It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so. -Mark Twain (1835-1910)
This was the title of a 2018 article written by Mary Beth Marklein (MBM) for Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning (Volume 50, 2018 – Issue 1, pp. 63-70). The online version was published on 22 May 2018. Since I have been following the development of Fulbright University Vietnam (FUV) since it was first announced, I read Mary Beth’s piece with great interest and, ultimately, disappointment. It read like a one-sided, US-centric puff piece that could easily have been written by the FUV public relations office or that of its benefactor, the US State Department. She took the time to speak to quite a few FUV people who, of course, confirmed her rosy view of this institution and whitewashed its recent controversial history. In other words, she committed a number of sins of omission.
Here are some comments from colleagues who know Viet Nam, all of which are spot-on, in my opinion.
She has drunk the establishment Kool-Aid. She thinks no one can truly do any wrong, I guess. She certainly skated lightly past a few important issues, such as how money was extracted from the Vietnamese for Fulbright U.
Like most Americans, she conflates two quite different concepts: “unbiased” and “pro-U.S.” Ironically, at most high-quality universities in the U.S. a large number of faculty see it as their mission to make their students aware of the powerful criticisms of the “neoliberal” world order, “globalization”, and U.S. policy. Even in the U.S., serious scholars (with some exceptions) are not mindless sycophants of U.S. imperialism. But FUV is much more U.S.-nationalistic than most universities in the U.S. So it’s worse than just “meddling” and imposing a U.S.-style institution on Vietnam — it’s imposing a lousy U.S.-style institution on Vietnam.
Below are some of my comments in red after the author’s paragraphs in blue.
Last but not least, another sin of omission is a major source of funding for FUV, namely, the balance of the Vietnam Education Foundation (VEF), a scholarship-for-debt program. That $20 million came indirectly from the Vietnamese government, a partner in this project in more ways than one.
Finally, what about the victims, both the living and the dead, of Kerey’s war crimes in Thanh Phong? What about the cruel and insensitive comments by Vallely in that Politico interview? What about the cynical and persistent use of education not only as a tool but as a weapon of soft power in trying to shape Viet Nam in the USA’s image, which is decidedly anti-Fulbright?
I could say more but I think this will suffice for a blog post.
Note: The author is a Ph.D. candidate at George Mason University, where her focus is on US higher education as public diplomacy. My hope is that she develops a more critical perspective on the issues she writes about and doesn’t continue to uncritically toe the line of US public diplomacy.
Shalom (שלום), MAA, The Unquiet US American
The only problem with this approach is that fair attendees who do this really don’t care (I’m writing for a G-rated audience here…) about asking meaningful questions or picking up promotional materials of interest to them. In fact, it’s safe to say that most probably don’t intend to study abroad. They just want the stamps, the way your dog, cat or whatever wants its treats, which lead to the gold, or whatever, at the end of the rainbow. What do colleagues whose institutions pay large sums of money to travel overseas and recruit students get? Wasted time and the empty feeling of being played. 
