Little Saigon Protests Muted by Inner Feuds : Embargo: Support for Clinton’s decision by some O.C. Vietnamese muffles anti-communist hard-liners’ voice.

It seemed inevitable, within hours of President Clinton’s Thursday announcement ending the trade embargo with Vietnam, that local political activists would begin talking about staging a demonstration in Westminster’s Little Saigon.

Chuyen Nguyen, 45, a supervisor for an aircraft parts manufacturer in Garden Grove, would once again pull from his car his yellow and red-striped flag of the fallen Republic of Vietnam.

Phong Tran, 67, would take a break from the Orange County courtroom where he works as a part-time interpreter to consider when and where to protest.

And Tran Minh Cong, a 54-year-old Orange County government employee, would quickly fire off a letter to a New York Republican congressman.

So many times before, Vietnamese immigrant activists had been quick to take to the streets of Little Saigon, waving placards and shouting through bullhorns to protest U.S. policies, celebrities or politicians whom they felt betrayed their cause.

Now, with Clinton handing them a major setback, it was time to rally their comrades and show their flag again. But this time, the usually noisy protests were muted.

At a time when the exiles wanted their voices to be heard and their influence felt by U.S. policy-makers, they were distracted by their own internal feuding--epitomized by two rival demonstrations scheduled for today, just blocks apart in Westminster.

Their continued bickering over the outcome of last month’s election for a new president of the Vietnamese Community of Southern California organization, coupled with support for Clinton’s decision among moderate Vietnamese and the business community, had jeopardized their ability to mount a united front against a policy that would comfort their Communist enemies.

But no one, not even their moderate political foes and members of the business community, expects them to give up without a fight.

The bitter memories of these angry hard-liners, as with many other Vietnamese expatriates, were permanently seared by a bloody conflict that cost them their homeland, and forced them to abandon family, friends and, in some cases, fortune.

For them, the war is not over.

And the blow they felt with the lifting of the embargo, they predict, will revive their fervor to press for democratic reforms and the release of political prisoners in their country.

“The worst thing that happened to us was on April 30, 1975--the collapse of South Vietnam. What can be worse than that?” remarked Phong Tran. “So we lost this fight (with the Clinton Administration). That does not mean we lost the war.”

Ban Binh Bui, scheduled to be sworn in today as the new president of the Vietnamese Community of Southern California, was aware on Friday that his political rivals had scheduled a demonstration close by to protest the trade issue that might upstage his inauguration.

But he predicted that their united opposition to the lifting of the trade embargo will allow them to overcome the discord between the rival factions.

“Even my opponent, Dr. (Huu Dinh) Vo, has the same position as me against the Clinton policy,” Bui said. “We have something to (fight) together. We cannot trust (Clinton) anymore. We are here. We are power.”

Vo agreed that the lifting of the embargo may well provide a unifying point for the Vietnamese community here, prompting its fractious members to work together in order to have a greater voice as the United States proceeds toward a complete normalization of relations with Vietnam.

But Bui won by only 82 out of nearly 5,000 votes, and Vo’s supporters have not embraced Bui’s election, remaining convinced that he won through fraud.

“I don’t feel this election was fair or clean,” Vo said. “I have tried to point out the problems and irregularities, but it has already been decided. Now I don’t know where I can go further to protest, or what I can do.”

The Vo camp does not plan to attend Bui’s ceremony, but it downplays talk of dissension within the ranks of those opposed to further steps toward normalization of relations with Vietnam.

Cau Tran, who was on Vo’s political slate in the January election, said that as far as he is concerned there is only one legitimate Vietnamese gathering today--the demonstration sponsored by the United Front for the Liberation of Vietnam.

Tran said that Bui had asked through an intermediary that they delay their 11 a.m. demonstration so that it would not conflict with his swearing-in ceremony at 10:30 a.m. But the request was denied.

“Now I hear (Bui) will have a demonstration right after his swearing-in ceremony,” Tran said. “To me it’s a joke, but we’ll see what happens. We’ll see where the people will go the most.”

Vo was more conciliatory, claiming that the 11 a.m. protest actually had been planned early in the week as one of a number of demonstrations scheduled throughout the country in anticipation of the embargo being lifted. He denied that it was scheduled to conflict with Bui’s ceremony, saying he did not know at that point when the swearing-in would be held. By the time he received his invitation, it was too late to reschedule, he said.

Besides, he said, “it’s good to have many demonstrations. It shows that different groups and people have the same reaction to this decision.”

Local Vietnamese journalists, who have watched the growing dissension among the political activists, said privately that they worry whether the radical factions will ever settle their differences.

It was not too long ago, they pointed out, that the announcement of renewed trade with Vietnam would have sparked acts of violence against anyone in the Vietnamese community who supported Clinton’s policy. Yet there have been no acts of violence against the many Vietnamese businessmen who publicly endorsed the move.

“The community is in flux; no one knows where we’re going,” said one journalist. “It’s a dangerous time. The militants might want to shoot, but don’t know where to shoot. So they might shoot wildly, and innocents might get hurt.”

Worries about violence are not unfounded. A dozen Vietnamese journalists have been either attacked or killed since 1980.

The victims included a Garden Grove publisher who died in an arson fire in 1987. The following year, the FBI announced an investigation into political violence in the Vietnamese exile community, after reports that a series of attacks around the nation were politically motivated.

In 1990 in Virginia, a Vietnamese man and his wife were found dead of gunshot wounds in the driveway of their home. That same year, Yen Do, editor of the Nguoi Viet Daily News, received death threats.

The contest for leadership among the hard-liners may benefit the moderates who once feared the radicals, but have found in Clinton’s announcement the strength to speak more freely.

Before the embargo was lifted, Dr. Co Pham, head of the Vietnamese Chamber of Commerce, bought a bulletproof vest after his life was threatened and his office picketed.

But now, Pham is basking in the public light. His group is sponsoring a fact-finding mission to Vietnam in March or April to draw up guidelines on how to do business with the homeland.

And there have been other recent signs that the fear of violence is subsiding.

When Vietnamese singer Thanh Lan came to the United States on a three-month visa, her local concert scheduled for early January was shut down by protesters. But now that she has asked for political asylum, no one is threatening her.

“Heaven and Earth,” Oliver Stone’s movie based on the life story of avowed Communist sympathizer Le Ly Hayslip, was expected to be boycotted in the community. Instead, it has drawn record crowds to the Thu Do theater in Little Saigon.

“The Scent of Green Papaya,” a film made in France by Vietnamese filmmakers that could garner an Academy Award for Vietnam, also was expected to be targeted by demonstrators.

“Well, it’s opening tonight and no one is boycotting it,” noted one Vietnamese journalist. “There’s just been a couple of editorials here and there against it.”

The staunch anti-communists may be finding themselves without the power to influence events. What were once staunch anti-communist attitudes among the majority may have given way to more moderate political positions.

And Vietnamese moderates, ready to move on and put the past behind them, want to build a better Vietnam instead of letting it rot, according to some who privately favor the new trade relations with Vietnam.

Chuyen Nguyen readily admits that he and his hard-line allies do not have political clout that reaches the White House.

But with their bullhorns, Nguyen said, they do not believe they are voiceless. He vows to whip up public opinion, circulate petitions and develop voter registration campaigns independent of the Democratic and Republican parties.

“We will utilize a bad situation and turn it into a good situation,” Nguyen said.

Cong, who will attend Bui’s inauguration at the Westminster Civic Center, also issued a warning: “Remember that when American companies come in and work in Vietnam, a lot of personnel and staff will be Vietnamese Americans. We will be fighting them right inside their plants. . . . One way or another, we will fight, here or there.”

Yen Do, editor of the Nguoi Viet Daily News, said the “noisy style” of the hard-liners makes them appear “bigger than they are.” And their ability to organize demonstrations, telephone-calling and letter-writing campaigns will keep them in a position to shape public opinion.

But if they want to gain political clout within the American political system, Do suggests that they deal with the new political realities.

“They will become a strong voice when they accept some kind of unity among themselves and they can play the politics of true compromise,” Do said.

Times staff writer Rebecca Trounson contributed to this story.