Why Việt Nam Won’t Take Sides on Ukraine, Even as Its Public Does

Việt Nam has taken a cautious position since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The country has consistently called for respect for international law, the United Nations Charter, and the need to resolve disputes through dialogue. However, at the multilateral level, Hà Nội has avoided joining the main United Nations General Assembly resolutions condemning Russian aggression.

According to Ian Storey’s analysis for the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute, Việt Nam abstained from voting on resolutions on March 2 and 24, 2022, Oct. 12, 2022, and Feb. 23, 2023. On April 7, 2022, it voted not to suspend Russia from the UN Human Rights Council. Hà Nội has also never imposed unilateral sanctions on Moscow.

This conduct does not necessarily indicate unconditional support for the invasion. It seeks to stop a European crisis from making Hà Nội choose between strategic partners. Việt Nam’s leaders must consider the history of their ties with Moscow. They also need to think about national security. Strong ties with the U.S., the EU, and Japan are also keys for trade, investment, and economic growth.

Hà Nội believes that small and medium-sized states should keep their autonomy in a more competitive world. The war in Ukraine reflects the rivalry between major powers. It isn’t a conflict between two states. It’s also a crisis impacting Russia’s relations with the West. This broader rivalry shapes the strategic environment that East Asian states must navigate.

An analysis published in The Pacific Review, titled “Bamboo in a Storm: The Russia Ukraine War and Vietnam’s Foreign Policy (2022 to 2024),” highlights this dilemma. The war has forced Hà Nội to reconcile its foreign policy principles, historical relationships, and national interests. For a country that advocates respect for territorial sovereignty, its caution toward the Russian invasion creates a clear tension between its stated principles and its diplomatic actions.

Ties with Ukraine Beyond the Soviet Legacy

Despite its official caution, Việt Nam has not cut ties with Ukraine. Diplomatic continuity has been paired with political contacts and humanitarian efforts. This suggests that Hà Nội aims to maintain an independent relationship with Kyiv, without making it entirely subordinate to its ties with Moscow.

In 2023, during the G7 summit in Hiroshima, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky met with then Vietnamese Prime Minister Phạm Minh Chính. According to Storey’s account, Chính reaffirmed Việt Nam’s commitment to its relationship with Ukraine and emphasized respect for international law and the United Nations Charter.

Chính’s message also drew on Việt Nam’s historical experience. As Hà Nội has often stated, a country that has faced numerous wars understands the value of peace. The ISEAS analysis of Việt Nam’s relations during the Russian-Ukrainian war documents this meeting.

The contact between the two leaders in 2023 did not signify a radical shift in Việt Nam’s stance. However, it confirmed that Hà Nội does not see its relationship with Kyiv as something to sacrifice for its ties with the Kremlin. Instead, Vietnamese diplomacy aims to maintain a relationship with Ukraine that can endure the conflict and continue to grow when political and security conditions allow.

Humanitarian Aid: Concrete Support Despite Diplomatic Caution

Hà Nội’s diplomatic caution has not stopped Việt Nam from making significant contributions to aid for the Ukrainian population. Beginning in May 2022, the Vietnamese government announced a humanitarian contribution of $500,000, distributed among various international and humanitarian organizations.

This included $100,000 each for the United Nations Central Emergency Response Fund, the World Health Organization, and UNICEF, along with $200,000 for the Ukrainian Red Cross through the Vietnam Red Cross Society. An additional contribution of $500,000 was announced in October 2026. On Oct. 20, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha thanked Việt Nam for the new assistance on social media, highlighting its importance ahead of winter.

These government contributions were supported by a private sector initiative. Vingroup, one of Việt Nam’s largest conglomerates, supplied 135 tonnes of instant noodles to Ukraine’s Kharkiv region during the first year of the war.

These efforts do not constitute military support for Kyiv and do not change Việt Nam’s position at the United Nations. Nevertheless, they show that the relationship with Ukraine extends beyond diplomatic statements.

Even while maintaining close ties with Moscow, Hà Nội has contributed to humanitarian efforts for Ukrainians. This distinction is crucial for understanding bamboo diplomacy, which seeks to preserve relations with various partners without entirely abandoning cooperation with a country affected by war.

Việt Nam also has a strong interest in maintaining relations with a wide range of states. The goal is to prevent major powers from defining its diplomatic space solely through competition. Preserving ties with Ukraine allows Hà Nội to reaffirm its autonomy, maintain a neutral stance, and avoid appearing completely aligned with Russia.

Bamboo Diplomacy Between Moscow and Kyiv

The term “bamboo diplomacy” has become a common expression to describe Vietnamese foreign policy. This metaphor, linked to former Communist Party General Secretary Nguyễn Phú Trọng, describes an approach that remains firmly rooted in its principles while adapting to international pressures.

The war in Ukraine represents one of the most significant tests of this approach. Hà Nội must protect its historical relationship with Russia, which is important for military cooperation and certain energy sectors, while ensuring that its position does not harm relations with Western economies.

At the same time, the Vietnamese government is concerned that the growing closeness between Moscow and Beijing could limit Việt Nam’s maneuverability in the South China Sea. This concern is particularly relevant because Russia, having become more dependent on China since the invasion, may find itself less autonomous in its dealings with Beijing.

For Hà Nội, the Sino-Russian strategic relationship poses a source of uncertainty by potentially influencing Russian economic and military activities in Asia.

Vladimir Putin visited Hà Nội in June 2024, and Vyacheslav Volodin, chairman of Russia’s State Duma, visited in September 2025, demonstrating the continuity of relations between the two governments. However, these visits should not be automatically interpreted as Vietnamese approval of the war.

In his analysis, “Russian President Putin’s Visit to Hanoi: Vietnam’s Bamboo Diplomacy in Action,” Ian Storey from ISEAS interprets the reception of the Russian president as part of Việt Nam’s strategy to maintain relations with multiple centers of power without abandoning its own interests.

Vietnamese Public Opinion: Sympathy for Moscow, Solidarity with Kyiv, and Online Divisions

The government’s official position does not necessarily reflect the views of its citizens. In Việt Nam, the war has sparked an online debate where collective memory, nationalism, distrust of the United States, nostalgia for the Soviet Union, and solidarity with the Ukrainian population all intersect.

In April 2022, Hoang Thi Ha and Dien Nguyen An Luong published one of the most detailed studies on the subject. Titled “The Russia-Ukraine War: Unpacking Online Pro-Russia Narratives in Vietnam,” the study analyzed 28 Facebook pages and groups that were particularly active in spreading pro-Russia narratives between Feb. 24 and April 10, 2022. The authors identified an online environment where users often interpreted the war through an anti-American and anti-Western lens.

Recurring messages among the pro-Russia in Việt Nam included the argument that NATO expansion provoked Russia, that the invasion was a response to Western pressure, and that Ukraine was acting as a tool of the United States. Some content also portrayed the Ukrainian leadership negatively and described Russia’s actions as a necessary response to an external threat.

However, it is important to acknowledge the study’s limitations. The analysis was not a representative survey of the Vietnamese population. It focused on 28 pages and groups already characterized by pro-Russian narratives.

Therefore, it cannot determine what percentage of citizens support Moscow, sympathize with Kyiv, or remain indifferent. Instead, it shows that a significant online space interprets the war through narratives favorable to Russia in 2022, when the war began.

The same study highlights that Việt Nam’s online environment is not monolithic. On various social media platforms, including Reddit and X, there are users who criticize the invasion and express solidarity with Ukraine, interpreting the war in terms of international law and self-determination.

Their views may reflect liberal values, personal experiences, access to different information sources, or a historical perspective less tied to nostalgia. However, it would be incorrect to assume that support for Ukraine implies opposition to the Vietnamese government. The political motivations of online users are more diverse than polarized debates might suggest.

Historical memory remains central to many of these discussions. For some, the Soviet Union’s support for North Việt Nam during the Vietnam War and the country’s subsequent reconstruction remains a key point of reference.

Contemporary Russia can therefore benefit from symbolic capital accumulated over several decades, even when its actions in Ukraine conflict with the principles of sovereignty that Việt Nam officially supports and defends. From this perspective, sympathy for Moscow does not necessarily stem from a profound understanding of Ukrainian society but may result from historical and ideological identification.

Another factor is distrust of the West, particularly the United States, from some of the people in North Việt Nam because the memories of the Vietnam War continue to shape how some citizens interpret international crises.

Criticism of the Russian invasion may be seen by some as part of a selective Western narrative, while conflicts involving American military interventions in other countries are invoked to highlight alleged double standards. This reasoning, however, can lead to a false equivalence. Washington’s responsibility for other conflicts does not erase Moscow’s responsibility for invading Ukraine.

A Relationship That Will Survive the War

The war has complicated relations between Việt Nam and Ukraine, but it has not undermined their diplomatic foundations.

In the medium term, much will depend on how the war unfolds and on Ukraine’s ability to rebuild its economy and institutions. A potential strengthening of trade relations could offer new opportunities, but it would be premature to present the result as a certain outcome.

Geographical distance, the material consequences of the war, and Việt Nam’s diplomatic caution will continue to shape the possibilities for cooperation. Hà Nội seeks to defend its autonomy through flexible diplomacy, preserving relations with Russia while maintaining ties with Ukraine and its Western partners.

This strategy has allowed the country to avoid a break with Moscow while keeping dialogue with Kyiv open. For a state whose modern history is deeply rooted in the struggle against foreign intervention, the defense of sovereignty is more than just a diplomatic formula.

The war in Ukraine illustrates how challenging it can be to apply this principle when strategic dependencies and economic interests are involved. Bamboo diplomacy may bend under international pressure, but its credibility also depends on its ability to clarify where its limits lie.