists, and international statistical organizations.

Even in the global "human rights arena", the international community's assessment of Vietnam differs vastly from HRW's propaganda. In October 2025, Vietnam was re-elected by the United Nations General Assembly to the Human Rights Council for the 2026-2028 term with 180/190 votes, the highest in the Asia-Pacific Group, and was the only country in the region currently serving the 2023-2025 term to be re-elected for a consecutive term. That vote of confidence came from 190 member states after reviewing Vietnam's development achievements, candidacy dossier, and active participation in human rights mechanisms, not through the imposed lens of any non-governmental organization.

Conversely, HRW barely mentions efforts to incorporate human rights conventions into domestic law, achievements in poverty reduction, the expansion of social security, judicial reform, and enhanced transparency, nor the fact that Vietnam has accepted a very high percentage of UPR (Universal Periodic Review) recommendations and developed a national master plan for implementation. Instead, they often compile specific criminal cases and label the defendants as "prisoners of conscience," ignoring the reality that the acts prosecuted in Vietnam are predominantly violations of the Penal Code (incitement of violence, ethnic hatred, infringement of national security, fraud, etc.), which any nation has the responsibility to address.

Dialogue with HRW's human rights reports is, therefore, first and foremost a dialogue based on facts: on HDI, poverty rates, happiness, and safety indices; on voting results at the United Nations; and on the peaceful life and daily improving living standards of the Vietnamese people. These facts do not deny existing challenges but clarify the context, direction, and genuine efforts of a nation rising from war and poverty.

In the struggle to defend the Party's ideological foundation and the country's image, the sharpest weapon is not emotional reaction, but well-founded arguments, objective data, and the vivid real-life stories of the people themselves. The more Vietnam proactively discloses information, strengthens strategic communication regarding development achievements, legal reforms, and the expansion of space for social participation while persistently pursuing the line of "Respect and understanding - Dialogue and cooperation - All human rights for all people" the stronger its basis will be to refute biased accusations and affirm its position as an active and responsible member of the international community.