Short Socialist Primer on the Lao People's Democratic Republic

Of the socialist countries existing today, the Lao PDR is talked about the least. The PRC, DPRK, Vietnam and Cuba often come up in both Western and Global South news, so why is the Lao PDR never mentioned? Even among leftist circles there exists a fog of intrigue over this small, landlocked country of 8 million. Or perhaps leftists would rather it be forgotten, since the poverty-stricken country is too easy a target for reactionary accusations of starvation under communism. With this short primer I hope to educate the leftist reader on the material and historical conditions of this country.

The Lao PDR borders China, Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand and Myanmar. In the 20th century, it was a colony of French Indochina, along with Cambodia, Vietnam and parts of South China. During WWII, the Japanese took over. When the Allies won, the French invaded again, starting the First Indochina War (1946-1954). The Pathet Lao, Viet Minh and United Issarak Front won their independence against the French. But the Lao people would go on to fight 4 more bloody wars and 1 revolution before the end of the millennium, mainly the Second Indochina War (1946-1954). In the Anglosphere, they call it the Vietnam War. In Vietnam, it's known as the Resistance War Against America. [1] In the Lao PDR, it's often referred to as the Secret War. [2]

It's confusing. Even the Wikipedia article calls it the "Laotian Civil War", implying an internal conflict. The reality is simple. It was a war of reactionary forces armed by McNamara's regime versus the Pathet Lao.

The mask of humanity fall from capital

During the war, US bombers dropped approx. 270 million "bombies", cluster munitions, within the borders of Lao PDR. [3] Most of the bombings unsuccessfully targeted the Ho Chi Minh Trail, a crucial, 16,000km supply line running through North Vietnam and Laos. So great was their desperation, the number of bombs the US regime dropped on the Lao people was greater than all the bombs dropped during WWII. [4]

For Americans, the scars from the war are only mental. The Lao people today want to move on, but the ghosts of the war take physical form. Some millions of US bombies still hide in bushes and streams today, waiting for some unlucky soul to detonate them. For a full fact list from Vientiane's COPE Visitor Centre:

The PRC in Lao PDR

In the past two decades, Chinese investment in Lao has skyrocketed, becoming its second largest trading partner. Under the BRI, a high speed rail from Vientiane to Yunnan was built, numerous hydropower dams along the Mekong, all significant improvements to infrastructure. In response, the liberal narrative cites the same overused debt trap diplomacy diatribe that demonises the BRI in Africa. It's as if there's no risk in lending billions to another country. In any case, this narrative has been conclusively disproven — there is very little evidence suggesting a premeditated strategy to seize Pakistani or Lao assets [5][6].

The liberals hence imply a bizarre and strange argument, that ‘The country that bombed you is your friend. The one that built your new railway is your enemy’. [7] A railway that massively improves transport infrastructure, reduces a dodgy 10 hour commute on dodgy roads between Vientiane and Luang Prabang to 8 hours [8]. The railway has also transported more than 14 million tons of goods and an increase of 62.8% in the number of fruits transported.

Building infrastructure in Laos was no easy task for the Chinese either. 80% of the country is untamed mountains, not to mention the UXO. During the railway's construction, PowerChina and other Chinese companies had to stop for the US bombies to be cleared. Liu QIanli, the engineering head, said that “[t]o dig on a no man's land is nothing compared to the fear of those unexploded bombs in the jungles, which makes me feel unprecedented pressure.” [9]

It seems offensive at best, then, that liberals continue to advance the debt trap narrative and frame Chinese investment in Lao as neocolonialism. Western media frames Chinese investment as harmful, while the regime that dropped millions of bombs on Lao should instead be trusted.

Can the Subaltern speak?

Disturbingly, news articles from Western publications often frame the Lao PDR as a subject without any agency. In most cases it takes the position of a victim, either of Chinese colonisation or US bombing. Perhaps they should consider that the Lao people actually want foreign investment to improve material conditions, even if it is financed on debt. Or maybe the anti-China propaganda is because the Lao PDR is financing projects with China instead of the IMF.

This is no different from how the Western media frames Cuba and Palestine today. The subaltern are positioned as subjects with no voice, then are talked about. The writer holds all the power. In any case, I hope that this article has helped as a primer for understanding the Lao PDR' material conditions.