Vietnam’s New AI Law and Its Strategic Implications – The Diplomat All Sections Search Read The Diplomat, Know
The Asia-Pacific Central Asia East Asia Oceania South Asia Southeast Asia | Security Politics Diplomacy Economy Society
Environment Opinion Features | All Regions Central Asia East Asia Oceania South Asia Southeast Asia Topics Diplomacy
Economy Environment Opinion Politics Security Society Blogs ASEAN Beat Asia Defense China Power Crossroads Asia
Flashpoints Oceania Pacific Money The Debate The Koreas The Pulse Tokyo Report Trans-Pacific View More Features
Interviews Photo Essays Podcasts Videos Newsletter Diplomat Brief Weekly Newsletter The Diplomat Home Page About Us
Contact Us Write for Us Advertise Syndicate Privacy Newsletter Subscriptions FlashpointsVietnam’s New AI Law and Its
Strategic Implications Recent FeaturesSecurityThe ‘Poisonous Heart’: Australia’s Most Secretive Base Draws New
ScrutinyEconomyThe Strait of Malacca: The Indo-Pacific’s Most Critical Chokepoint?VideosAsia’s Overlooked
Maritime FlashpointsSecurityThe Rise of North Korea’s Nuclear-Armed NavySocietyJakarta, the Sinking Metropolis Where
Millions Still Struggle to Access Piped WaterSecurityWhy China Is Investing in Planetary Defense SocietyWhy a Tibetan
Protester Set Himself on Fire Outside the United NationsPolitics‘There Is Zero Accountability’: India’s
‘Cockroaches’ Question Modi and a Broken SystemVideosBeyond the South China Sea: 4 Other Maritime Flashpoints in
East AsiaJuly 20, 2026Ongoing Belt and Road Initiative Poses Strategic Risks in the Western BalkansEconomyChina, the US,
and Nuclear Energy Geopolitics in Southeast AsiaDiplomacyNew Zealand’s Trade Agreement With India Reflects a
Foreign Policy Shift Subscribe for ads-free reading Flashpoints | Security | Southeast Asia
Vietnam’s New AI Law and Its Strategic Implications The country’s government is leading Southeast Asian efforts
to regulate AI technologies, but its approach has several important shortcomings. By Kevin McGahan July 28, 2026 Credit:
ID 78662583 © Grafvision | Dreamstime.com Subscribe for ads-free reading In March 2026, Vietnam began implementing its
state-led, top-down AI law (Law 134/2025/QH15), one of the boldest moves to govern the juggernaut technology sector that
any Southeast Asian government has made so far. For a country rapidly ramping up its high-tech ambitions, Vietnam’s AI
regulatory measure aims to strengthen sovereign control over data flows, augment transparency, and mitigate against
varying risks associated with AI. Moreover, it sets a benchmark for regulation within a region which has generally
relied on voluntary compliance, as exemplified by ASEAN’s soft-law or guideline approach to AI governance. But therein
lies the rub. While Hanoi is forcefully implementing a standalone legal framework to assert control over information
technology and strengthen state sovereignty, the Vietnamese government is ignoring the broader regulatory,
socio-economic, and environmental implications. These include unintended consequences such as the sorts of economic
dislocations and social disruptions that are inherent in such dynamic and historic transformations, although AI
engenders change at exponential rates that could vastly widen already troubling societal inequalities. Vietnam is not
alone in its quest for enhanced digital sovereignty, and the stakes of the issue are high. The United States, China,
Russia, and the European Union have long understood that key sectors – ranging from healthcare to energy and security
– now operate on AI systems generally dominated by a handful of tech companies and the supply chains of critical
minerals on which they rely. AI governance, therefore, increasingly encompasses the grand strategies of various global,
national, and corporate stakeholders who are seeking to survive in a harshly competitive environment. Vietnam’s new AI
law creates a comprehensive legal framework, establishing a three-tier system of high, medium, and low categories of
risk that align with differing levels of regulatory control. The higher the risk, the more government regulation. As a
state-led approach, the law applies to both domestic and foreign entities conducting AI activities in Vietnam. While the
law is still being implemented, it ideally aims to balance regulation with innovation and socio-economic development by
allowing tech developers to test evolving AI models without strict penalties during a trial phase. Although the law has
its strengths, Vietnam’s AI law has several important shortcomings. First, the policy sits uneasily under ASEAN’s
regional voluntary approach to AI regulation. Most troubling, it possibly creates a high-tech race to the bottom in the
region, as venture capital often seeks jurisdictions with the least amount of regulation. Vietnam’s growing economy
and quest for capital sits in a region increasingly shaped by ASEAN’s evolving governance architecture. But the
country’s AI law currently stands in contrast to ASEAN’s soft approach to AI regulation, at least for now. In
February 2024, ASEAN issued its Guide on AI Governance and Ethics, which outlined principles of transparency, fairness,
accountability, human-centricity, privacy, safety, and reliability. This framework was expanded in January 2025 to cover
generative AI with nine areas of concern, including cybersecurity and content creation. ASEAN’s principle-based AI
approach tends to mirror the EU’s emphasis on constructive engagement with the AI sector. By the end of 2026, ASEAN
could potentially be moving to a legally binding approach under the ASEAN Digital Economy Framework Agreement, which is
expected to be signed later this year. Vietnam’s AI law is also notable for what is omitted from regulation, such as
the questions of how to manage environmental degradation and natural resource allocation. This omission is significant
because AI requires vast resources, particularly water for cooling data centers. According to the World Economic Forum,
the standard 1 megawatt (MW) data center can guzzle approximately 25.5 million liters of water per year; this is
comparable to the daily consumption of 300,000 residents in a medium-sized city in Vietnam. The energy implications of
such resource consumption are stark. Diverting natural resources to cool AI’s growing infrastructure threatens to
deplete local and regional water reserves. This strain on Vietnam’s environment is escalating in what the World Bank
already views as one of the most at-risk countries for global climate change and rising coastal waters. More
importantly, the new law fails to offer any social protections for workers and communities who are displaced by AI
technology. Across Asia, for example, workers in the gig economy have protested companies that control AI-generated
algorithms, which have tightened delivery times while cutting wages. Vietnam has clearly missed an opportunity to take a
more worker-friendly, human-centric approach to AI regulation. It is not alone in this; governments across the region
have generally shirked any meaningful effort to provide a social safety net to support workers from a growing wave of AI
systems and robotic automation. These shortcomings collectively underscore how during periods of great transformation,
various stakeholders, including countries, companies, and local communities, must cooperate to protect two essential
commodities that are central to the global economy; namely, land and labor. Consequently, Vietnam’s AI law, and others
like it that fail to address governance gaps involving key commodities and regulatory coordination, will undermine
AI’s overall effectiveness, exacerbating economic dislocation and social displacement that could potentially unleash
regional instability and uncertainty for many years to come. Already have an account? Log in. You have reached the limit
of 2 free articles this month. Get to the bottom of the story Subscribe today and join thousands of diplomats, analysts,
policy professionals and business readers who rely on The Diplomat for expert Asia-Pacific coverage. Get unlimited
access to in-depth analysis you won't find anywhere else, from South China Sea tensions to ASEAN diplomacy to
India-Pakistan relations. More than 5,000 articles a year. Unlimited articles and expert analysis Weekly newsletter with
exclusive insights 16-year archive of diplomatic coverage Ad-free reading on all devices Support independent journalism
Subscribe Now View Subscription Options Already have an account? Log in. In March 2026, Vietnam began implementing its
state-led, top-down AI law (Law 134/2025/QH15), one of the boldest moves to govern the juggernaut technology sector that
any Southeast Asian government has made so far. For a country rapidly ramping up its high-tech ambitions, Vietnam’s AI
regulatory measure aims to strengthen sovereign control over data flows, augment transparency, and mitigate against
varying risks associated with AI. Moreover, it sets a benchmark for regulation within a region which has generally
relied on voluntary compliance, as exemplified by ASEAN’s soft-law or guideline approach to AI governance. But therein
lies the rub. While Hanoi is forcefully implementing a standalone legal framework to assert control over information
technology and strengthen state sovereignty, the Vietnamese government is ignoring the broader regulatory,
socio-economic, and environmental implications. These include unintended consequences such as the sorts of economic
dislocations and social disruptions that are inherent in such dynamic and historic transformations, although AI
engenders change at exponential rates that could vastly widen already troubling societal inequalities. Vietnam is not
alone in its quest for enhanced digital sovereignty, and the stakes of the issue are high. The United States, China,
Russia, and the European Union have long understood that key sectors – ranging from healthcare to energy and security
– now operate on AI systems generally dominated by a handful of tech companies and the supply chains of critical
minerals on which they rely. AI governance, therefore, increasingly encompasses the grand strategies of various global,
national, and corporate stakeholders who are seeking to survive in a harshly competitive environment. Vietnam’s new AI
law creates a comprehensive legal framework, establishing a three-tier system of high, medium, and low categories of
risk that align with differing levels of regulatory control. The higher the risk, the more government regulation. As a
state-led approach, the law applies to both domestic and foreign entities conducting AI activities in Vietnam. While the
law is still being implemented, it ideally aims to balance regulation with innovation and socio-economic development by
allowing tech developers to test evolving AI models without strict penalties during a trial phase. Although the law has
its strengths, Vietnam’s AI law has several important shortcomings. First, the policy sits uneasily under ASEAN’s
regional voluntary approach to AI regulation. Most troubling, it possibly creates a high-tech race to the bottom in the
region, as venture capital often seeks jurisdictions with the least amount of regulation. Vietnam’s growing economy
and quest for capital sits in a region increasingly shaped by ASEAN’s evolving governance architecture. But the
country’s AI law currently stands in contrast to ASEAN’s soft approach to AI regulation, at least for now. In
February 2024, ASEAN issued its Guide on AI Governance and Ethics, which outlined principles of transparency, fairness,
accountability, human-centricity, privacy, safety, and reliability. This framework was expanded in January 2025 to cover
generative AI with nine areas of concern, including cybersecurity and content creation. ASEAN’s principle-based AI
approach tends to mirror the EU’s emphasis on constructive engagement with the AI sector. By the end of 2026, ASEAN
could potentially be moving to a legally binding approach under the ASEAN Digital Economy Framework Agreement, which is
expected to be signed later this year. Vietnam’s AI law is also notable for what is omitted from regulation, such as
the questions of how to manage environmental degradation and natural resource allocation. This omission is significant
because AI requires vast resources, particularly water for cooling data centers. According to the World Economic Forum,
the standard 1 megawatt (MW) data center can guzzle approximately 25.5 million liters of water per year; this is
comparable to the daily consumption of 300,000 residents in a medium-sized city in Vietnam. The energy implications of
such resource consumption are stark. Diverting natural resources to cool AI’s growing infrastructure threatens to
deplete local and regional water reserves. This strain on Vietnam’s environment is escalating in what the World Bank
already views as one of the most at-risk countries for global climate change and rising coastal waters. More
importantly, the new law fails to offer any social protections for workers and communities who are displaced by AI
technology. Across Asia, for example, workers in the gig economy have protested companies that control AI-generated
algorithms, which have tightened delivery times while cutting wages. Vietnam has clearly missed an opportunity to take a
more worker-friendly, human-centric approach to AI regulation. It is not alone in this; governments across the region
have generally shirked any meaningful effort to provide a social safety net to support workers from a growing wave of AI
systems and robotic automation. These shortcomings collectively underscore how during periods of great transformation,
various stakeholders, including countries, companies, and local communities, must cooperate to protect two essential
commodities that are central to the global economy; namely, land and labor. Consequently, Vietnam’s AI law, and others
like it that fail to address governance gaps involving key commodities and regulatory coordination, will undermine
AI’s overall effectiveness, exacerbating economic dislocation and social displacement that could potentially unleash
regional instability and uncertainty for many years to come. AuthorsGuest AuthorKevin McGahanDr. Kevin McGahan is the
former convener of global studies and lecturer in political science at the National University of Singapore. He is
currently a sustainability consultant as well as an adjunct researcher at the AI Asia Pacific Institute.
TagsFlashpointsSecuritySoutheast AsiaVietnamArtificial intelligenceartificial intelligence AsiaArtificial intelligence
in VietnamVietnam EconomyVietnam technology Subscribe for ads-free reading Advertisement Latest StoriesA New – and Old
– China Human Rights Agenda at the United NationsThe Quad and ASEAN’s First Step Off The FenceWhy Did China
Sanction 2 High-Tech Institutions in Poland?America’s Changing Policy on Afghanistan Advertisement Diplomat Brief
Weekly Newsletter Get briefed on the story of the week, and developing stories to watch across the Asia-Pacific. Get the
Newsletter Advertisement RelatedCan Vietnam Play a Meaningful Role in the Global Rare Earth Supply Chain?By Tran Thi
Mong TuyenThe country has little hope of displacing China, but is in a good position to provide a reliable and
diversified source of processed oxides and magnet components.The 2016 South China Sea Arbitration Award at 10: Its
Lasting SignificanceBy Cao Nguyen Khanh Huyen and Nguyen Thanh LongThe award did not settle maritime disputes in the
region. But it did fundamentally clarify the interpretation of maritime entitlements under UNCLOS – and forced
countries to clarify their claims in turn.Vietnam’s Quiet Strategy at the Shangri-La DialogueBy Khang PhamAt the
Shangri-La Dialogue, Hanoi has sought to shape the terms of the regional security debate.Vietnam’s Cautious Acceptance
of Chinese 5G TechnologyBy Minh TranRecent agreements with Huawei and ZTE reflect economic pragmatism rather than a
shift in strategic trust.Most ReadAsia’s Overlooked Maritime Flashpoints Besides the South China Sea, there are
various waterways under contention, from open ocean to marshlands and rivers.India’s Gen Z Protesters Score Major
Victory Against Modi GovernmentBy Kavita ChowdhuryAfter angry students forced the education minister to resign, Prime
Minister Modi’s aura of invincibility has been dented.What a Stray Dog’s Murder Tells Us About Chinese Civil
SocietyBy Alric LeeWang Wang has appeared on billboards around the world – visible proof that China’s censorship
does have limits. ‘There Is Zero Accountability’: India’s ‘Cockroaches’ Question Modi and a Broken
SystemBy Tarushi AswaniThe Cockroach Janata Party is leading a youth-heavy protest movement that embodies the public
anger with the BJP.FeaturesThe ‘Poisonous Heart’: Australia’s Most Secretive Base Draws New ScrutinyBy Briana
CharlesThe largest U.S. spy facility in the region attracted a massive protest action amid rising concerns about the
Australia-U.S. alliance.The Strait of Malacca: The Indo-Pacific’s Most Critical Chokepoint?By Paola MorselliThe
vulnerabilities of Hormuz and Malacca are fundamentally different – but a closure of the Strait of Malacca would be
far worse.The Rise of North Korea’s Nuclear-Armed NavyBy Logan Rolleigh and Ryan BrobstNorth Korea has modified its
hierarchy of defense priorities by elevating the importance of the KPAN.Jakarta, the Sinking Metropolis Where Millions
Still Struggle to Access Piped WaterBy Michael NeilsonExcessive groundwater extraction by households and industry is one
of the primary reasons for the city's subsidence.Latest StoriesA New – and Old – China Human Rights Agenda at the
United NationsBy Sophie RichardsonWhy did China support the re-election of Volker Turk as U.N. High Commissioner for
Human Rights?The Quad and ASEAN’s First Step Off The FenceBy Vanshika Saraf and Amit KumarFor the first time, the
Quad issued a dedicated joint statement on cooperation with ASEAN.Why Did China Sanction 2 High-Tech Institutions in
Poland?By Antoni ŁukasikBeijing has offered no explanation for why these particular Polish entities were selected, but
several recent developments are worth noting.America’s Changing Policy on AfghanistanBy Muhammad MuradWashington has
moved from an emphasis on human rights to “selective” contacts driven by specific cases. That's a win for the
Taliban. Regions Central Asia East Asia Oceania South Asia Southeast Asia Topics Diplomacy Economy Environment Opinion
Politics Security Society Blogs ASEAN Beat Asia Defense China Power Crossroads Asia Flashpoints Oceania Pacific Money
The Debate The Koreas The Pulse Tokyo Report Trans-Pacific View More Features Interviews Photo Essays Podcasts Videos
Archives Magazine A New Japan By Other Means APAC Insider Asia Life Asia Scope China, What's Next? Indian Decade James
Holmes New Emissary New Leaders Forum Sport & Culture Tech Biz Tokyo Notes Zachary Keck The Diplomat About Us Contact Us
Write for Us Advertise Syndicate Terms of Use Privacy Policy Newsletters Subscriptions Newsletter Diplomat Brief Weekly
Newsletter © 2026 Diplomat Media Inc. All Rights Reserved.