Resettlement: Has it truly been "re-established" or not?

(Baonghean) - On my way to work, I stopped by Thanh Hoa, Thanh Son commune (Thanh Chuong district) to visit an old Khmu man who had once invited me to his house for a meal. The old man looked a little sad when he learned I had just been to the Ban Ve hydroelectric reservoir: “Several people in our village have sold their houses and gone back up there. Many houses are locked up, and they’ve returned to their hometowns to work. There isn’t much land here; cassava takes two years to bear fruit, and acacia trees take five or six years to yield. They plant them and then go to work, only returning occasionally to tend to them. The children follow their parents and don’t get to go to school up there. In the old days, Kim Da village had stilt houses arranged in layers like terraced fields. You could plant trees without tending them and they would bear fruit, and you could catch fish in the stream without worrying about hunger. But here, the land is bad; even coconut trees don’t grow…”

The wife sat on a small chair, chewing betel nut, listening to her husband's conversation. The old couple in their half-stilt, half-concrete house looked as gloomy as a pair of wild birds trapped in a cage.

I idly pondered the people who returned to Tuong Duong after years of being persuaded to resettle. I wondered what their feelings were upon returning to the land they had been attached to for generations? The mountains, the streams, and the villages with their charming stilt houses are now submerged beneath the vast, tranquil lake. Did they ever press their ears against the side of the boat to hear the sound of the waves echoing from a memory that had become ancient? Perhaps I'm just overthinking things! Didn't the old man say that the villagers returned to Tuong Duong to make a living? Hunger and poverty had driven them back to their old home more than nostalgia or attachment. They returned out of habit, an instinct formed over generations, like birds migrating south to escape the cold.

So, the question is: Why were these Thai and Khmu ethnic people resettled in a place where the soil, climate, and farming practices were completely unfamiliar to them? Why, after all these years, has the issue of allocating arable land remained unresolved, with those who arrived earlier receiving more and those who arrived later receiving less? Finally, why haven't these resettled people been able to stabilize their lives and are forced to wander aimlessly on their own ancestral land?

As a result, uncontrolled migration makes it difficult for the government to control and track it. This also affects people's access to social welfare, healthcare, and education, while creating conditions for social ills to develop. Another consequence is the decline of the unique customs and traditions of the Thai and Khmu people due to two reasons. Firstly, they are influenced by the Kinh culture when interacting and living alongside them. Secondly, due to economic difficulties, people neglect traditional cultural activities. "You can't preach without food," meaning that without rice and money, people have to work hard, leaving no time to maintain cultural traditions like gong music and rice wine.

Of course, from the perspective of some people, "Sinicization" is seen as an inevitable and welcome progress. Women and girls no longer spend months weaving clothes, but instead buy ready-made clothes made by the Kinh people, which are convenient and "fashionable"?! But there are still Thai people who miss the traditional wooden stilt houses of their old villages, and Khmu people who are saddened that their gongs and drums are now without companions. Overarching this nostalgia and affection are concerns about hunger and poverty in the new land. Resettlement means once again stabilizing life, but it seems they are still "immersed" and "living" rather than truly "re-established"?

Hai Trieu