BPSOS Director Nguyễn Đình Thắng: Việt Nam’s Terrorism Charges Are an ‘Absurd Fabrication’

Just before midnight on June 11, 2023, a group of Montagnards armed with guns, knives, and gasoline attacked the People’s Committee headquarters of the Ea Ktur and Ea Tiêu communes in Đắk Lắk province. [1] The attacks left nine people dead and two wounded. Authorities arrested nearly 100 suspects, who then faced mobile trials in early 2024. [2]

Among the defendants was Y Quỳnh B’Đắp, co-founder of Montagnards Stand for Justice (MSFJ), who was residing in Thailand at the time. He was sentenced in absentia to 10 years in prison for terrorism. [3] Thai police subsequently arrested Y Quỳnh B’Đắp in June 2024 and brought him before a Thai court. [4] By late November 2025, Thailand had extradited Y Quỳnh B’Đắp to Việt Nam to serve his sentence. [5]

The case took a new turn in February 2026, when Vietnamese police placed Y Quỳnh B’Đắp on their national state broadcaster VTV (Vietnam Television, Đài Truyền hình Việt Nam) and asserted that Nguyễn Đình Thắng had directed the terrorist attack. 

Thắng is a U.S. citizen and the director of Boat People SOS (BPSOS), headquartered in Falls Church, Virginia. [6] 

In April 2026, Thắng was tried in absentia and sentenced to 11 years in prison for terrorism. [7] Two months later, the Ministry of Public Security (MPS) placed BPSOS on its list of “terrorist organizations” and designated Nguyễn Đình Thắng as a “terrorist subject.” [8]

Despite these rulings, according to Nguyễn Đình Thắng, Việt Nam has made no move to arrest him or to alert U.S. authorities. Thắng continues to live freely and work alongside agencies of the U.S. Congress and the U.S. government.

To clarify the matter, Luật Khoa conducted an interview with Nguyễn Đình Thắng on July 9, 2026, concerning the Vietnamese government’s terrorism accusations against him.

Luật Khoa: Mr. Nguyễn Đình Thắng, how are your organization, BPSOS, and Montagnards Stand for Justice (MSFJ) connected?

Nguyễn Đình Thắng: MSFJ is one of many organizations we help. There is nothing special about it.

However, when Vietnamese police seized on the Montagnard shooting in 2023, I knew immediately they would take advantage of the situation. There have been no H’mong or other group shootings, so authorities have not yet used the same tactics there.

The guiding principle of BPSOS is to build the inner strength of vulnerable and repressed people, enabling them to stand up and defend their rights under Vietnamese and international law. We encourage them to unite to protect and support one another. By operating in a more organized way, others can keep working even if one person runs into trouble. This is why MSFJ’s work has continued, even after Y Quỳnh B’Đắp was extradited to Việt Nam.

Luật Khoa: This is the first time Việt Nam’s MPS has publicly linked BPSOS and MSFJ to the June 2023 terrorist attack. What is your view on that matter?

Nguyễn Đình Thắng: They are completely and absurdly making things up. Under international law, when accusing someone, you must allow the accused to respond and to cross-examine. Instead, they told me nothing; I was not even notified of the date, time, or place of the trial. 

In principle, the accuser must face the accused, their witnesses, and all physical evidence. In a fair process, our lawyers would appear before the court to examine everything and question what is true and false. You cannot just invent a story.

I had no lawyer of my own choosing. They appointed lawyers for me, and I do not even know who they are. Hence, all normal legal procedures—specifically “due process”—along with respect for the rule of law and judicial independence, were completely absent.

Furthermore, when it tries a U.S. citizen, the Vietnamese state must notify the U.S. Embassy so they can send an observer. Instead, there was absolutely nothing. They tried me without any notice.

You do not even need to look closely. Just look at the basic procedures they failed to follow. How can anyone believe the stories they have fabricated? It is entirely staged.

Luật Khoa: What support has BPSOS given MSFJ?

Nguyễn Đình Thắng: Our principle is to build the inner strength of domestic groups so they can engage directly with the international community. Inside the country, the communist regime dominates everything. They write the laws, blow the whistle, impose the penalties, and act as the judges. In the cases of Y Quỳnh B’Đắp and myself, that is literal: they actually put us on trial.

However, on the international playing field, Việt Nam must follow the international rules. They cannot control that arena. They only have a foothold and frequently have to negotiate because the rules are set internationally. Similarly, in the American arena, the U.S. government makes the decisions.

In those settings, people inside the country can act as whistleblowers, alerting the United States whenever Việt Nam violates agreements made with the U.S. or the United Nations.

Therefore, our focus is on facilitating direct connections. MSFJ later had members resettle in the United States, and they now work directly with the U.S. side. We merely make the introductions and then step back to save time, as we have other groups to assist. 

We support dozens of organizations like MSFJ, not just one, so we cannot shadow each one forever. That is why we train them to do the work themselves, and now they are capable of achieving a great deal.

When an opportunity arises, we alert them. For example, we recently informed MSFJ that the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative was conducting an investigation into Việt Nam, which could result in penalties affecting tens of billions of dollars. We told them the investigation was their chance to speak up. They filed a submission, and the committee heard their voices.

Luật Khoa: Could you please tell us more about the U.S. Trade Representative’s investigation into Việt Nam?

Nguyễn Đình Thắng: On July 8, 2026, we appeared before the investigative committee of the U.S. Trade Representative to demonstrate that Việt Nam lacks rule-of-law institutions and independent courts.

Just look at my own case. I am a U.S. citizen, yet they sentenced me to 11 years in prison in absentia less than two weeks after we joined the U.S. trade investigation into Việt Nam. Consider the following:

• I never received any preliminary documents.
• I was not permitted to confront my accuser or examine the witnesses and evidence.
• I was denied the right to my own lawyer.
• I was never notified of the date, time, or location of the trial.
• The U.S. government was not notified, preventing them from sending an observer.

I told the U.S. officials, “Just look at my file.” If speaking up, opposing the state policies, or exposing what Việt Nam attempts to hide from the world results in being silenced this way, how can American companies operate safely in Việt Nam? How can bilateral trade possibly be fair?

One side operates with transparency, while the other consistently hides its witnesses. The case of Phạm Chí Dũng followed the exact same pattern. 

Furthermore, authorities arrested and tried a Vietnamese official who leaked Directive No. 24—which outlaws all independent trade unions—in secret. That individual is currently in prison, yet no one even knows the length of the sentence. Everything is kept strictly secret. 

Even Lê Chí Thành, a former police captain who stood up to denounce the government’s use of forced labor and torture in prisons, was thrown into prison himself.

MSFJ is an organization that has worked alongside us to rescue numerous Montagnards whom the Vietnamese state sold into slavery abroad through its labor export program. MSFJ has also rescued many Montagnards trafficked to scam centers in Cambodia. 

Because they spoke up, the Vietnamese state accused them of terrorism and sentenced their co-founder, Y Quỳnh B’Đắp, to 10 years in absentia. He remains in prison today. Now, BPSOS has been subjected to the exact same treatment.

After BPSOS urged citizens inside the country to cooperate with the investigation by the U.S. Trade Representative into Việt Nam’s theft of U.S. intellectual property, many people responded. A mere five days after we spoke out, BPSOS was immediately branded a terrorist organization.

Look at these facts and ask yourselves: how can anyone trust the Vietnamese state in matters of trade? They will cheat no matter what.

Luat Khoa: From your perspective, how are human rights issues connected to the trade discussions between the two countries?

Nguyễn Đình Thắng: In reality, trade completely ties human rights issues to itself. 

For example, in 2007, Prime Minister Nguyễn Tấn Dũng signed an order authorizing the forced seizure of Montagnard land for bauxite mining, which was then handed over to Chinese state-owned companies. 

Despite widespread protests at the time, the government eventually relocated approximately 2,000 households. And what was the purpose of this bauxite project? The two plants were intended to manufacture aluminum products at artificially low prices, made possible because the companies paid no land rent after the government confiscated the land from the people. That is a direct violation of Indigenous rights. 

The Montagnards were born and raised on that land. Forcing them to relocate means they lose the ancestral lands left to them. Therefore, Indigenous rights are intrinsically linked to U.S. trade. Việt Nam waived land rent for up to 15 years, after which the companies paid a mere $800 a year per hectare. How can the United States possibly compete with such aluminum prices?

Similarly, in Hà Tĩnh, the Formosa steel plant seized people’s land. Many of the local fishing villages were Catholic, and the residents were forced to relocate after their churches were demolished. That becomes a matter of religious freedom. 

When these repressed communities stood up—led by figures such as priests Nguyễn Đình Thục, Đặng Hữu Nam, and others—the Vietnamese state “spawned” the Red Flag Associations to violently attack them.

That same steel plant now produces goods at rock-bottom prices to sell to the United States, creating unfair competition for American steel manufacturers. How can American companies compete when the United States requires fair wages for its workers? Furthermore, since Việt Nam has no independent trade unions, how can workers even protect their own rights?

Multiple issues, spanning labor rights, indigenous rights, and religious freedom, connect to U.S. trade. Việt Nam cheats, exploits, and oppresses its own people to compete unfairly with the United States. That is why we frame all of these issues within the context of trade.

Luật Khoa: Since the terrorism accusations against you and BPSOS began, has Việt Nam’s MPS contacted you?

Nguyễn Đình Thắng: Not at all.

Under the diplomatic conventions between Việt Nam and the United States, Việt Nam’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs is required to contact the U.S. State Department to notify them of the MPS’s accusations against me. The State Department would then forward the matter to the U.S. Justice Department, which would collaborate with the courts to issue a summons.

Following these steps, the court would arrange for both parties to confront one another according to the bilateral procedures between the two nations. This process must occur directly. I would likely have to appear before a U.S. judge to face the Vietnamese police, ensuring that proper procedures, concrete evidence, and clear accusations are presented. Việt Nam has completely bypassed all of these procedures.

I know that the U.S. State Department has repeatedly asked Việt Nam’s MPS to provide evidence to the U.S. side so that the State Department can inform the FBI [Federal Bureau of Investigation, Luật Khoa’s note]. To this day, however, they have received no evidence, simply because it does not exist. If they attempted to produce fake evidence, the Americans would see through it immediately.

Luật Khoa: Can you tell us when, and how many times, the State Department asked Vietnamese police for evidence?

Nguyễn Đình Thắng: I cannot disclose those specifics, but I know they have asked several times, and Việt Nam has flatly refused to respond. This refusal means they are in violation of standard protocols; they claim to know a terrorist element is embedded in the United States, yet they refuse to inform U.S. law enforcement so it can investigate and protect American citizens.

Luật Khoa: What do you anticipate the Vietnamese government’s next moves will be concerning you and BPSOS? 

Nguyễn Đình Thắng: They have one or two more steps available but likely do not want to take them yet. If they push this all the way, they risk walking off a cliff.

The next step would be to ask the FBI to investigate—to declare to the United States that an extremely dangerous terrorist element is operating within American society and actively financing terrorism. What they do not realize is that a portion of this supposed “terrorism financing” actually comes directly from the U.S. Congress and the U.S. government.

The subsequent step would be to request my extradition. However, to request extradition, they must provide comprehensive evidence. This is not the jungle law practiced in Việt Nam; a U.S. court mandates the right to cross-examination. The Vietnamese state would be required to send representatives here to face us in person.

That scenario would provide the American justice system an opportunity to reveal the entire truth. We do work with U.S. officials, and we have explicitly asked them not to pressure Việt Nam into simply overturning the court’s verdict against me. If a Vietnamese court quietly overturns the verdict, it closes the matter and leaves nothing left to discuss. I told them no: it must now be retried from the very beginning, under the fair and rigorous procedures of the United States and the international community.

They must submit the indictment documents in advance. You cannot legally prevent the accused from knowing the charges against them. From there, we will retain legal counsel and appear in a U.S. court, which will then engage with the Vietnamese court. We will take it step by step, starting completely over, so that both the United States and the international community can clearly see whether Việt Nam adheres to the rule of law and whether any fairness or transparency exists within its justice system.

Luật Khoa: What specific obstacles have the Vietnamese authorities created for both you and BPSOS, particularly following your terrorism conviction? 

Nguyễn Đình Thắng: Quite a few.

We frequently transfer money to activists on our staff based in Thailand. A U.K. money transfer company, YWI, blocked these transfers, stating that they could not process the funds based on information provided by the Vietnamese government. 

We were forced to choose another platform, but we know the Vietnamese state likely informed that company that we are a terrorist organization. Under international law, terrorist funds cannot be transferred.

Additionally, Việt Nam’s MPS has designated some of our staff members as terrorist elements. We employ a Montagnard woman who was accused of being a member of MSFJ, despite never having been affiliated with them. She is exclusively a member of our organization and formerly worked for the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees. Yet, the authorities simply saw a Montagnard and assumed she belonged to MSFJ.

This demonstrates the poor operational standards of the Vietnamese police: it is either carelessness or they are doing it on purpose. That woman immediately flew to Switzerland, and the Swiss government granted her residency, completely ignoring Việt Nam’s accusation that she is a terrorist.

We consistently take steps to protect our personnel. Naturally, such an action causes significant disruption because relocation is costly, but our organizations have never relied on any single individual. We continue to grow stronger.

Luật Khoa: You mentioned that Việt Nam’s MPS will find these next steps very difficult to take. Why, then, did they still proceed with accusing BPSOS of being a terrorist organization? 

Nguyễn Đình Thắng: I think they have harbored resentment toward our organization for a long time. We are the most effective organization reporting Việt Nam’s human rights violations—specifically concerning religious freedom and human trafficking—to the United Nations and other countries.

The Vietnamese government is a human trafficker. Through its labor export program, it traffics its own citizens into slavery across multiple countries. In 2022, the United States ranked Việt Nam as one of the three worst countries for human trafficking. We even exposed trafficking cases in Saudi Arabia that clearly involved Vietnamese diplomats.

Because of this resentment, they viewed the 2023 shooting in Đắk Lắk as an opportunity. However, they miscalculated. They wanted to exploit the situation, but they did not think several steps ahead. They acted without a cohesive strategy. While their initial steps might seem advantageous and clever, they will inevitably become stuck as they move forward. I know their behavior because our goal is to push them to proceed step by step, all the way to the very end.

Luật Khoa: Designating BPSOS as a terrorist organization places it alongside groups such as Việt Tân, Triều Đại Việt, and the Provisional National Government of Vietnam. In your view, how does BPSOS differ from these organizations? 

Nguyễn Đình Thắng: We are very different.

We are not a political organization. We want to help people build a future and a country where citizens have a voice and value their contributions. The people must decide the fate of their country, and the political system it adopts is entirely their choice. 

We neither support nor oppose any particular system; even if the people genuinely accepted the communist system, we would see that as normal.

We have no political aim, because politics is transient. Our objective is to build the people’s inner strength. Only when citizens are sufficiently wise and capable can they carry the fate of the entire nation over the long term and develop alongside the rest of the world.

The second major difference is that when Việt Nam accused BPSOS of being a terrorist organization, the international community immediately spoke out in force because they know us. They do not typically advocate for organizations with political goals.

Luật Khoa: Many accuse BPSOS of being an “anti-communist” organization. Do you agree?

Nguyễn Đình Thắng: The term “communism” has two different meanings. The first refers to the current communist regime in Việt Nam, while the second refers to communist ideology.

Regarding ideology, we defend and promote Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which guarantees freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. Communist thought is simply another form of thought. I may not agree with it, but if someone follows it and faces persecution, I will still defend their right to do so. We respect people’s beliefs, though I believe communism lost its meaning long ago.

This ideology rests on the premise that whoever controls the means of production holds political power. In the past, production had to be centralized because it required massive factories, meaning workers were entirely dependent on the owners of those facilities. That is no longer the case. Today, the raw material is in people’s minds, and the means of production is a tiny laptop that can travel anywhere. 

Production no longer needs to be centralized; it has spread out completely. Therefore, the communist model of pooling all assets to develop a country, its economy, and its society simply no longer applies. It died out a long time ago.

As for the current communist regime in Việt Nam, we hold it in very low regard. It is not even worth our response. I avoid directly refuting the Vietnamese state, because engaging with them would afford them some kind of value. We only work with the international community and allow them to speak out on our behalf. The regime does not deserve our response.

Luật Khoa: What is your current security situation, and do you have any concerns about your safety?

Nguyễn Đình Thắng: I do have some concerns. Certain countries, such as Thailand or other Southeast Asian nations, do not respect human rights or international norms and might comply with what Việt Nam asks. There may also be democratic countries that do not know the facts. Việt Nam could inform them about this so-called terrorist organization, and as a result, I could be stopped and face difficulties when traveling through an airport.

Before traveling abroad, we always contact the U.S. consulate in the destination country so they can monitor the situation and notify the host government in advance.

Luật Khoa: Thank you for taking the time to speak with Luật Khoa.

---

Hoàng Nam wrote this analysis in Vietnamese and published it in Luật Khoa Magazine on October 13, 2026. The Vietnamese Magazine translated it into English.