Kangaroo's right, it's a people's democratic Republic.
Should it be a multiparty democracy instead of a single party state.
I think that depends upon how far & how the existing political system has developed against the challenges existing in that countries society & economy.
My feelings are that a strong unified leadership is needed in holding a country together in interesting times. To achieve the greater good it is better then to give up some personal freedom.
In Vietnam's case, if there is popular support, then I feel they may now begin to benifit from a multiparty system as their overseas trade has grown, rebuilding after the devastating war complete & memories of it although present, are fading.
I would not be suprised thou if it moved that way in a simular way that China has, with capitalism being gradually introduced as the foundations of the multipart state.
Yes, because I believe in true democracy. However, the current "People's Republic" is a communist government as is the obviously communist "People's Republic" of North Korea. To regain a true democratic form of government I believe would require a great civil uprising, similar to the conflict from '45 to '54 to overthrow the French colonials and then '54 to '73 to unite the country then divided by the United Nations as the Communist North and Democratic South. It would be great indeed if such could be accomplished without massive violence and great loss of life as in my own 749 day experience. That was a civil war. Putting all feelings aside, if the people of Viet Nam are pleased, as a majority, with their current form of government so be it.