Editorial | Articles about Cambodia | Khmer
March 8, 2006
Miracle, 36 Years after Khmer Republic
By Kok Sap kok...@yahoo.com
From late 1968 on, US President Nixon got secret nod from Kingdom of Cambodia mercurial Prince Sihanouk to bomb Viet Cong sanctuaries along eastern border of his Kingdom. The bombardment classified Operation Menu Breakfast, Lunch, and Dinner featuring Napalms spiced up in Orange Agents from B-52 high altitude cooks and unauthorized incursions. Due to his poor suicidal diplomacy, Prince laid duty on his old buddy General Lon Nol to lead the National Salvation Government in 1969. Eventually in early 1970, Prince fled country under faked pretenses before popular demands removed him from duty on 18th March 1970. He was sentenced in absentia of treachery in abatement and harboring enemies. Then the Viet Cong undeclared war took toll on Cambodia.
The omnivorous Professor Kissinger, 1973 Nobel Peace Price recipient and Le Duc Tho ancien ami, enforced his schematic ultimatum on Khmer Republic then on its own but to surrender unconditionally to Prince Beijing based government. Coldheartedly US left its cold war accomplice, Khmer Republic to the bloody Prince Regime and rebels. The Prince was bloody mad and avenged people on the 17th April 1975. Over 1/3 of Cambodia total population then plus civilization took toll at his absolute directives. Cambodia turned isolated open killing fields. From that day on Cambodia had never been the same.
The event was the Miracle on Mekong River, B-52 bomb crates scarred Khmer Republic beneath scattering millions skeleton and starving slave feet. On the 7th January 1979, the same Viet Cong regiments returned and claimed over its invasion and occupation of former Khmer Republic in the world sent mission to topple murderous regime of the Prince. Vet Cong replaced the Prince clique with own remaining Viet Minh People Revolution disciples.
From 1979, over half million destitute and distraught survivor never turned back and sought out permanent refuge overseas at the UNHCR and humanitarian nation mercy. Others were caught in resistance and Khmer Rouge controls. Eventually the remaining were sent back to Cambodia under Viet Nam’s PRK communist government before 1993 UNTAC arrival.
Once again, the bloody murderers rule the victims whose justice is still in limbo up to now. The mercurial and heinous criminal Prince has been re-enthroned and unmolested as King second time around at the UN perpetuated choreographic. To date it has been 36 years passed but appallingly the humanity of Cambodia still is under injustice and hopelessness.
People never changed that’s Hanoi miracle in Nam Tien’s Nam Vang moi.
» Read more!
Seeing through Hun Sen
Sources: http://www.thestandard.com.hk
The wily Cambodian prime minister has long held power by playing a cruel but effective psychological game with his opponents. Unsurprisingly, few are convinced that his latest gesture of reconciliation toward them is genuine, writes Vaudine England
Saturday, February 25, 2006
The wily Cambodian prime minister has long held power by playing a cruel but effective psychological game with his opponents. Unsurprisingly, few are convinced that his latest gesture of reconciliation toward them is genuine, writes Vaudine England
A lmost overnight, Cambodia changed from a country where most of its opposition voices were in jail or exile to one where Prime Minister Hun Sen was loudly announcing an outbreak of peace.
Earlier this month he spoke at length of the "71-hour" outburst of "national reconciliation" in which "Cambodian talked to Cambodian" and solved the country's problems. Just like that.
By February 10, the seal on the apparent outbreak of peace and kindness was set by the return to Cambodia of opposition party leader Sam Rainsy.
He had been in self-imposed exile for a year but, in carefully arranged phone calls and letters, he had apologized to Hun Sen and promised a new non- confrontational attitude, getting a royal pardon in return.
A few thousand ecstatic supporters greeted his return, as they had greeted the releases from jail of his colleague Cheah Channy, radio journalist Mam Sonando, union leader Rong Chhun, and human rights advocates Kem Sokha and Pa Nguon Tieng. United States assistant secretary of state Christopher Hill had visited Cambodia in mid- January and requested the releases, adding his voice to a chorus of complaint at the crackdown.
It was another "miracle on the Mekong," in the wry words of a Cambodian diplomat.
In Cambodian geo-politics, the phrase "miracle on the Mekong" deliberately recalls in satirical tone the judgment of US Congressman Stephen Solarz on the July 26, 1998 elections. Despite massive intimidation, human rights abuses and perversion of the democratic process, Solarz judged the elections then as free and fair because more than 90 percent of the electorate still dared to vote.
Later forced to temper his claim of a miracle, Solarz pointed out that most people had voted against premier Hun Sen, but a split of the opposition between Prince Norodom Ranariddh's Funcinpec Party and the Sam Rainsy Party deprived them of victory.
Critics of Hun Sen, his Cambodian People's Party (CPP) and of Solarz, argued that far from being a miracle, talk of a free vote was a travesty.
"What took place in Cambodia on July 26 [1998] may not have been, as I had originally hoped, a `miracle on the Mekong,' leading to a new birth of democracy and reconciliation in that troubled land. But it would be unfair to the millions of Cambodians who had the courage to vote to dismiss it as a totally illegitimate electoral charade," Solarz wrote in September 1998.
Observers are faced with much the same dilemma now.
It seems good news that the clutch of opposition figures and human rights activists are now out of jail. It is also reassuring when a country's leader says he "needs opposition voices" and wants Cambodians to unite to solve their problems.
But the miracle is most probably a mirage, agree diplomats, analysts and even participants in the latest Cambodian drama.
Look at the pattern provided by history, advises Pa Nguon Tieng, a director of the Cambodian Center for Human Rights and of the Voice of Democracy radio station.
The key to it all is that Hun Sen always comes out on top. He does by first repressing then appearing to offer a hand of friendship to whomever his opponents are at the time. It's a twisted act of conflict resolution: The conflict is created by the person who then offers the resolution.
"I think Hun Sen has had a lot of experience [playing persecutor-rescuer]. He understands what will benefit him in terms of conflict resolution," Pa Nguon Tieng says.
"Look at 1993 - he faced lots of problems when he was in power in a coalition with the Royalists, leading to the bloody coup of 1997. Since then, all power has been concentrated in his hands alone.
"But he had lots of international problems, even from within Asean [the Association of Southeast Asian Nations] and the people here were in strife, very poor and crying out for food.
"So he came up a plan to bring all sides of politics back to the country to participate in the 1998 elections. The international community accepted it and new aid flowed in to hold the election, helping legitimate his rule.
"Most recently the government took violent action against the human rights community, put us in jail and again drew negative reaction. So once more he had to reopen dialogue," recounts Pa Nguon Tieng.
He seems a gentle, hopeful man, and takes all this as a sign that Hun Sen is learning something. He is prepared to wait and see if Hun Sen's current outburst of reconciliation will last or prove to be just another trick.
"I hope he has learned and that the arrests shouldn't happen again," he says. But few others are are prepared to give Hun Sen the benefit of the doubt.
A Western diplomat says: "Hun Sen is manipulating everybody, so everybody is beholden to him. He is positioning himself and others to play them all off against each other."
Precisely how the current drama began and is played out reveals key themes in Cambodian political life, from sensitivity over its weakness relative to its powerful neighbors of Vietnam and Thailand, to the dominant role of Western support for democracy in the impoverished country.
Back in 1993, the United Nations administration in Cambodia - which was supposed to disarm all factions, from the murderous Khmer Rouge to the Vietnamese-backed Hun Sen regime - made do with pronouncing a free election. It then stood by while the election victor, Prince Ranariddh and his Funcinpec Party, went into coalition with Hun Sen who then proceeded to abrogate power. Murder, intimidation, secession threats and more marked the body politic.
"Cambodians had seen [former King] Sihanouk and [his son] Ranariddh bow to the election losers, share power with them, and adopt avidly their undemocratic and corrupt ways," wrote long-term observer Henry Kamm in his 1998 book Cambodia, Report from a Stricken Land.
With the elite proving such a disappointment, Kamm reckons the most lasting contribution of the UN presence in Cambodia was the handful of private human rights organizations it left behind. These groups are now performing the role that opposition parties should be playing - educating people about rights and advocating peaceful change - while the personalities and parties of Cambodia's mainstream politics remain mired in conflict.
By the mid 1990s, Funcinpec's respected finance minister Sam Rainsy had quit the ruling coalition after being stripped of his post for outspoken criticism of corruption at all levels of government. He now leads the Sam Rainsy Party, which remains in some disarray following his year-long absence. Competition meanwhile had begun between Ranariddh and Hun Sen in seducing aging leaders of the Khmer Rouge to their side. Splits, be they real or created, among the old guard of the Khmer Rouge led to the "arrest" of Pol Pot by his brutal colleague, the one-legged Ta Mok. The legendary Brother Number One, Pol Pot, was dead by April 1998.
This was national stability achieved at last, according to the Hun Sen lexicon.
Last year, Hun Sen again invoked the issue of national stability when he sought to clarify the country's border with Vietnam, once and for all. The deal signed in October between Hun Sen and the government which first put him in power sparked off the latest round of trouble however.
The apparently visceral hatred of Vietnam among some Cambodians is often used by politicians to whip up passions, and the border deal provoked public outrage, dramatic media coverage and rising tension. This gave Hun Sen the opportunity to arrest activists and journalists: Mam Sonando of Beehive Radio was accused of provoking conflict with neighboring countries, and rhetoric on a banner at rallies in December - that Hun Sen had "sold" land to Vietnam, that he was a "second Pol Pot" and had "blood on his hands" - was pretext for scooping up popular rights advocate Kem Sokha.
The border law has since been passed, and signed into effect by King Sihamoni (Sihanouk's successor in the palace).
"That's why Hun Sen could release Kem Sokha and the others," judges Pen Samitthy, editor of the biggest circulation newspaper in Cambodia, the Rasmei Kampuchea Daily.
Aware of Rainsy's urgent need to return to Cambodia to rescue his political career, Hun Sen was similarly able to reach out to him in exile in Paris.
"I need him to come back. I need opposition views because sometimes my officials lie to me. I do not want to go ahead alone. If I go alone it is like being on a horse without holding the reins," said Hun Sen on February 6.
Out of jail and now back in the offices of his Beehive Radio, Sonando remains unimpressed.
"Hun Sen is clever. When he is in deadlock, with nowhere to go, he solves problems like this to maintain power," he says. "He is like a talented circus performer."
The political procedure, Sonando explains, is similar to being robbed of something and then having to feel grateful after being allowed to buy it back.
"It's not only me. Everyone in Cambodia has to pay bribes and say thank you for things which should be ours free, as a right."
He is grateful, however, to be out of jail and thanks Hun Sen for "taking the route of Cambodian talking to Cambodian" in arranging the return of Rainsy. "Compromise is better than confrontation, so I think we can solve problems step by step," Sonando says.
Crucially, a key event on March 30, 1997, which all independent observers agree was initiated by Hun Sen, has now become a non-issue in the latest reconciliation. On that day, Rainsy and about 200 followers were holding a peaceful demonstration in front of the National Assembly to demand an independent judiciary. Four grenades were lobbed into the crowd, killing at least 15 people and wounding more than 100. The culprits escaped thanks to intervention by CPP troops.
Rainsy blamed Hun Sen for the attack, and Hun Sen blamed Rainsy for trying to discredit the ruling party. Through all the ups and downs, the increasing militarization of politics since March 1997, the 2003 elections and more, that accusation has been sacrosanct for the opposition.
Yet in Rainsy's apology prior to his pardon which allowed him to return safely to Cambodia this month, he specifically retracts his accusation that Hun Sen was responsible for the grenade attack.
This turnaround alone may fatally damage his standing as an opposition leader and all eyes are now on Rainsy and his party.
"I think Sam Rainsy has lost credibility already, not just because of the latest compromise but because of his changing behavior. But he may restore his credibility through his actions should he tell the truth about what the government does," judges Pa Nguon Tieng.
He says his colleague at the Cambodian Center for Human Rights, Kem Sokha, is a different man to Rainsy, and not a competitor for Rainsy's position as the only figure capable of standing up to Hun Sen.
"We are happy to work in civil society rather in a political party. We are just trying to spread information and the spiritual power of human rights and democracy," says Pa Nguon Tieng.
Kem Sokha, in person, is somewhat less modest.
He couldn't resist the classic politician's line - "if my people need me" - suggesting that if there was a strong call for him to wrest opposition reins from an enfeebled Rainsy's hands, then he would take on the mantle of history to do so.
At least Kem Sokha managed to avoid apologizing to Hun Sen. Indeed, he claims that his own and the other releases, and even the return of Rainsy, were all thanks to his intercessions with Hun Sen who, he says, called him several times a day in prison.
"I told him, if you want to rule the country longer you must support civil society. He will not change easily but I tried to change his mind," Kem Sokha says.
A politician before he turned to the human rights movement, Kem Sokha now claims he has two million supporters across the country and that Hun Sen has recognized his clout. Analysts agree that Kem Sokha remains a strong possible successor to Rainsy as opposition icon.
The upshot of it all is that Ranariddh's Funcinpec, the official ally of Hun Sen in government, now fears it may not be needed any more (or be allowed access to the perks and benefits of rule) if Hun Sen brings Rainsy on side. A hint of this tension was evident even before Rainsy landed at Pochentong Airport when Funcinpec Radio aired a commentary which described Rainsy as a habitual liar who had left his party members feeling hopeless.
"It's the same old fighters fighting the same old battles. . It's a matter of destabilizing the opposition, keeping them off balance, so that Hun Sen can reintroduce the facade of democracy when it suits him," a Phnom Penh- based diplomat said.
An important bone of contention remains however - the criminal defamation law that allows the courts to bring suits against opposition figures whenever it chooses (or is told to do so).
The law is an unfortunate legacy of the UN's tenure in Cambodia. It was first instituted to dampen abuse between political parties ahead of the 1993 election but has since become a tool of repression in Hun Sen's hands.
"We are trying to change the law because it is being used to silence critics; it is a very bad law that severely limits freedom of expression," Ou Virak, general secretary of the Alliance for Freedom of Expression in Cambodia told the Phnom Penh Post.
He hopes the law will be a major topic at the forthcoming Consultative Group meeting of donors this week.
Yash Ghai, a former Hong Kong University law professor who is now the UN Special Representative to Cambodia on Human Rights, agrees the law must go: "The combination of a rather loosely drafted law and the relative lack of independence and competence of the judiciary means that such laws can be used to harass political opponents and suppress freedom of expression."
Perhaps more revealing of the abiding concerns of ordinary Cambodians is the fact that circulation of the leading Rasmei Kampuchea Daily goes up when its front page stories are not about elite politics, but when coverage is focused on the recent arrests of 10 senior policemen accused of being paid assassins.
"People follow this story because they support this action [the arrest of police]. They know the police and the courts are corrupt. This is what increases circulation here, not stories about Kem Sokha and Sam Rainsy," newspaper editor Pen Samitthy says.
Cambodian reconciliation is not a miracle yet, but not entirely a mirage either.
» Read more!
The Daily Star, Bangladesh - 4 Jan 06
The view from Phnom Penh
Verghese Mathews
This has not been a good year at all for the opposition Sam Rainsy Party though it has turned out to be much better than expected for the dominant Cambodian People's Party of Prime Minister Hun Sen and its coalition partner in government, the royalist Funcinpec, headed by Prince Norodom Ranariddh.
Meanwhile, newly crowned King Norodom Sihamoni manifested a regal decorum and a quiet charm that quickly endeared him especially to the common folk"the little people" as his father, ex-King Sihanouk, was wont fondly to refer to them.
Hun Sen, Ranariddh and Rainsy have, over the years, all played centre stage with varying degrees of success and failure. In the process they have raised debilitating politicking and disruptive one-upmanship into a fine art.
Notwithstanding this, there has been a gradual maturing of the political styles in the past year. Old-fashioned politicians who were rewarded for past services are being slowly replaced by more educated and competent young politicians and technocrats who are able to address complex challenges and relate equally well to the increasing numbers of potentially troublesome unemployed youths moving to the cities and towns.
This evolving change in the political party scene has gone largely unnoticed as all focus has been on the main players. Not surprisingly, despite the infusion of the new blood, the infighting, the factionalism and the one-upmanship of Cambodian politics continue.
Looking back at 2005, King Sihamoni has undoubtedly emerged as the best-loved figure, with Hun Sen clearly the strongest of the leaders while Ranariddh has surprised his detractors as a deft survivor and a practical politician.
Rainsy is indisputably the main loser. This was sealed on December 22 when a Cambodian court found him guilty on two counts of criminal defamation and sentenced him in absentia to 18 months in prison for remarks he made against Hun Sen and Ranariddh. Rainsy, who has been in self-exile in Paris following the removal of his parliamentary immunity from prosecution in February, refused to attend the trial.
Rainsy was alleged to have accused Hun Sen of being involved in a 1997 grenade attack on an opposition rally that resulted in 19 deaths. He was also alleged to have accused Ranariddh of having accepted substantial bribes from the CPP as an inducement for Funcinpec to join the government.
Rainsy has termed the judicial decision farcical and repeated his allegation that the Cambodian courts are not independent. The US State Department expressed concern at what it termed was the continuing deterioration of democratic principles such as free speech.
Likewise, Rainsy's friends overseas, including human rights organizations, have come out in his support, but back home where the votes count, his glamour is gone and his party is steadily losing credibility.
Some suggest that while Rainsy's extended stay outside the country had given unprecedented elbow room for other aspirants in his tightly-run party, no clear alternative leader has emerged. With the latest court ruling, Rainsy will continue to remain outside with limited options. Some supporters have suggested a party-in-exile leading to a government-in-exile!
Meanwhile, Rainsy has quickly called for a pardon from the King, an act which will return him to public life in Phnom Penh. Already his friends and supporters, especially the anti-Hun Sen Cambodian diaspora in the US and France, are picking up this call and flooding internet newsgroups with similar demands to the King.
A couple of months ago, there was a similar flood of appeals by almost the same groups for the King not to sign a supplementary border treaty between Cambodia and Vietnam. The young King was under tremendous pressure for weeks, even when it was clear to many that his hands were tied as a constitutional monarch. Sihamoni could have, as some suggested, chosen the easy way out and gone on a holiday, leaving it to the acting Head of State to sign the bill into law. In the event Sihamoni boldly chose to stay and signed the bill knowing that it would upset some people.
Once again, the pressure is building upthis time for Sihamoni to pardon Rainsy and others and, once again, observers believe that Sihamoni will do the right thing.
The pressure is much less these days on Hun Sen. At the recent annual CPP congress, he was named the undisputed prime-ministerial candidate in the 2008 election, a far cry from the situation before the last election when the confirmation was not so readily forthcoming until much nearer the polls. In addition, many observers are convinced that the enlarged CPP Central Committee, from 153 to 268 members, has many of Hun Sen's men.
Hun Sen is clearly in charge, and this is not at all surprising given that he has done well both as a clear-minded and resolute Prime Minister and as a party strategist. However, the toughness he sometimes exhibits has not endeared him to liberal groups and human rights activists at home and abroad.
Ranariddh is the luckiest. In the last decade his party's fortunes have gone from bad to worse and many had written it off after the last election. His joining the government has given him a lifeline and he knows it. The subsequent warming-up of personal relations between him and Hun Sen, though it has not percolated all the way down to the provincial structures, has been a great boost for Funcinpec and generally good for the country.
What started off as an uncertain year for Cambodia is ending better than expected. The IMF has just announced that it will provide 100 percent of debt relief, amounting to approximately $82 million, incurred by Cambodia to the IMF before January 1, 2005.
The IMF noted that Cambodia had qualified for the debt relief because "of its overall satisfactory recent macroeconomic performance, progress in poverty reduction, and improvements in public expenditure management."
The IMF further noted that since 1999, Cambodia had enjoyed robust economic expansion, with annual growth rates averaging over 7 percent with inflation under control and with improving public administration, in particular public expenditure management.
While that is a good way to end the year, the new year will bring varied and complex challenges, the major ones being the need to further strengthen its institutions and to ensure that good governance is firmly rooted in the country. This calls especially for a determined and comprehensive attempt at curbing corruption and dismantling the equally deeply entrenched patronage system.
It is now for Hun Sen to focus on and to promote the younger generation of technocrats and politicians to address these challenges. This will take some time. But what is at stake is not just Hun Sen's credibility and his place in history: Cambodia's viability is also at stake. No one wants it to be a failed state.
Verghese Mathews, a former Singapore Ambassador to Cambodia, is a Visiting Research Fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
SUBMITTED BY: Verghese Mathews, Email: mat....@iseas.edu.sg Sat, 7 Jan 2006
» Read more!
December 21, 2005
Quest for Truth I
By Kok Sap
Victim of April 17,1975
Who's Khim Tit? This question was in my mind for sometimes. This man was a former province of Battambang governor who rose through ministerial ranks in Sihanouk regimes pre and post-colonial reign. But for some reasons people had not stressed enough of this man notoriety in meddling Cambodia independence endeavor. He eventually remains a questionable trigger who had a lot to do with Cambodia past and present instability.
To the Cambodia fragile Independence plan, this man might not seem to be that of significance at the time. But he certainly had played a key role in sabotaging Cambodia self-rule and determination from the get going. Mentality wise, he seemed to fit well with Hun Sen own colonial collaboration. Overwhelmingly many seemed disagreed over his government and practices throughout years. This question has been floating until this date and yet escaped Sihanouk memories entirely when come to truth.
Undeniably, to many sensible and conscionable later generations, this still seemed to be an unsolved mystery. Those who had stained hands then seemed to withdraw and hide them in French pantalon pockets. Some still arrogantly refuted and disrespected truth. Some questioned own nationality validity and integrity? Out of the two best known historians of post colonial Cambodia seemed to lend supports in truth searching for our readers. In this case let re-examine one of the detractors motif and sense of nationalism at the time.
According to a journalist Milton Osborne account in his book titled Sihanouk Prince of Light Prince of Darkness, on p 38, Charles Myer argued that some years were to pass before Sihanouk seriously engaged himself in affairs of state rather than making the pursuit of pleasure his dominant concern. Certainly, the evidence is overwhelming that after the Japanese coup de force Sihanouk was content to rely on the largely conservative advice of men such as his uncle Prince Monireth or Khim Tit, a provincial governor who was to join the cast of politicians whose names repeatedly featured in the revolving door cabinets of the 1940s and 50s.
Then on p.46, in 1945s, Khim Tit, was Son Ngoc Thanh's minister for defense and an unquestioned Francophile became increasingly concerned as Thanh sought to establish links with the emerging communist-dominated regime in Viet Nam.
On p.47, asserted that the removal of Thanh from office was engineered by Khim Tit as Khim Tit's own version of the events surrounding Thanh's removal from office is self serving and unsatisfactory. While Son Ngoc Thanh seemed prepared to risk armed conflict with the French, Sihanouk heeded to advice of his conservative advisers, responding in cautious and polite terms to a call from Admiral Argenlieu, whom De Gaulle had sent to Indo China as high commissioner, to dispatch representatives to the planned meeting in India that would discuss the Cambodia's future relations with France.
Son Ngoc Thanh's own assessment seemed to risk over Cambodia independence as opposed to Sihanouk own monkey trick reservation. On October 8, Khim Tit suddenly left for Saigon with Charles de Gaulle government military officer Major Gallois. The author conveyed with credible proof that Khim Tit trip was to cook up plots and appeared personal with De Gaulle government official General Jacques Philippe Leclerc to ousting Son Ngoc Thanh from office. To his disappointment Prince Monireth was assuming Thanh job on October 17, rather than Khim Tit himself. But Sihanouk never admitted that he was behind the plot but never denied that he was aware of Khim Tit trip to Saigon to meet Gen. Leclerc. Then in 1973 when he was representing the Cambodia delegation at UN, the same devious veteran conservative, Khim Tit, had claimed to have seen a police report that Khieu Samphan had been burnt to death with acid, while Hou Youn and Hu Nim,who had gone to the marquis in 1967,had been crushed beneath bulldozer tracks. This was insanely ludicrous and irresponsible.
Concurrently David Chandler accounts in his book titled The Tragedy of Cambodian History on p.24 asserted that the provisional government of Charles De Gaulle sent military officers back to Indo China whom later aided the self-serving Khim Tit, a new minister of defense, in arrest his superior Prime Minister Son Ngoc Thanh.This account clearly supported by the British Officer Lt.Colonel E.D Murray in 1982 interview stated on October 8 1945 he was there and had worked closely with Khim Tit, who had, after trip from Saigon, published a disingenuous report denying that he had been collaborated with French Gen.Leclerc in arresting Son Ngoc Thanh then.
Double Jeopardizes on Khim Tit was in fact a bolded face liar. Then Chandler went on p.37 to state that Khim Tit went on to be the head of National Union Party of Sisowath Lycee clique in divergent task in addition to Khmer Renovation Party led by the clique from Colonial Chasseloup Laubat Lycee to drown out Democrats Party progressive campaign for election in the absence of its founding leader Yuthevong death in 1947.
This enough to say that Son Ngoc Thanh was in fact a dreamer of Cambodia Independence. Yet his legacy had been distorted by a handful of Sihanouk loyal cronies untruthfulness and disingenuous accounts. Let it be known that the truth remain untold to the Cambodia generations that who is the real Sihanouk and are his co-conspirators in term of history.
SUBMITTED BY: kok sap, Email: koks....@yahoo.com
Sun, 25 Dec 2005
» Read more!
Freedom Of Expression Being Haunted By Ghost Of The Past
Majority of Cambodian whether they are living abroad or in Cambodia, they seem to be locked up by the past of intimidation which one was prohibited to make critic a bad performance by a leader. Moreover, Cambodian used to living under a dictatorships for many decades that governing in different forms of systems. For any of this of government, one could not say anything to inform or to criticize a leader from the bottom to the top. For example, if an individual says something to criticize a leader even a president of a community or an executive of a community, one would be in a thread like, if you are in Cambodia, you would have been killed or bitten up. In addition, if one is living abroad and criticizing Hun Sen or Norodom Ranaridh, one would be told, "..be careful when you are going to Cambodia, or you are so modest here, why don't you try in front of Hun Sen and his men." Even worst, you are told to shut up and to leave the those alone and let them do what they are doing.
We seem afraid of our shadow or should I say the ghost of the past. How does the democracy spousper in Cambodia, and how does the process of our democracy in progress when we keep sabotaging our expression, and furthermore, the FUNCI and CPP's government keep amending constitution that dealing with freedom of expression and free press?
By one's understanding, freedom of expression is one of the key to democracy. However, when freedom of expression has been shut, the key process of democracy is invanded.
I can only say one thing, we must use our right, and tell those who shut us up to shut up! If we want a democracy, we have to get the democracy ourself!
SUBMITTED BY: Samoeun Chhim, Email: samoeun....@yahoo.ca Tue, 27 Dec 2005
» Read more!
Do you know or have you heard of HAK MAO, a Cambodian man who came from the village CHANG BO HÈ in Cambodia, (khoum and srok) POURK, province (khhaid) SIEM RIEP ?
His family in Cambodia didn't see him since 1973 and they're still looking for him. They say that he might lives in Canada, but nothing is for sure. He works or used to work as an airplane pilot (khan Bela ?).
HAK (surname) MAO (last name) is the oldest of his family of 9 brothers et sisters.
Father Mao Huy (dead)
Mother Chhoun Leng (dead)
1 Brother Mao Hak (lost since 1973)
2 Sister Mao Lon (lives in Samrong Oddormechey)
3 Sister Mao Leup (lives in Samrong Oddormechey)
4 Sister Mao Loun (lives in Samrong Oddormechey)
5 Brother Mao Ly Hiav (lives in Samrong Oddormechey)
6 Brother Mao KIm Louth (lives in Samrong Oddormechey)
7 Sister Mao Kim Leng (lives in Samrong Oddormechey)
8 Brother Mao Ly Han (lives in Chong kal Oddormechey)
9 Brother Mao Ly Hor (lives in Samrong Oddormechey)
As you can see, most of his family still lives in Cambodia, in Samrong, Oddormechey. Only one brother lives in phnom Pung Ror, in Chong Kal, Oddormechey.
Please if you have any information about HAK MAO, call his family in Cambodia who still hope that one day, they will see him again.
Telephone Numbers :
012 872 732
012 457 849
011 618 255
016 325 701
OR EMAIL ME AT CESTSARAH@YAHOO.COM
SUBMITTED BY: Sarah Kit
, Email: cest....@yahoo.com Tue, 8 Nov 2005
» Read more!
Hun Sen and the Upcoming Negotiations on the Border Issues: Scenarios and Associated Implications
by Preap Pisey
La version française est disponible ci-dessous
After having totally neutralized the Supreme National Council on Border Affairs (SNCBA) [1] presided by King-Father Norodom Sihanouk, Hun Sen and his team are getting ready to go to Vietnam on October 10, 2005, to sign an additional convention to the 1985 Treaty related to the border delineation.
The announcement of this trip made the front page of newspapers and launches important debates. The treaty, signed under the Vietnamese occupation, is in total contradiction with the 1954 Geneva Convention, and the 1991 Paris Agreements. Beside the continuous displacements of border towards the interior of Cambodia’s territory, this treaty would cede important portions of Cambodia’s territory to Vietnam. According to Mr. Sean Pengsè, the President of the Cambodia’s Border Committee, an organization based in France, this treaty brings into question again the border markers along 200 kilometers located in the South of the country.
Given the seriousness of the subject and reports published in the news media, which was not the case for previously signed treaties, it appears to us that it is necessary to come up with scenarios that could result from Hun Sen’s trip to the lands of his master, and to analyze the implications associated which each of the scenarios considered.
Based on our humble analysis, the possible scenarios are as follows:
The additional convention to the 1985 Treaty will be effectively signed; The convention will not be signed; The duration of the negotiation will be stretched out in time.
Scenario No. 1 :
The additional convention to the 1985 Treaty will be effectively signed
The signing of this additional convention to the 1985 Treaty implies, of course, the transfer of one portion of Cambodia’s territory to Vietnam. However, beyond this transfer, the signature of a supplement to the 1985 Treaty, orchestrated with great fanfare, would also be interpreted as a very strong political will by Vietnam to become the absolute master of Indochina. By that, it would mean a launch of a “strong signal” to the regional power houses and to the International community that Vietnam had become the absolute master of Laos and Cambodia, and that it intends to act as such.
This scenario can be interpreted not only as an open aggression against the Khmer Nation, but it is also a provocation launched against China in which “the new generation of the Chinese leaders cherished their friendship with the Cambodian royal family as well as their relations with Cambodia [2]” from long ago. Vietnam, through the signing of this addition to the 1985 Treaty, is testing the sincerity of China, one of the unavoidable great world superpowers, towards Cambodia before subjecting the latter completely under its yoke. It would be interesting to see what reaction this Great Superpower would have on this Vietnamese arrogant insult. How much would China be willing to allow Vietnam to trample on its “small protégé” as reiterated so many times by the successive Chinese leaders? Would China be able to defend the interests of Cambodia, its so-called “small protégé”? What would its other “small protégés” think of China if it were to allow itself to be led by the nose by a “small player” like Vietnam?
Scenario No. 2
The convention will not be signed
As it was stated elsewhere, the addition to the 1985 Treaty will not be signed, in which case the territorial and maritime integrity of Cambodia will not necessarily be preserved. In its actual application, Vietnam will continue to violate Cambodia’s territory through an ever massive “demographic” colonization along the border areas, in particular, those which are included in the “Development Triangle [3]”.
The latter case would correspond to Vietnam’s script aiming at transforming Hun Sen into a “national hero” able to resist against Vietnam. The Vietnamese strategy would consist of saying: not only did Hun Sen not sign the very contested 1985 Treaty but he also succeeded in taking back a portion of the territory classified as litigious zones – a statement which Hun Sen himself started to praise [4]. The objective being very clear, it is not only to give a new shining coat to Hun Sen’s image, so tarnished by corruption and persecution against the population, but also to confer to him the statute of “National Hero” similar to that of King-Father Norodom Sihanouk’s during the “Royal Crusade” for Independence of Cambodia. According to this scenario, we will have another “hero” under a totally different circumstance. Hun Sen, very thirsty of power, accepts to “play” blindly the Vietnamese strategists’ game by ignoring that the political, diplomatic and military supports provided by Vietnam are not free. The Vietnamese resettlers’ commitment, living in Cambodia, to vote for Hun Sen’s CPP is just a short term “coin of exchange” to satisfy personal and the clique of Hun Sen’s ambitions. What the latter forgets is that where there are Vietnamese, there where will be Vietnam.
This scenario would correspond not only to a preparation in view of the re-election of Hun Sen in 2008, but also points to a change in strategy by Vietnam. In the past, the Vietnamese strategists had systematically eliminated all Cambodians who no longer serve the interests of Hanoi once they no longer needed them, such was the case of most of the founding members and/or fighters of the Khmer Rouge movement. This time, Vietnam is stretching the survival of its puppets in order to encourage others to come to serve Hanoi’s interests in exchange for a “personal reward” proportional in size to the degree of their betrayal against the Khmer Nation. In this hypothetical case, we, the Khmer People, must pay attention to this kind of strategic manipulations which had always led us to destruction.
At the sight of this Vietnamese hidden agenda, we strongly encourage the supporters of CPP to revise their position. It is not too late to save together Cambodia. Champa and Kampuchea Krom are the concrete examples to demonstrate Vietnam’s machiavellian intent behind the resettlement of Vietnamese in Cambodia with the pretext to support the CPP’s voting basis. You all know that the Cham people have no more their country and are constrained to live sometimes on their fishery boats and in countries that are not theirs. Regarding our Khmer Krom compatriots, you know also how much they have been suffered. Their fundamental rights are systematically flouted. They can’t access to any medical care. A lot of pregnant women can’t see their pregnancy reach its term. The access to education is also forbidden in a subtle form, the exams are organized as such the children of our Khmers Krom can’t go beyond the high school. They are condemned to be hard workers in the rice fields. And their ancestral lands are systematically grabbed. Their cultural identity is maintained just only for touristic purpose. For instance, they are forced to practise the boat race several times a year just to attract tourists and can’t have anything in return. So please, don’t let the same things to be repeated in our Cambodia’s today. Let us have the courage to defy our corrupted and short-sighted leaders who don’t care at all about the survival of the Nation.
Scenario 3
The duration of the negotiation will be stretched out in time
This last scenario would consist of stretching in time the negotiation on the border delineation. The objective would consist of mobilizing all the Khmer resources in terms of manpower, thinking process, etc…, and to focus them on this issue of highly strategic importance to the eyes of the Khmer population. This strategy, similar to war and/or industrial and commercial competition strategies, consists of creating diversions and to “deplete” the resources of one’s enemies or competitors in order to facilitate their killing. One of Vietnam fears is to see Cambodians emerging one day from poverty and becoming, with their “belly full,” true resistance fighters against the sprawling expansionism of Hanoi. Thus for Vietnam, the more the Cambodians are busy with a particular issue, the more their conquest strategy has a chance to be moved forward. As we knew well, it is rare that Vietnam has only a single strategy to shape their annexation ambitions. As it was implicitly underscored by Mr. Dy Kareth in his article [5], in parallel to the unceasing displacements of border lines towards the interior of Cambodia’s territory, Vietnam is also deploying another colonization arsenal disguised under the makeup of the concept of economic development, such as the famous development triangle of Gia Lai, Kon Tum, Dac Lac, and Dac, Nông (in Vietnam), Attapeu, Sekong, and Sravan (in Laos), Stung Treng, Ratanakiri, and Mondulkiri (in Cambodia). The establishment of the project follows with establishment of new “armies” of Vietnamese settlers on our farmers’ lands in the above provinces, and where some of these farmers were constrained to adopt the Vietnamese citizenship. In some areas such as Ratanakiri and Mondulkiri, Vietnam has already started building sections of highways, electrical power lines, and schools to facilitate the establishment of its populations on the lands of our Khmer Leu Compatriots.
Faced with such conditions, we, the Khmer People, must pay attention to the machiavellian positioning of the Hanoi strategists. Let us join our strength to help those who fight against the expansionist/annexationist hungers of our aggressors.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Phann Ana: “Hun Sen Opposes Empowering Border Council”, The Cambodia Daily, June 16, 2005.
[2] Xinhuanet : “Sino-Cambodian friendship carried on”, April 07, 2005.
[3] Regarding this subject of strategic importance, please refer to the excellent article by Mr. Dy Kareth, Vice-President of the Cambodia’s Border Committee, titled “The Expansionist Development Triangle,” August 22, 2005, Paris, France.
[4] Sakada Chun : “Mr. Hun Sen Defends the Signing of Additional Border Treaty to 1985 Treaty With Vietnam”, VOA 06/10/2005.
[5] Op. cit.
_______________________________________________________________
Hun Sen et les Négociations à venir sur le Tracé des Frontières :
Scénarios et Implications
par Preab Pisey
Après avoir neutralisé totalement le Conseil National Supérieur des Affaires Frontalières[1], présidé par le Roi Père Norodom Sihanouk, Hun Sen et son équipe s’apprêtent à se rendre au Vietnam le 10 Octobre 2005 pour signer une convention additionnelle au traité de 1985 relatif au tracé des frontières.
Ce voyage à venir a fait la « une » des journaux et relance d’importants débats. Ce traité, signé sous l’occupation Vietnamienne, est en totale contradiction avec les accords de Genève de 1954 et les accords de Paris de 1991. Outre les déplacements incessants des frontières à l’intérieur du territoire Cambodgien, ce traité aurait cédé des proportions importantes du territoire du Cambodge au Vietnam. Car selon Mr Sean Pengsè, président du Comité des Frontières du Cambodge, organisme basé en France, ce traité remet en cause les bornes sur 200 km dans le sud du pays.
Compte tenu de la gravité du sujet en question et des échos largement relayés dans la presse, ce qui n’a pas été le cas pour les traités précédemment signés, il nous semble nécessaire d’imaginer les scénarios qui pourraient résulter du voyage de Hun Sen sur les terres de son maître et d’analyser les implications qui sont associées à chacun des scénarios envisagés.
Selon notre humble analyse, les scénarios envisageables sont les suivants :
1) La convention additionnelle au traité de 1985 sera effectivement signée ;
2) La convention ne sera pas signée ;
3) La durée de négociation s’étalera dans le temps.
Scénario 1 : La convention additionnelle au traité de 1985 sera effectivement signée
La signature de cette convention additionnelle au traité de 1985 implique bien sûr le transfert d’une partie du territoire Cambodgien au Vietnam. Mais au-delà de ce transfert, la signature, organisée en fanfare, d’un additif au traité de 1985 se traduirait également par une volonté politique forte de la part du Vietnam de s’affirmer comme le maître absolu en Indochine. Il s’agirait là d’un lancement d’un « signal fort » aux puissances régionales et à la communauté internationale que le Vietnam est devenu le maître absolu au Laos et au Cambodge et qu’il entend de se conduire en tant que tel.
Ce cas de scénario peut être interprété non seulement comme étant une agression ouverte à l’encontre de la Nation Khmère mais aussi une provocation lancée envers la Chine, dont « la nouvelle génération de dirigeants chinois chérissait son amitié avec la famille royale cambodgienne ainsi que ses relations avec le Cambodge[2] » depuis de longues dates. Le Vietnam par le biais de la signature de cet additif au traité de 1985, met à l’épreuve la sincérité de la Chine, une des grandes puissances mondiales incontournables, envers le Cambodge avant de le mettre complètement sous son joug. Il serait donc curieux de voir quelle serait la réaction de cette Grande Puissance face à cette affronte insolente du Vietnam. Jusqu’où serait – elle prête à laisser le Vietnam piétiner le « petit protégé » tant réaffirmé par les dirigeants Chinois successifs ? Serait-elle en mesure de défendre les intérêts du Cambodge, le soit-disant son « petit protégé » ? Que penseraient ses autres « petits protégés » si la Chine se laissait mener par le bout du nez par un « petit joueur » tel que le Vietnam ?
Scénario 2 : La convention ne sera pas signée
Comme il a été énoncé, l’additif au traité de 1985 ne sera pas signé, auquel cas l’intégrité territoriale et maritime du Cambodge ne sera pas pour autant préservée. Puisque dans la pratique, le Vietnam continuera toujours à violer le territoire du Cambodge par la colonisation « démographique » de plus en plus massive dans les régions frontalières, notamment celles faisant partie du « Triangle de Développement[3] ». Ce cas de figure correspondrait à la mise en scène par le Vietnam visant à transformer Hun Sen en « héro national » capable de tenir tête avec le Vietnam. La stratégie du Vietnam consisterait à dire non seulement Hun Sen n’a pas signé le très contesté traité de 1985 mais surtout a réussi à reprendre une partie du territoire placé en zones de litige, que Hun Sen a commencé à faire lui-même des éloges[4]. L’objectif étant très clair, il s’agit non seulement de redorer l’image de Hun Sen tant ternie par la corruption et la persécution à l’encontre de la population mais surtout de lui conférer un statut de « Héro National » à l’image de celui du Roi Père Norodom Sihanouk lors de la « Croisade Royale » pour l’indépendance, qui depuis est resté dans le cœur de tant de Cambodgiens le Père de l’Indépendance du Cambodge. Selon ce scénario, nous aurons donc un autre « héro » avec un autre temps. Hun Sen, assoiffé de pouvoir, accepte de jouer aveuglément le jeu des stratégistes Vietnamiens sans se rendre compte que le soutien politique, diplomatique et militaire du Vietnam n’est pas gratuit. L’engagement des colons Vietnamiens installés au Cambodge à voter pour Hun Sen n’est qu’ « une monnaie d’échange » à court terme pour satisfaire les ambitions personnelles et du clan de Hun Sen. Ce que ce dernier semble oublier c’est que là où il y a des Vietnamiens, c’est là où la terre appartiendra au Vietnam.
Ce scénario correspondrait non seulement à un préparatif en vue de la réélection de Hun Sen en 2008 mais à un changement de stratégie de la part du Vietnam. Dans le passé, les stratégistes Vietnamiens ont systématiquement éliminé tous les Cambodgiens qui ont servi les intérêts de Hanoi une fois qu’ils n’ont plus besoin d’eux, comme c’est le cas de la plupart des membres fondateurs et/ou combattants du mouvement des Khmers Rouges. Cette fois, ils prolongent la survie de ses « pantins » afin d’encourager d’autres à venir servir les intérêts de Hanoi tout en ayant une « récompense personnelle » à la hauteur de leur trahison envers la Nation Khmère. Dans ce cas hypothétique, nous, Peuple Khmer, devrons être attentifs à ce genre de manipulations stratégiques qui ne font que nous mener depuis tout le temps à la destruction.
Au vu cette intention machiavélique cachée, nous encourageons fortement nos compatriotes supporters du PPC à revoir leur position. Il n’est absolument pas trop tard de sauver ensemble le Cambodge. Le Champa et notre Kampuchea Krom sont les exemples concrets pour témoigner les réelles intentions du Vietnam en envoyant des masses de population s’installer au Cambodge sous prétexte d’un apport de soutien au parti PPC. Vous savez que les Chams n’ont plus de pays et sont obligés de vivre parfois sur des bateaux de pêche et dans des pays qui ne sont pas les leur. Concernant nos compatriotes Khmers Krom, vous savez également combien ils souffrent sur leur propre terre. Leurs droits les plus fondamentaux sont systématiquement bafoués. Ils ne peuvent avoir accès aux soins médicaux, beaucoup de femmes enceintes ne peuvent même pas voir leur grossesse arriver à son terme. L’accès à l’éducation supérieure leur est interdit sous forme totalement déguisée. Les examens sont organisés d’une manière telle qu’ils ne peuvent aller au-delà du lycée. Ils sont condamnés à devenir de durs labeurs dans les champs de riz. Leurs terres ancestrales ont été systématiquement confisquées. Leur identité culturelle a été maintenue juste pour des raisons touristiques. Par exemple, ils sont obligés de pratiquer plusieurs fois dans l’année la course aux pirogues pour attirer des touristes sans avoir rien en contrepartie. Donc ne laissons pas les mêmes pratiques se répéter dans le Cambodge actuel. Ayons le courage de défier nos leaders corrompus qui ne se soucient nullement de la survie de notre Nation.
Scénario 3 : La durée de négociation s’étalera dans le temps
Ce dernier scénario consisterait à laisser endurer la négociation sur le tracé des frontières. L’objectif consisterait à mobiliser toutes les ressources Khmères en hommes, en réflexion, etc, et à les focaliser sur cette question d’une importance hautement stratégique aux yeux de la population Khmère. Cette stratégie, relevant des stratégies de guerre et/ou de la compétition industrielle et commerciale, consiste à créer des diversions et « épuiser » les ressources de ses ennemis ou de ses concurrents pour mieux les abattre. Une des craintes du Vietnam est de voir les Cambodgiens émerger un jour de la pauvreté et deviennent, avec un « estomac bien rempli », de véritables résistants contre l’expansionnisme tentaculaire de Hanoi. Donc pour le Vietnam, plus les Cambodgiens sont occupés par un problème particulier, plus leur stratégie de conquête a des chances d’avancer. Comme nous le savions bien, il est très rare que le Vietnam déploie une seule stratégie pour concrétiser leurs ambitions annexionnistes. Comme il a été souligné implicitement par Mr Dy Kareth dans son article[5], parallèlement aux déplacements incessants des lignes des frontières à l’intérieur du territoire du Cambodge, le Vietnam déploie un autre arsenal de colonisation déguisé sous l’habillage du concept de développement économique, qui est le fameux triangle de développement réunissant les provinces Gia Lai, Kon Tum, Dac Lac et Dac Nông (Vietnam), Attapeu, Sékong et Saravan (Laos), Stung Trèng, Ratanakiri et Mondulkiri (Cambodge). La mise en œuvre de ce projet s’accompagne, comme on a pu constater dans la presse, d’une implantation de nouvelles « armées » de colons vietnamiens sur les terres de nos paysans de ces provinces, où certains d’entre eux ont été contraints d’adopter la nationalité vietnamienne. Dans certaines régions comme en Ratanakiri et Mondulkiri le Vietnam a déjà commencé à construire des tronçons d’autoroute, des lignes électriques de haute tension et des écoles pour faciliter l’installation de ses populations sur les terres de nos compatriotes Khmers Leu.
Face à de telles conditions, nous, Khmers, devrons être attentifs aux manœuvres machiavéliques mises en place par les stratégistes de Hanoi. Joignons nous la main pour aider ceux qui luttent contre les appétits expansionnistes/annexionnistes de nos agresseurs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Phann Ana: “Hun Sen Opposes Empowering Border Council”, The Cambodia Daily, June 16, 2005.
[2] Xinhuanet : “Sino-Cambodian friendship carried on”, April 07, 2005.
[3] Concernant ce sujet d’une importance stratégique, veuillez lire l’excellent article de Lok Dy Kareth, vice président du Comité des Frontières du Cambodge, : « Le Triangle de Développement Expansionniste », 22 août 2005, Paris France.
[4] Sakada Chun : “Mr. Hun Sen Defends the Signing of Additional Border Treaty to 1985 Treaty With Vietnam”, VOA 06/10/2005.
[5] Op, cit
SUBMITTED BY: Preab Pisey (Mrs), Email: pisey....@yahoo.es Sat, 29 Oct 2005
» Read more!
A FIT TRIBUTE FOR HISTORIC FAVOUR
The Cambodian prime minister is absolutely right when he utters, There is no leader in the world who is so bad even if he is as bad as Pol Pot that would rush to give away land to other countries.
But he seems to ignore at least two important facts there is commonly an exception to the rule, and usually there is no rush in giving away land to any neighbour. It took about half a century for Kampuchea Krom to formally become the present southern part of Vietnam.
Successive Cambodian governments up to 1979 had refused to accept the Brevier line as a legitimate maritime border demarcation between Cambodia and Vietnam. They always argued that the line had only been for administrative convenience, not a maritime demarcation. The Brevier line, drawn up in 1939 singly by Governor General of Indochina Jules Brivie, allocates the whole Koh Tral (Phu Quoc) to Cochin-china, currently Vietnam.
The break came with the 1979 liberation of Cambodia from Pol Pot regime by the invading Vietnamese troops at the invitation of the ruling party under the resourcefulness of the current prime minister. Vietnam's troops and administrators were then stationed in Cambodia for the next ten years during which a string of treaties relating to border issues were signed and sealed. It is indeed impossible to imagine that those treaties signed under a seemingly master-slave relationship would be free and fair from all parties' perspective. The Khmer gratitude for the historic liberation or favour would need to be somehow fully reflected somewhere.
A border concession has traditionally been one of fit tributes for such a dramatic liberation. Contrary to its successors that had taken a hard stance in rejecting the Brevier line, the State of Cambodia in 1991 was prepared to let go of it to avoid further hassle.
The border tribute is revealed in a leaked transcript/minutes of a top level meeting on 29 July 1991 specifically convened to address a complaint of the Vietnamese Ministry of Foreign Affairs dated 10 July 1991 in regard to Cambodia's earlier call for commercial bidding among exploration companies to search for oil deposits in Cambodian maritime territory. Vietnam maintained the exploration would involve maritime border demarcation and disputed areas which had yet to be resolved. It referred to the treaty signed between the two countries on 7 July 1982, which did not yet determine their maritime border.
The meeting was chaired by Comrade Chea Soth, vice-chairman of the Council of Ministers, and attended by twelve other comrades: Bou Thang, vice-chairman of the Council of Ministers; Say Chhum, vice-chairman of the Council of Ministers; Kong Sam Ol, vice-chairman of the Council of Ministers, Hor Nam Hong, minister for foreign affairs; major general Noun Sok, deputy minister for national defence; Tep Hen, deputy-minister at the cabinet of the Council of Ministers; Bun Uy, deputy-minister at the cabinet of the Council of Ministers; It Prang, deputy-minister for industry; Souv Chiv Kun, department head of mineral resources; Kang Keng, department head of industry construction in the cabinet of the Council of Ministers; Hor Peng Hour, deputy director general at the cabinet of the Council of Ministers; Hour Sithy, secretary to the chair of the Council of Ministers.
In the above 29 July 1991 meeting, according to the following excerpt of the transcript, comrade Hor Nam Hong Minister for Foreign Affairs, gave away Koh Tral by accepting the legitimacy of the Brevier line. He said,
If the exploration has not started, the negotiation will be easy. With respect to the Brevier line, I have seen so clearly in the French notation that it is an administrative line in order to facilitate the people living in the regions [including Koh Tral]; [it] makes all administrative documentations not too difficult; [it is] too far for the people to travel to Kampot [for them]. At the time the three countries were under the French administration. In fact, this Brevier line is not a border line; and the fact is that the places have been ours since the old time. But save the hassle, they have already taken them, let them have them why bother to claim it back for peace's sake. And if they don't accept that much, it is going to be complicated in the future and we wait until then. For now we solve the other part first because we already have the agreement.
Comrade Chea Soth then said,
We have not done the exploration yet. We have just made the announcement; we have not yet measured [the lots allocated for exploration].
At the end, the meeting decided to seal the fate of Koh Tral and other regions separated by the Brevier line. The Cambodian foreign minister recapped the decisions, or sealed the fate of Koh Tral then.
Comrade Hor Nam Hong said,
Now let's take up this position we all agree so that it is easy for me to talk to them:
Issue 1: We pull back all those lots allocated for the exploration from the historical maritime border; they also pull back both sides all pull back from the areas under disputes.
Issue 2: If we are going to have joint ventures, we are going to discuss further among the three partners with signatures among us Vietnam and the exploring companies.
Issue 3: We will meet in the future to demarcate the maritime border between the two parties.
Issue 4: We must accept as our base the Brevier line outside the historical water boundary.
Details of the Supplementary Convention to the 1985 Treaty that prime minister Hun Sen signed with Vietnam on 10 October 2005 are not known. It is, however, promised to be available for the National Assembly ratification. It is not opened for any scrutiny before then. But the decision of the ruling party has been clear since 1991at the latest that it will sooner or later finalise a fit tribute package that delivers the southern archipelago to Vietnam.
Of course, the current prime minister who was not present at the 29 July 1991 cabinet meeting could claim innocence, just like Khieu Samphan, Pol Pot, Noun Chea, Duch and other high profile Cambodian leaders, dead or alive, who do not have any courage to accept full responsibility for what they have done, in one way or another, to the Khmer people. Sadly, they have always claimed they are in the right even while the country is going down the drain
Sim Sina (Mrs) 24 October 2005
NB: A copy of the original minutes/transcript in Khmer is available on request.
SUBMITTED BY: Sim Sina (Mrs), Email: sim...@westnet.com.au Sun, 23 Oct 2005
» Read more!
The Loss of Cambodia's Territorial Integrity Part 4 (Cambodian Parliament and its duty)
The Paris Peace Agreement was intended to help the Khmers and defend the supreme interests of the Khmers and Cambodia. The problem facing Cambodia right now has much to do with the Khmers themselves more than anybody else.
Vietnam's political, military and territorial ambitions and greed are known facts. They can be brought under control through skilful diplomacy, international agreements and international court. Thailand's political, military and territorial ambitions and greed are also known facts. Again they can also be brought under control through skilful diplomacy, international agreements and international court.
The real issue here is that the (legitimate) government of Cambodia of Prime Minister Hun Sen, itself, is the one who does not respect the Paris Peace Agreement and its own constitution. They are the first and the worst example to violate the Paris Peace Agreement that serves the supreme interests of their own country to the advantage of Vietnam. Therefore, calling upon the signatories of the Paris Peace Agreement will fall on deaf ears. Absurd as it may sound, but it's the sad and most distressing reality of the Khmers and its society that its current leaders have no hesitation or scrupulousness to be of service to Vietnam in order to protect and preserve its power base and clique.
Curiously enough, there has been a complete silence on the part of the former Khmer Rouge leadership in Pailin with respect to this issue. What do governor of Pailin, Mr. Ea Chhean and his assistant, Mr. Ieng Vuth think of all of this? What happened to Mr. Ieng Sary, Noun Chean and Khieu Samphan? Aren't they all the champion and fierce defenders of Khmer land? Didn't they invade Vietnam with the intention of getting back Kampuchea Krom and blamed all preceding Khmer leaders of not having their kind of courage to do so? Thanks to them, with their bloody and terribly insane policies of 1970-1975, Cambodia is now in a big mess!
Will the Cambodian Parliament endorse this additional convention to the 1985 treaty when it knows that this convention violates every letter and spirit of the Paris Peace Agreement and the Khmer Constitution? The CPP will, for sure, endorses it. The SRP will, for sure, not endorse it. The final blow that will tip the balance will come from FUNCINPEC. What will FUNCINPEC do? That, I will leave it up to you to contemplate!
The Parliament of Cambodia has the absolute legal power to put a stop to all of the problems of the additional convention to the 1985 treaty. If they vote to reject this additional convention then it is the end of it. The Khmers do not need other foreigners who care more for their (foreigners) own interests to help solve their (Khmers) own problems. It's time they learn to assume responsibility to take the destiny of their country into their own hands. Foreigners are always foreigners. The will always be foreign to the Khmer interest whatever those interests happen to be. Khieu Kanharith, the minister of information of the Royal Government of Cambodia, said that the whole issue was up to the Parliament of Cambodia to decide. He is right. The Parliament of Cambodia holds an important key to this problem. The members of the Parliament of Cambodia should have been wise enough to demand from their own government of Cambodia a detailed document of the additional treaty so they can seriously study very well in advance the implications of the signing of this additional convention before the voting session of the Assembly. Will the members of parliament from each political party be courageous enough to vote their conscience with respect to this additional convention, rather than to follow blindly the voting instructions set forth by their few superiors who probably care more for their own personal interests than those of their dying nation?
Each Cambodian Member of Parliament is paid a salary of about $2000.00 US per month plus other benefits. This is a lot of money in a country where a teacher or university professor makes only a few hundred dollars the most. As a Member of Parliament, each is entrusted with the sacred responsibility to defend at all cost the supreme interests of the Cambodian people and Cambodia, a country each claims, professes, and declares loudly to love. It is absolutely more famous and dignified to lose a seat at the National Assembly by following one's own conscience and go into history as a poor patriot than to continue to sit in the Assembly seat and be condemned for eternity in history. As a kid some long time ago in the Cambodian school, you must have studied Cambodian history in which you felt considerable pain when you got to the part where Cambodia lost her territory to her neighbours and somehow, you thought in your head that you would not be like this person, that person or those persons who committed the act of treason against their own country. Well, The time has come to test each parliamentarian's patriotism and the hope is that each one of them except a few incorrigible ones will vote like a child according to his/her own conscience.
For FUNCINPEC members of the parliament, remember your colleagues who laid down their lives in the fight for the liberation of Cambodia from Vietnamese colonialism, a Cambodia of at least as big as that between 1963 and 1969 as recognized internationally under Sangkum Reastr Niyum. Remember their sacrifices and their ideals. Vote with your conscience and not because your superiors tell you so. FUNCINPEC supporters inside and outside Cambodia can begin to exert pressure on the leaders of the FUNCINPEC party so that they will allow each FUNCIPEC Member of Parliament to vote his/her own conscience with respect to the additional convention to the 1985 treaty.
That's it; the Parliament of Cambodia holds the answers to the problems facing Cambodia right now with respect to Her territorial integrity. This Parliament can be the saviour or the eventual killer of Cambodia's territorial integrity. History will surely judge the Cambodian Parliament without prejudice.
By Anet Khmer
SUBMITTED BY: Anet Khmer, Email: anet....@yahoo.com Sun, 23 Oct 2005
» Read more!
Hun Sen Is Under Pressure From His...
If you ever think, Vietnam will even give Cambodia an inch of its land, you are deadly wrong. Because this is a country that is so greedy to steal any thing it can. For example, concerning Kampuchea Krom, did that country ever give half of an inch back to us?. And you know the answer is no. So what the hell is the prime minister of our country is talking about, when he said that, by signing the supplementary border agreement, Cambodia gained more territory. Mr. Hun Sen, even your own spokesman said that, the agreement was signed in 1985 while the Vietnamese troops still occupied our country.
Mr. prime minister, you even blamed former king Sihanouk for the two islandsthat now belong to Veitnam. Come on, Mr. it is you, who gave them away, and not the former king. The ex-king has always fought to protect our territory. And he has never given even half of an inch of our precious land to Vietnam. Even your own brother, Hun Neng, blamed the U.S. bombings in the 70's. I think you and your brother should blame yourself for the lost land, instead of accusing the former king and the bombings. It is you who signed the agreement to give the land away, because you try to please the greedy boss. As the leader of our coutry, you should try to protect the country and its people. Don't just do anything to please your boss, because you know that Veitnam is a vey greedy country. You must help and defend our country as the former king Sihanouk has done. And also try to protect you borders, because according to what I have learned, is that there are a lot of Vietnamese are coming to Cambodia. And that is not a good sign, because as you remember, how Kampuchea Krom was lost. First those people came in just to do business, and after that they settled down. And as more and more of them came, they started to take control of Kampuchea Krom. So please be aware of what one day will happen to Cambodia.
SUBMITTED BY: van choeung, Email: vanchim...@aol.com Wed, 12 Oct 2005
» Read more!
The Loss of Cambodia's Territorial Integrity-Part 3 (Additional Convention to the 1985 treaty)
Cambodia's territorial integrity is a subject of national importance to every single Khmer, dead or alive. Each Cambodian has a legitimate concern and indignation over his/her country's loss of territorial integrity as Cambodia has been losing continuously Her territory to Her insatiable and unscrupulous neighbors. It is inconceivable and incomprehensible that in this modern age of better communications, advanced technological knowledge, more civilized relationship between states, recognition of various state boundaries through maps being maintained at the United Nations and peaceful disputes of various borders handled by the International Court, we still see wicked and cunning attempts on the part of a country and a people like Vietnam to nibble away Cambodian territory with the complicity of the selfish and power-hungry Khmer leaders.
Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen's official visit to Viet Nam on October 10-12, 2005 marks a sad period in the Cambodian history as He will be signing an additional convention to the 1985 Treaty with Vietnam, thereby giving away more Khmer territory to Vietnam. This is a fait accompli as there has been no strong and challenging protest from inside the country, to say the least not even from a political party such as FUNCINPEC and the National Assembly. What FUNCINPEC has failed to understand is that as a junior partner in this so-called coalition government, it has the same responsibility, if not more than, as the opposition to make sure that the superior interests of the Khmer nation and not their lucrative positions be protected at all cost. It is also a sad moment in history that a small number of politicians could decide to give away the precious territory without taking much heat or consequences from the majority of the Khmers wherever they happen to be. This signing will set a bad precedence when times come to negotiate the border demarcations with Thailand and Laos. The sad reality facing the children of Angkor, which allows such a thing to happen, is a painful, but not enough mentioned fact of their never-ending disunity at the expense of their beloved motherland, the motherland that their friends, parents and ancestors have, throughout centuries, laid down their lives to defend!
The Vietnamese ambition to control, dominate and subjugate Cambodia goes back a long time. We have all heard and read about the Indochinese Federation, the dream child of Ho Chi Minh! We have also learnt about the planned westward demographic movement of Vietnam. To accomplish this goal, Vietnam continues to look for the Khmer accomplices to fulfill this mission. Division of the children of Angkor is not a difficult task as they are prone to such a thing. Unfortunately, among the children of Angkor there have always been those who are, for their personal rewards at the expense of their own Khmer Nation, eager to help the foreigners accomplish this goal.
In November 1953 Cambodia under the leadership of the then HM the King Norodom Sihanouk obtained a complete independence from France without having Her territory being partitioned as in the cases of Vietnam and Laos. This is quite an admirable accomplishment considering that various external and internal forces existed then to partition Cambodia territorially and ideologically. Instead of rallying to HM the King Norodom Sihanouk and helping Him defend and rebuild the newly independent country against aggressions and sabotages by the neighbours, Some Khmers chose to remain Vietnamese servants as Khmer Vietminhs, others chose to become American mercenaries and some others chose to abolish the monarchy. Why they have chosen not to rally to HM the King Norodom Sihanouk to help Him build and defend the country is beyond me. Jealousy, personal ambition and revenge etc, should have been set aside for the sake of national unity to safeguard Cambodia, the land every Khmer professes to love.
By continuing to be divided, the Khmers fall without knowing into the trap of Vietnam and other foreign countries who may want to use them for their interests. This division allows people like Hun Sen and his group to serve foreigners' interests with impunity. The division among the Khmers exist everywhere inside and outside the country alike! The division is seen among ordinary citizens, workers, students, teachers, intellectuals, politicians and the Buddhist monks who are supposedly full of compassion, tolerance and understanding. The strategy of dividing in order to conquer works very well in Cambodian case.
Do not forget that HM, the King-Father Norodom Sihanouk obtained Independence from France in 1953 and reclaimed successfully the temple of Preah Vihear from Thailand in 1962. Under SRN Cambodia, then proud and prosperous, obtained a 1967 joint declaration from the Revolutionary Provisional Government of South Vietnam and North Vietnam to respect Her borders and recognize Her territorial integrity in its entirety of 181, 035 square kilometres. This declaration has the same value and force as the treaty; therefore, there will be no need for any additional treaties as far as Cambodia's territorial integrity is concerned. Hun Sen must have been daydreaming when he illogically declared that Cambodia would gain more territory with the signing of this additional convention to the 1985 treaty. Please note that the Cambodian Prime Minister has a history of illogical and absurd argument some time in the past when he said that the deforestation in Cambodia resulted from the poor Khmer peasants cutting down the forest to provide themselves with wood for cooking fire! One may wonder why Vietnam is suddenly not clever enough to just accept to keep their promises by honouring the 1967 declaration, thereby satisfying fully the Cambodian neighbours with their demands, feeling good that for once they are honest, earning respect from Cambodians and the international community and at the same time and most importantly not losing her coveted territory.
The division of the Khmers coupled with the tight iron grips imposed by the Phnom Penh government and the indifference on the part of government civil servants and the security forces is so severe that there is no enlightened awakening to the dangers awaiting the Khmer nation. Imagine what would have happened if everyone inside Cambodia who works for the state institutions decided to stop working for 1 month in order to protest vigorously this signing of the additional convention!
The loss of some territory as a result of Hun Sen signing the additional convention is one problem, but the more paramount danger is the silent Vietnamization of Cambodia through insidious illegal Vietnamese settlers into the land of Angkor. The CPP and Hun Sen will not stop this influx, as the illegal influx would guarantee that there would always be votes for them. Perhaps one day in the future the CPP officials and Hun Sen will roam the land, after being allowed to leave the underworld during Pchum Ben, looking for food supposedly offered to them by their children and realize that such a thing does not exist anymore as there is nothing left that can be considered Khmer in the land of the former children of Angkor. With time the Khmers will definitely become the minority in their own land!
The patriotic Khmers must have been sad, frustrated and enraged that their ancestral land entrusted with them by their ancestors is taken away from them with the accomplices of their traitorous brethrens. Their frustration and anger are rightly logical and reasonable. However, the Khmers must learn to work together putting the superior interests of the land of Angkor above all else with no exception in order to ensure the survival of this nation they all profess to love. Refrain from attacking each other lest you become the servant of your enemy without your knowledge. Look at the good qualities in each individual rather than seeking for less relevant and minor shortfalls. Unity is most critically needed at this time and the survival of the land of Angkor depends solely on this unity.
By Anet Khmer
SUBMITTED BY: Anet Khmer, Email: anet....@yahoo.com Mon, 10 Oct 2005
» Read more!
Sihanouk Third Kingdom Prophecy
October 10, 2005
By Kok Sap
Given all situations in Cambodia, the self-acclaimed Ultra Nationalist and the former Great Heroic King had denounced and pronounced none of the regimes and governmental forms could out play his Mono Mano sugar coated Socialistic inclined Party known as Sangkum Reastra Niyum then. We wonder if he is able to do the right thing for his own conscience before his eternally rest. Most acquainted with former monarch hands on every detail in Cambodia politic style had not ruled out that the former king is still very attached to his subjects if they would appeal his consideration to personally save them from dictatorial dominance.
In retrospect the former king is more appealing than all politicians combined including all of his sidekicks: the bad, the scrupulous, and the evil. No arm force or real treasury at his disposal, he made the hard core communist politicians at Yuon disgruntles to accept and enthrone his last legitimate son, Norodom Sihamoni, the most apolitically experienced as new King quite effortlessly after his calculated second abdication.
After the fact to measure up his subject loyalty, he abruptly broadcasted his shadowed independence via legitimate sovereignty movement once again. This time he explicitly expressed his endeavor to bring about change in Cambodia sovereign integrity and political landscape which has shaken his evil sidekick steadily. Relatively this topic had both provoked the most personal and inner sentiment of the people regardless of political affiliation. Subsequently that personally put his evil sidekick on cliffs edge.
As a seasoned Independence Crusader at old age the 2008 election seems not far fetch for the former king who may do unimaginable damages to current Yuon domineered ruling party politic while having his breakfast of salty egg and porridge at his palace in Beijing. Definitely, it would be his ultimate goal to secure royalty and monarchy continual existence in the shadow of shattered CPP doubled mirror. This advertent phenomenal is in the making for a new ruler who could internally and externally uninstall and uproot national nemesis influence.
Other hands if he really chose to run, he needs no extraordinaire campaign platform but the holistic anti-corruption and restoration of borders alone to woo people and international donors' assistance with simple Pancca Sila resolutions: Admit his sincerity upon his past mistakes and ask people to allow his last chance to redress them before it is too late,
Call upon armed forces to keep national order as people call for vote of NO CONFIDENCE in current administration and legislative body inability to uphold Cambodia Constitution fully,
To indict and sentence the convicted of heinous crime and plundering people fund to life in prison with hard labor such as sweeping streets of all government property, and central market sites daily,
Demand responsibility of legislatures to improve citizen quality of living and reduction of non transparency by confiscating and accounting all assets and property belong to the convicted and sentenced corruptive officials for the state treasury disposal,
To explicitly express this will be his final noble deed to restore people and country dignity before death. That may be enough to spark the orderly democratic and peaceful revolution to reinstate true democracy of Cambodia government once for all. With own cognizance, the former king may just fulfill his own prophecy before his own eyes as the riddle unfolding its meaning as "the small slender king shall rule the three kingdoms." In fact he had ruled two kingdoms so far; therefore; to attain the third one he will be at services of his own son the king as Prime Minister and guardian angel to guaranty the grand stand of his final political doing. This is fatherly deed to protect own children interest. If this to happen, the evils may need to practice reading own eulogies after digging hole for own burials on Koh Ach Khmer in South China Sea. The former great heroic King bears the solution and if it is true for his proclamation of a grand nationalist.
SUBMITTED BY: Kok Sap, Email: koks....@yahoo.com Mon, 10 Oct 2005
» Read more!
October 5, 2005
Letter of Appeal to HRH. Prince Norodom Rannaridh President of Cambodia National Assembly
Subject: oppose the signing of the so called additional agreement of 1985 treaty
Your Highness:
With all due respect, this matter that I present for your consideration is no longer political but a personal duty to us all. Each of us whether in or outside Cambodia with true conscience is steadfastly oppose the signing of the so called additional agreement of 1985 treaty done with Viet Nam by Comrade Hun Sen then. The country is imploring you not to approve the signing et al. As individual your deed will re-deem further determination of Khmer unity and interest.
In this regard may I please point out as so it seems the renowned Lafontaine's fables' the cunning monkey set up the dumb struck goat to be punished by the hungry farmer after it ate his lunch and up the tree is in full play in Cambodia politic over border problems specifically with the neo-imperialistic colonial Viet Nam. On 9/26/2005 Mr. Khieu Kannharith, the government's spokesman admitted to Voice of America Radio that the 1985 Cambodia-Vietnam border treaty is not a fair one for Cambodia because Vietnam occupied Cambodia at that time. He urged those opposed to this treaty to write Norodom Ranariddh, the President of the National Assembly, and other Members of Parliament to stop the approval of the continuation of this treaty. Also it is subsequently clear as day light that Prime Minister Hun Sen is anxiously anticipated to sign it next week in Hanoi additional agreements to the treaties signed in the 80's under the de-facto government of People's Republic of Kampuchea at large considered as a vassalage of communist Vietnam, which is former King Norodom Sihanouk has always stated that he would never recognize any border treaties with Viet Nam signed after 1969. At this point interestingly Mr. Hun Sen had not only violated Cambodia Constitution but done it boldly according to experts based (KI News) on the following:
Since a royal decree has the power of a law, neither the King nor the Government has the power to make this kind of executive-made law. Any law has to be made by the only constitutional law-making body, which is the National Assembly representing the sovereign Cambodian people. In its substance (article 2, paragraph 6), the above royal decree is unconstitutional because it gives the President of the National Border Authority, i.e. the Prime Minister, the power to sign international treaty/agreement, which under the Constitution is vested with the King in his capacity as Head of State.
Over times Mr. Hun Sen has relentlessly maneuvered every possibility such as putting forward the 14 June 2005 Royal Decree creating the National Border Authority which he arbitrarily subjugated the King to accept him as the signatory of any border treaty with neighboring countries, especially Vietnam, which is categorically unparallel with the very Constitution which uphold your vested authority. In fact, Mr. Hun Sen failed to have former king consent in 1993 but the new King Norodom Sihamoni appeared endorsing him in 2005.
For its part, the Vietnamese government is also emphasizing the great importance of the signing of a supplementary agreement on the 1985 land border treaty as it dispatched its high ranking official who had also admitted the difficulties at the conference recently in Siem Reap. Now the ball is in the National Assembly court where you are in the position to influence the National Assembly including the opposition to do the right thing in voicing out people concerns and dissention over this long over due neglected matter.
In all regards, your Highness knew it well that Viet Nam has continually annexed much of Cambodia remaining territory since 1800's. Yet it has not stopped; therefore; the Cambodia National Assembly can duly put a stop to this nonsense treaty. It appears Mr. Hun Sen can do so much for so long but the very people will appreciate your determined position to let him know enough is enough.
Sire, whether you personally choose to do other wise but the very mouthpiece of Mr. Hun Sen powerhouse had indicated it is up to you at this juncture. Undeniably this matter concerned us all and we insist that your Highness be not a goat for the sake of your conscience and people who had died for you and your family not long ago. People and each of us abroad in spite of each of our differences appreciate your esteemed action to defy treachery once for all.
I am grateful for your interest and time in this matter.
Truly,
Kok Sap,
Fellow compatriot
SUBMITTED BY: Kok Sap, Email: koks....@yahoo.com Wed, 5 Oct 2005
» Read more!
Reshuffle Priority
September 27, 2005
By Kok Sap
Since France regrettably spat it out in the 50's, Cambodia desperately needs others to respect its sovereignty and territorial integrity to the fullest.But most non compliant. It lives with intolerable sense of inferiority and insecurity. The cunning neighbors continue to mull Cambodia left and right whether economically or militarily up to this moment. In order to command respect from others, a nation needs a strong well trained and compensated force that is willing to lie down and defend it. This may be unappetizing to many but undeniably Cambodia has always put its priority backward. No other way but to put this bluntly in order to re-evaluate what's important to resolve the situation. Truth is not pretty but each must accept this unjust prejudice and bias.
For its national security and self determination, however, Cambodia had short changed its active armed force men at best. For the longest it is irresponsible of the governments that its armed forces have to argue to get fed and paid. Of course this seems provocatively relevant to one another in term of societal responsibility and reciprocity.
Appallingly the society was more responsive and readily to provide to the massive of ordained men without reservation in the whole land. My question here is what most of these men have done for Cambodia beside their most willingness to elevate and influence people with no comprehensibility of the dead foreign languages daily. Practically playing flute for the buffalo ears. What's Khmerization to them? Khmerization is nationalism.
Shame to say at least other religion for instance Christianity is on target as it readily in providing its following its Holy book in excellent Khmer translation. Other hand Buddhism in Cambodia is still remaining critically ineptitude and servitude in term of literacy and comprehension since mid 1200's. Is it a coincidence? Not really.
Buddhism is an extended arm of monarchy to solidify its control over population at the expense of real democracy as each has its own dialect respectively to belittle Cambodia intelligence. In return Cambodia Constitution is falsely stipulating its present motto: Nation? Religion? King? Implied one can't do without other. As far as the religion, Cambodia is no longer a single religion country but its Constitution overtly misrepresented its true intent. Not a law but a lie.
Do not get this wrong it will not be a respectable democracy if people can't have rights to believe and practice beliefs.
Regardless of what period, it is absurd and indicative disrespect for the government to mistreat armed forces which bear a sacred duty of its defense. The existence of Cambodia thus far is not because of the religion or the King but purely nationalism of the falling men and women of generational armed forces. Other thing armed forces are not to be bought or affiliated with any particular party otherwise it will be fallen into the feudalistic fiefdom wherein this regard Cambodia is exactly.
Defense depends on force which made up of men who need decent and respectable livelihood in orderly society. These men trade their life and family hope for less than a bottle of whiskey cost per month for some high ranking officials in Phnom Penh. They are proudly to die if needed be for the country. Why people and government do not try to uplift these men necessity. Is it making sense, if we do not want to feed people but yet force them to do the utmost extreme for our very existence?
A lot of people say quantity but I say quality is much important. For example Israel of less than 2 million people in the 60's but it had beaten Arabs of hundreds million pants downed .Each of its citizen has an obligation to serve and defend the nation. They did not fight harder but smarter with tremendous support from their compatriots and government. Remember Israel is no better than Cambodia now it still lives off US charity all these years since its illegal homestead of Palestine after WWII.
In real life people tell me all the times "Every man for his Own" and I agree "So Does the Country." If a man can't be decent how can be his government? For that reason, just look at the Cambodia so called modern armed forces, you'll see.
Astoundingly true that Cambodia people would do what it takes to defend their land as long as their government is for them. There were times that Cambodia had broken down its enemies will despite of capability and size. Therefore the government needs to give undivided attention and respect to armed forces in case Cambodia facing its hereditary violators unexpectedly.
If Hun Sen requires two thousand strong men to protect his, so what's the real need for Cambodia of 13 millions? How comes these men will indiscriminately killed anyone who may attempt to harm their feeder? It is not out of natural love but mere survival as Hun Sen beefing up these men with vanities. Therefore they are more than willing to take bullets for the sake of their rice pot as supposed to the whole nation.
SUBMITTED BY: Kok Sap, Email: koks....@yahoo.com Tue, 27 Sep 2005
» Read more!
Angkor Wat by Bicycle
by Antonio Graceffo
“Gi gong. Gi gong!” I repeated, switching to Khmer. “I want to ride a bicycle around Angkor Wat.” I insisted.
“But it is more than thirty kilometers.” Protested the clerk at the bicycle shop. “And besides, it is raining.”
Thirty kilometers isn’t a huge distance for a bicycle. But, he did have a point about the rain.
“When do you think it will let up?” I asked, considering postponing.“In a month or two.”
“Give me a bicycle now.” I decided. I paid my two dollars rental, and made the clerk’s day. Now, when he went for lunch with his colleagues, he would
have a great story to tell.
Cambodia is great for adventure tours, but if you are afraid of water, (is that called hydrophobic?) you shouldn’t come in the rainy season. The air temperature is always pretty high, so a cool drizzle feels good. Besides,
twenty minutes into a bike ride I am usually dripping with sweat anyway.
The bicycle, a cheap Chinese copy of a mountain bike, was easily the worst
bicycle I had ever ridden. Neither the gears nor the brakes worked, which
was a lot of fun in the rain. The seat post and wheels were bent, and the
rear axles made a loud klunking noise once each revolution of the wheel. The
chain also went completely slack at times, causing the pedals to spin
independently. They would usually come around and crack me on the shins. It
was a lot like when I was learning Khmer Kickboxing and had to kick tree
trunks with my shins.
“You will be a champion some day.” Said Thavrin, who would be my companion
for the entire Cambodian adventure.
I’ve had better bicycles. But no bicycle ever gave me as much as this one
did, taking me around Angkor Wat. It is one of the Seven Wonders of the
World, and I was there on a bicycle. Not bad for a boy from Brooklyn who
once believed you would fall off the Earth if you went beyond East 78th
street.
Khmers think foreigners are all insane. In Khmer culture, anyone with enough
money to go on vacation could afford a driver, or at least a car. They don’t
quite understand why we would chose to ride a bicycle. For me, aside from a
need to work off all of the free four-star meals I had been eating in this
trip, I feel a bicycle is the best way to tour anything. It is faster than
walking, which can sometimes get tedious. You can barely walk thirty
kilometers in a day, much less stop off and look at interesting temples. A
car is too fast. And there is something both decadent and displeasing about
stepping out of an air-conditioned vehicle, snapping a digital photo, and
then driving to the next interesting temple. A bicycle is somehow more
honest.
From the town of Siem Reap to the Angkor Wat complex is only about two or
three kilometers. Less than one kilometer out of Siem Reap, the noise level
drops to zero. You follow a beautiful, tree-lined path to the mote. No
matter how many photos you have seen of Angkor Wat, nothing will prepare you
for your first glimpse of the actual temple. It rises up like some beautiful
creation of the gods.
Entrance into the park is free for Khmers. For foreigners, it costs $20 for
a day pass, or $40 for a three-day pass. The park is so incredibly large,
that it cannot be seen in a day, or even three for that matter. If you have
already paid thousands of dollars for a plane ticket to Cambodia, you might
as well stay the extra two or three days and really experience Angkor Wat.
Once again, like all of the temple complexes in Cambodia you are free to
wander and do pretty much whatever you want to inside of the park. But, it
would be recommended to hire a guide. English speaking guides run about $20
per day. Guides for other languages are more expensive. The guides will
explain the intricacies of ancient Khmer architecture, as well as all of the
legends from the Ramayana and elsewhere, which appear on the walls of the
great temple. Without a guide you are just wandering aimlessly about,
snapping photos of interesting stoneworks, which will all look the same to
you when you get the photos developed after you return home.
At the park entrance, the guard told me I had to buy a ticket. Since I had a
krama, a traditional Khmer scarf, wrapped around my head, and I speak Khmer,
I tried to get in for free.
“I am Khmer.” I told him. “I don’t have to pay.”
Many Khmers have never heard a foreigner speak their language, and the guard
was noticeably taken off balance. Finally, he formulated the question that
had been running around his head. “If you are Khmer why is your skin so
white?”
“My father is Chinese.” I said.
“But your Khmer doesn’t sound perfect.”
“My mother died in the war.”
This almost convinced him. But then he asked. “Why do you have round eyes?”
“I was adopted by an American family.” I said.
I don’t think he actually believed the story. But there must have been
nothing in his training course to prepare him for a foreigner trying to pass
himself off as a half Chinese war orphan. Finally, we both burst out
laughing, and I felt a little guilty about my clumsy attempt at deception.
Of course, the joke was on me, because now I had to shell out $40 for a
three-day pass.
“Tell your mother she can get in for free.” He told me, as he waved me
through.
Maybe he had believed me after all.
Once through the gates, there is a choice of two routes to take, the Grand
Loop or the Small Loop. I chose the Grand Loop, which measures about thirty
kilometres all the way around the complex. Roughly the first kilometer takes
you past the main Angkor Wat temple, which you are familiar with from
postcards and T-Shirts. And, if you have had the good fortune of living in
Cambodia for a year and a half, as I have, you will have received at least
one gift, a dinner plate, paperweight, or toothbrush, which bears the sacred
image. Angkor Wat is the symbol of Khmer pride; its image even adorns the
Cambodian flag. The time of the Angkor Empire, 1100 AD is also referred to
as The Glorious Age, when Khmer civilization was at its peak, and Cambodia
was more than twice its current size.
According to my guide, Samban, from Phnom Penh Tours, in ancient times,
Cambodia bordered China, Thailand, Lao, and Myanmar. Effectively, there was
no Vietnam at that time. Ho Chi Minh City, Saigon, was part of Cambodia.
But, eventually, the Kingdom of Vietnam encroached on Khmer soil, until
Cambodia no longer reached to China. Later, the French ceded the lower half
of Cambodia, called Kampuchea Krom, to Vietnam. Thailand also infringed on
Cambodian territory, even occupying Angkor Wat for some brief periods of
history.
Although Angkor Wat is both a world heritage site and the single most
important, artefact of Cambodian history, the temple is not some isolated
relic. It is a living, breathing part of modern Khmer life. Bamboo huts of
neighbouring villages are built right up to the mote of the ancient temple.
Hawkers earn their living selling products to the visitors, with constant
shouts of “Mr, OK, you come eat drink, ok.” The mote is so large, that
people make a profession of fishing in it. Children ride bicycles along the
great stone walls, but not the whole thirty kilometers, only foreigners were
that dumb, and we saw several others doing the same as us.
One of the nice things about travelling by bicycle is that you are
guaranteed a warm reception wherever you go. I wanted my first day at Angkor
Wat to be about the people who lived along its perimiter or made their
living directly from the temple. On a bicycle it was easy to stop and
converse with people anytime we chose. And of course the Khmer people were
always willing to chat.
The first people we stopped to talk to was a group of small children doing
traditional fishing. They waded into the marshy areas on the fringes of the
mote carrying a scoop-shaped screen made of woven bamboo. They stooped down,
and pushed the screen, like a sledge, through the water. Similar to panning
for gold, when the screen was full, they would pick through the silt and
weeds. After discarding the muck on his screen, a small boy put a handful of
tiny fish in a plastic jug.
“Do you do this for business?” I asked him.
“No, for soup.” He answered.
The children tried to teach me to use the screen but I couldn’t get the hang
of it. The trick was to trawl jut deep enough to collect water, but not so
deep that the screen fowled on the long weeds growing up out of the water.
Even for experienced fishers the job was not very rewarding. After hours of
fishing, the children had collected about thirty fish, each the size of your
thumb.
We crossed over the bridge at the North Gate of Angkor Tom. The tops of the
railings along the sides of the bridge were seven-headed naga (giant
serpents from Hindu/Buddhist mythology). The thirty-meter long naga were
supported by stone figures, each of which depicted a different character
from Hindu/Buddhist mythology. The figures fighting for good were on the
left side of the bridge. And the evil characters were on the right.
At the end of the bridge we passed beneath a massive stone arch, which
displayed bas-reliefs from the myth, entitled, The Churning Sea of Milk (Go
Samut Duk Dah). Set atop the arch was a Buddhist satva. Samban explained. “A
satva is someone on his way to becoming Buddha. The Dali Lama would be an
example of a Satva.”
We rode on to a lesser-visited attraction, which is not on the itinerary of
the one-day tourists. Samban led me from the road, down a quiet green path.
We climbed up an embankment, and stood atop a stone parapet. In the ground
below us gaped an oval shaped hole reminiscent of an ancient area. The pit
was approximately three meters deep, and the area measured approximately
100m squared.
“It is believed.” Said Samban “That the ancient Khmers would drive wild
elephants into this put and train them for the army.”
At that moment it dawned on me that not only were the ancient Khmers gone,
but the elephants as well. In addition to being home to the most powerful
empire in Indochina, Cambodia had also been home to elephants and tigers.
But, like so many other resources in the country, countless years of civil
war, poverty, and corruption have driven the animals nearly to extinction.
Back on the bicycles we enjoyed the serenity and invasive green of the Khmer
rainy season. It would probably have been better to ride a bike on a sunny
day, but at least the rain kept us cool. In the dry season the heat would
have been oppressive.
Our next stop was at Preah Khan, which was originally built as a Buddhist
temple in 1191 by King Jaya Varaman VII, who instituted Buddhism as the
national religion of Cambodia. But, when he died, King Jaya Varaman VIII
changed the national religion back to Hinduism. The new king ordered the
faces of the Buddhist statues destroyed. Today, the temple is adorned with
15,000 faceless Buddas.
The temple was topped by a tile roof, and constructed of heavy stone blocks
connected with metal joints. Temples were protected by tremendous bas
reliefs of the three mythical animals garuda (half man/half bird), naga, and
lions. These were the symbols of power and were permitted to remain on the
temple after the ascension of Jaya Varaman VIII. All three figures garuda,
naga, and lion have since been accepted by both Buddhist and Hindu kings of
Cambodia.
Both the enormity of these temples and the beauty of the detailed
craftsmanship is difficult to take in. That devotion to a god unseen drove
men to create such structures is unfathomable today, when most of us cant be
bothered to go to church. But, one of the most amazing aspects of the
temples is that no one ever lived in them. Even monks and kings were housed
outside, in wooden structures. The temples were strictly the dwelling places
of the gods.
Many of the temples were surrounded by a mote, and enclosed behind
stonewalls, which bore a martial appearance. Reminded of European castles, I
asked Samban if the temples had played any military role, if perhaps in
times of war, they would have been used as fortresses. Any discussion of
Cambodian history always tuns to the unhealed scars left by the Khmer Rouge.
The Angkor Empire had departed from the Earth hundreds of years before
anyone had heard of Pol Pot. But the precious stones of Angkor Wat were
witnesses to genocide.
Samban explained that during the Vietnamese occupation of Cambodia, form
1979 to 1987, the Vietcong turned these temples into garrisons. Siem Reap
was the primary battleground during the war between the Khmer Rouge and Lon
Nol, 1970-1975. So, obviously tourists weren’t able t visit the temples at
that time. During the Khmer Rouge period, 1975-1979, no foreigners were even
allowed to enter Cambodia. The first tourism officially began in 1987, when
the Vietnamese government created a state-run tourist agency. At that time,
there were very few tourists, and mostly from Communist Block countries.
But, the area around the temples had been so heavily mined by Vietnamese
soldiers that you couldn’t visit most of them. Siem Reap remained a Khmer
Rouge stronghold until 19991 when UNTAC arrived (The UN peace keeping
mission).
“In the 60s there were tourists here.” Exclaimed Samban. But then, because
of the KR, the temples were neglected or destroyed. “I saw photos of the
temples in 1989, they were completely overgrown, reclaimed by the jungle.”
On the way back to our bicycles we stopped off to interview a band of
musicians, all landmine victims. They were seated on the ground, displaying
their amputations, playing traditional Khmer instruments. One man, Wan Yun,
was only 32 but already blind in one eye and was missing a leg.
“Did this happen to you in the army?” I asked.
“Yes.” Answered Wan Yun. He looked sad, but he was still smiling politely,
which is the Khmer way. One would think that working at Angkor Wat he would
be tired of tourists. But, he seemed genuinely excited to be talking to me.
Maybe it was because most tourists just walked past him, or gave him money,
without taking the time to recognise that he was a human being who needed to
talk.
In most countries, asking if someone had been in the army was enough. But in
Cambodia the next question had to be “Which one?” In recent memory, Khmer
men and women have served in the Royal Army, under King Norodom Sihanouk,
the Republican army, under Lon Nol, the Khmer Rouge, Under Pol Pot, The
Khmer Serai (free Khmer army) under a number of different leaders, the
Kampuchea army, under the Vietcong, or finally, the Royal Cambodian Armed
Forces, under Prime Minister Hun Sen. If you conducted enough interviews, it
was not difficult to find men in their early fifties, who had served in
several, or all of the Cambodian armies.
Wan Yun told me that he had been injured in 1993, while serving in Hun Sen’s
army, fighting the Khmer Rouge near the Thai border. Two years ago, he had
been taken into a government program, and was taught to play music. Now, he
and the rest of the band members lived in a government run shelter, and
supported themselves by performing for tourists.
Two massive, headless guardians protected the entrance to the temple. “I
brought a tourist here in 1999.” Explained Samban. “She was shocked when she
saw the heads were missing from the statues. After she returned to her
country she sent me copies of the photos she had made here in 1969. The
heads were on the statues at that time.”
“Who stole them?” I asked.
“It could have been a number of people.” Answered Samban. “The Vietnamese
took a lot of our historical artefacts with them when they left. It also
could have been Khmer Rouge.”
“Could it have been some poor people who sold them for food?” I suggested.
“Absolutely not!” Samban was emphatic here. “Poor people have no idea the
value of these artefacts. They would also have no idea how to sell them.”
“How are they sold?” I asked, just in case things didn’t work out as a
writer, maybe I could become a temple raider.
“The artefacts have to be transported to Thailand, then smuggled across the
border, and sold on the Thai black market.” The border with Thailand was
still quite pores, but in the Khmer Rouge time, before 1994, it was even
worse, with KR cadres passing back and forth at will. It is also a
well-known secret that Thai border police accept bribes. Some Khmers go as
far as saying that the Thai allow the transport and sale of the Khmer
artefacts out of spite, just to rid the Cambodians of their cultural
heritage.
Regardless of Thai complicity, to take a massive stone sculpture and
transport it through numerous military blockades and police roadblocks,
before even getting to the Thai border, would require permission and
protection from someone high up. Said another way, the sculptures weren’t
sold by a poor farmer trying to feed his starving family. They were sold by
powerful people, Vietnamese or otherwise, to buy a new Land Cruiser, while
the family of the poor farmer continued to starve.
The sheer mass of the temple construction is impressive enough. But, then
you see the intricate details. Every inch of the lintels is covered in bas
relief depicting the Ramayana, the central myth of Hindu and Buddhism. The
walls inside the temple were rough and pockmarked. Samban explained that
they were once covered in bronze plates, many of which were gilded. In the
entire Angkor complex not a single metallic plate remains. They were all
stolen.
The rain let up, and we continued on our bicycles, burning off the 18,000
calorie meals we had been eating. At the twenty-kilometre mark the tour
ended. Now, we had about fifteen kilometres to ride back to town, and return
the bikes. On the way, we passed some men throwing fishing nets from an
embankment. We stopped off to get our second fishing lesson of the day.
“Do you sell these fish?” I asked.
“No, we just catch them for our mothers and wives.” Answered one of the men.
“And if we don’t, there is trouble at home.” he joked.
The men explained that they were full time farmers and just enjoyed fishing.
Seeing them standing side by side, laughing and talking I realized that for
these men, throwing their nets out together was a social occasion, the
equivalent of an afternoon in the local pub. They could meet their friends
and discuss the things that mattered to them as well as those that didn’t.
But unlike westerners in a pub, these men were burning calories, not
absorbing them. And they were earning money, not spending it.
Even the rural poor had a lesson to teach the west.
Working a full day they could collect about half a kilo, or about $1 worth
of fish. Many poor Khmers exist on a diet of almost nothing but rice. Even
in Phnom Penh, some of the boxers I train with only get about 100 grams of
meat a day, not enough to build muscle. These fishermen were luckier than
inland farmers because the fish would add much needed protein to their diet.
Clumsily, I took the net from one of the men. They all laughed at how out of
my element I looked.
“You don’t have a wife or mother, do you?” Asked one of the men.
“No.” I answered.
“That’s good.” He said. “Because you would never be able to feed them.”
The net is large, perhaps three meters squared. The edges of the net are
weighted with bits of metal. The secret, apparently, is in the packing. The
fishermen knew exactly how to gather and fold the net, wrapping it over the
left shoulder and left elbow, and then dividing the weighted bottom between
their left and right hands. They would twist at the waist, and launch the
net into the air. The trick here was to throw the net high enough that it
would open completely before hitting the water, but not so high that it
would begin to ball up before submerging. Once thrown, the net would be
retracted using a lanyard attached to the left wrist.
When it came my turn to throw, I was surprised at how much the net weighed.
In fact, I handed my phone and valuables to Thavrin. “Just in case I wind up
following the net into the water.” I said. I could just see me throwing
myself off balance, falling in the lake, getting tangled in the net, and
then drowning in three feet of water. I put my pocket-knife between my teeth
just in case.
“Ang ay dong ut ite?” I asked my teacher.
He jut stared at me, wonderingly.
“Am I doing it right?” I repeated, after temporarily removing the knife from
between my teeth.
“Yes.” He said with a big smile.
We both knew he was lying, but he didn’t want to hurt my feelings.
I made a feeble attempt at a throw, and the net became hopelessly tangled.
“How did I do?” I asked Thavrin, hoping he would use Khmer decorum, and find
something positive to say about my failed effort.
“Your gums are bleeding.” He said, pointing at the knife marks on my mouth.
My cell phone rang. It was my sponsor, Long Leng. “I have been trying to
reach you all day.” He began. “Have you been going to look at the
attractions so you can write something?”
“Sorry.” I said, quoting a sign I had once seen on a country store in
Alabama. “Gone fishing.”
Contact the author at: antonio_graceffo@hotmail.com
You can reach Long Leng of Phnom Penh Tours at ppenhtourism@camnet.com.kh
SUBMITTED BY: Antonio Graceffo, Email: antonio.....@hotmail.com Sat, 17 Sep 2005
» Read more!
