What was Phan Chu Trinh’s objective for Vietnam? How were his ideas different from those of Phan Boi Chanu?

Answer :
Phan Boi Chau and Phan Chu Trinh’s were great nationalist of Vietnam. Both have same visions of Vietnam’s independence, but they differed in thinking to achieve those visions. Both pursued the same goal i.e. liberation of Vietnam from the French rule but with different means. Their differing views are given below:

Phan Boi Chau

(i) He believed that first the foreigners should be driven out of the country and after their independence they could laid about other things.
(ii) His was in favor of monarchy. He wanted to raise up the Vietnamese to end monarchy in due course of time.
(iii) He was greatly influenced by China and accepted a political framework headed by a monarch.
(iv)He advocated for the help of the court to resist the French.


Phan Chu Trinh
(i) He supported the western civilization. He also wanted to overthrow the foreign rule but at the same time he was not against the setting up of French legal and educational institutions in Vietnam.
(ii) He was against Phan Boi Chau’s monarchy theory. He believed in overthrowing the monarchy to promote popular rights.
(iii) He wished to establish democratic republic in Vietnam. He was deeply influenced by the democratic ideals of the west and also demanded the legal and educational institutions along with the development of agriculture and industries.
(iv) He opposed the idea of resisting the French with the help of the court.

Common Ideas:
- Independence: Both Phan Boi Chau and Phan Chu Trinh shared a common goal of seeking independence for Vietnam from French colonial rule. They believed that Vietnam should be a sovereign nation and advocated for the end of foreign domination.
- Nationalism: Both leaders were strong proponents of Vietnamese nationalism and emphasized the importance of preserving and promoting Vietnamese culture, language, and traditions. They believed that the Vietnamese people should have pride in their identity and work towards the betterment of their country.
- Modernization: Phan Boi Chau and Phan Chu Trinh recognized the need for modernization and reforms in Vietnam. They believed that adopting Western ideas and technology could help strengthen the country and enable it to compete with other nations. They advocated for education, industrialization, and the development of a democratic system.
- Unity: Both leaders emphasized the importance of unity among the Vietnamese people in their struggle for independence. They believed that divisions among the population would weaken the movement, and therefore, they aimed to unite all Vietnamese, regardless of their social or economic backgrounds, in the fight against colonialism.

Differences:
- Tactics: While both Phan Boi Chau and Phan Chu Trinh sought independence, they differed in their approaches. Chau advocated for armed resistance and believed in the use of force to overthrow the French colonial rule. On the other hand, Trinh believed in non-violent methods and focused on diplomatic negotiations and international support to achieve independence.
- Role of Monarchy: Another difference between the two leaders was their stance on the Vietnamese monarchy. Chau supported the restoration of the Nguyen dynasty and believed that a strong monarch was necessary to lead the country. In contrast, Trinh was critical of the monarchy and believed that a democratic system of government would better serve the interests of the Vietnamese people.
- International Relations: Phan Boi Chau had a more nationalist approach and focused primarily on internal matters, seeking support within Vietnam for the independence movement. In contrast, Phan Chu Trinh had a more international outlook and sought alliances and support from foreign powers, such as the United States and Japan, to pressure the French and gain recognition for Vietnam's independence.

Overall, while Phan Boi Chau and Phan Chu Trinh shared common goals of independence, nationalism, modernization, and unity, they differed in their tactics, views on monarchy, and approach to international relations.