Sam Rainsy during the 2007 commune election campaing (Photo: Pring Samrang, Cambodge Soir)Wednesday, April 11, 2007
By Soren Seelow Cambodge Soir
Unofficial translation from French by Luc Sâr
Click here to read Cambodge Soir’s original article in French
In an interview given to Cambodge Soir, Sam Rainsy explains his project for a large alliance to topple the CPP during the 2008 general election. However, the [opposition] leader does not exclude allying himself with the latter, he said that he wanted to “move to [demarcation] lines”, in the same fashion as François Bayrou is doing in France [François Bayrou is a French politician, president of Union for French Democracy (UDF) since 1998, and a leading candidate in the 2007 French presidential election. ... as of early March [he] is polling in third place behind front-runners Nicolas Sarkozy of the UMP party and Segolene Royal of the Parti Socialiste. The possibility of a Bayrou presidency has taken the French establishment by surprise, which had been expecting the battle to be fought primarily between Sarkozy and Royal, both very personable and media-friendly. - Source Wikipedia].
Sam Rainsy proposes to the Norodom Ranariddh Party (NRP) and to other small political parties to join him to form a large alliance – a Democratic Movement – in order to unseat the CPP in 2008. According the SRP predictions, the CPP could only obtain 49% of votes in the upcoming general election, this would technically leaves 51% of votes to a [potential] large unified bloc, if the latter can see the daylight. However, at the same time that he is announcing the anti-CPP alliance project, Sam Rainsy explains in an interview with Cambodge Soir that he does not exclude the possibility to work with the CPP. He dreams of reshaping the political landscape by transcending the political splits, in the same fashion as [French presidential candidate] Bayrou is doing [in France]. Sam Rainsy feels a lot of affinities with the latter.
Your project of a large coalition winning the absolute majority at the next general election presumes that the CPP would be abandoned by its current partner [Funcinpec]. Do you plan to reach out to the Funcinpec?
No. The Funcinpec is about to disappear. There is little difference [between the current Funcinpec party and] the party of Ung Huot who was nominated as prime minister to replace Norodom Ranariddh following the 1997 [coup d’état] events. His new party, which rallied to the CPP, obtained almost no votes during the 1998 general election. I think that any party which presents itself as an ally, or even seen a CPP subordinate, is condemned to disappear. People prefer to reach God rather than just the Saints. If one projects the results of the last commune election to next year’s [general] election, Funcinpec wouldn’t receive any seats, the NRP would receive 2: one in Kompong Cham and one in Prey Veng, and the SRP 31. It would be rather humiliating for the CPP to ally itself with a dying party which will pass away in one year.
You declared this morning [Tuesday] that the CPP was not an enemy, but a “competitor,” and that it could eventually become a “partner”…
“Never say never.” All solutions are worth considering. Look at Germany where the two large rival parties have formed a large coalition, or Israel, where Likud and Labor are participating in the same government.
Aren’t you afraid of disturbing your electorate by considering a collaboration with the CPP at a moment when you try to set up an alliance to beat the CPP in 2008?
I want to give a democracy lesson to Hun Sen by examining the nuances of the terms covering various political situations: “enemies,” “competitors,” “partners.” Fear must end. I want to appease the minds. Opponents can be brought to work together. We must abandon this Khmer Rouge state of mind. For me, I never had it (KR state of mind).
Is a coalition between the SRP and the CPP possible?
Yes, it is possible.
You recently wrote to Say Chhum, the CPP secretary-general, asking to meet him. Is this undertaking part of your overture strategy?
It was Mu Sochua, SRP Secretary-General, who wrote that letter asking to meet her CPP counterpart in order to facilitate our common work in the commune councils. There are 1,4000 communes where the SRP will seat at the same table as the CPP. We are thus factual partners. Whether anybody wants it or not, we are condemned to work together.
This collaboration at the local level, could it lead to a government alliance?
It would be a good indication. If we are collaborating in a manner that would benefit the country at the commune level, this would portend to a good understanding [between the two parties] at a higher level. If we are condemned to work together, of course: it all depends on the voters’ choice.
Precisely, couldn’t the CPP ally itself with another party?
Look at Germany’s case. There were several coalitions [combination] possible, but the two large parties preferred working together. Furthermore, the CPP is not monolithic. When new forces are emerging, the political landscape is reshaping. Within the CPP, there are conservative elements, and then some are more avant-gardist. We are intellectually closer to certain CPP elements. The reshaping of the political landscape is maybe contemplated by one CPP faction which, for the time being, do not dare make a move. If we form a [political] pole which is equivalent to the CPP in terms of votes, some CPP members could join us and tip the balance to our side. I have in mind a large coalition which includes some CPP elements.
Hun Sen is not wrong when he said that some people are only thinking about destroying the CPP…
When elements of the [French political] UDF [party] switch to Sarkozy [French presidential candidate, head of the French right-of-center UMP party], they are not destroying the UDF. The term “to destroy” is a Khmer Rouge rhetoric. We must build bridges, new outlines, we must move the [demarcation] lines. If Bayrou is accepted in France, it’s because he jumped over the left-right cleavage hurdle. “A majority of ideas must be offered,” as it was the fashionable thing to say ten years ago in France.
Your aspire to be like Bayrou then?
The UDF [Bayrou’s political party] and the SRP are both members of Liberal International. In fact, I would like to see Cambodia being stimulated by what Bayrou is attempting to do in France.
Sam Rainsy proposes to the Norodom Ranariddh Party (NRP) and to other small political parties to join him to form a large alliance – a Democratic Movement – in order to unseat the CPP in 2008. According the SRP predictions, the CPP could only obtain 49% of votes in the upcoming general election, this would technically leaves 51% of votes to a [potential] large unified bloc, if the latter can see the daylight. However, at the same time that he is announcing the anti-CPP alliance project, Sam Rainsy explains in an interview with Cambodge Soir that he does not exclude the possibility to work with the CPP. He dreams of reshaping the political landscape by transcending the political splits, in the same fashion as [French presidential candidate] Bayrou is doing [in France]. Sam Rainsy feels a lot of affinities with the latter.
Your project of a large coalition winning the absolute majority at the next general election presumes that the CPP would be abandoned by its current partner [Funcinpec]. Do you plan to reach out to the Funcinpec?
No. The Funcinpec is about to disappear. There is little difference [between the current Funcinpec party and] the party of Ung Huot who was nominated as prime minister to replace Norodom Ranariddh following the 1997 [coup d’état] events. His new party, which rallied to the CPP, obtained almost no votes during the 1998 general election. I think that any party which presents itself as an ally, or even seen a CPP subordinate, is condemned to disappear. People prefer to reach God rather than just the Saints. If one projects the results of the last commune election to next year’s [general] election, Funcinpec wouldn’t receive any seats, the NRP would receive 2: one in Kompong Cham and one in Prey Veng, and the SRP 31. It would be rather humiliating for the CPP to ally itself with a dying party which will pass away in one year.
You declared this morning [Tuesday] that the CPP was not an enemy, but a “competitor,” and that it could eventually become a “partner”…
“Never say never.” All solutions are worth considering. Look at Germany where the two large rival parties have formed a large coalition, or Israel, where Likud and Labor are participating in the same government.
Aren’t you afraid of disturbing your electorate by considering a collaboration with the CPP at a moment when you try to set up an alliance to beat the CPP in 2008?
I want to give a democracy lesson to Hun Sen by examining the nuances of the terms covering various political situations: “enemies,” “competitors,” “partners.” Fear must end. I want to appease the minds. Opponents can be brought to work together. We must abandon this Khmer Rouge state of mind. For me, I never had it (KR state of mind).
Is a coalition between the SRP and the CPP possible?
Yes, it is possible.
You recently wrote to Say Chhum, the CPP secretary-general, asking to meet him. Is this undertaking part of your overture strategy?
It was Mu Sochua, SRP Secretary-General, who wrote that letter asking to meet her CPP counterpart in order to facilitate our common work in the commune councils. There are 1,4000 communes where the SRP will seat at the same table as the CPP. We are thus factual partners. Whether anybody wants it or not, we are condemned to work together.
This collaboration at the local level, could it lead to a government alliance?
It would be a good indication. If we are collaborating in a manner that would benefit the country at the commune level, this would portend to a good understanding [between the two parties] at a higher level. If we are condemned to work together, of course: it all depends on the voters’ choice.
Precisely, couldn’t the CPP ally itself with another party?
Look at Germany’s case. There were several coalitions [combination] possible, but the two large parties preferred working together. Furthermore, the CPP is not monolithic. When new forces are emerging, the political landscape is reshaping. Within the CPP, there are conservative elements, and then some are more avant-gardist. We are intellectually closer to certain CPP elements. The reshaping of the political landscape is maybe contemplated by one CPP faction which, for the time being, do not dare make a move. If we form a [political] pole which is equivalent to the CPP in terms of votes, some CPP members could join us and tip the balance to our side. I have in mind a large coalition which includes some CPP elements.
Hun Sen is not wrong when he said that some people are only thinking about destroying the CPP…
When elements of the [French political] UDF [party] switch to Sarkozy [French presidential candidate, head of the French right-of-center UMP party], they are not destroying the UDF. The term “to destroy” is a Khmer Rouge rhetoric. We must build bridges, new outlines, we must move the [demarcation] lines. If Bayrou is accepted in France, it’s because he jumped over the left-right cleavage hurdle. “A majority of ideas must be offered,” as it was the fashionable thing to say ten years ago in France.
Your aspire to be like Bayrou then?
The UDF [Bayrou’s political party] and the SRP are both members of Liberal International. In fact, I would like to see Cambodia being stimulated by what Bayrou is attempting to do in France.
12 comments:
Is a coalition between the SRP and the CPP possible?
Yes, it is possible.
Thank God, lord of heaven, at
last we can see a glimpse of light
at the end of the dark tunnel.
Good luck your excellency (Sam
Rainsy)! And don't worry what
Ah gringoes's slaves think. Leave
them to me! I just love the feel
of my foot hitting the buns!
All anti-CPP movements should unite as one mighty force to stand against CPP in the 2008.
Several separate anti-CPP parties are only light weapons and they cannot destroy the CPP at all.
A Democratic Movement with the participation of all anti-CPP alliances must form a sigle opposition Party in the 2008 election. It dose not require many anti-CPP parties to run the election. If many anti-CPP parties run the election it will end up in division of votes and the seperation of force, and CPP will rule the country again and again.
It is better to have only 2 main political parties -- the opposition and the rulling party-- for the election. This can be a strategy to get the support from anti-CPP voters of up to 51%. This can also help the voters to have a choice of what party to vote for.
Black Cat
To Mr. Sam Rainsy,
Mr. Sam Rainsy, you are such a liar. You must be in a state of mind where you believe that lying several times makes people believe that you are telling the truth. In fact, people still believe that you are telling lies as you always have.
In your dictionary, uniting small parties with yours means exactly exploiting them to the fullest for your own gain and chucking them in the garbage bin after you reach your goal.
If you have a short memory, or perhaps you think that Khmer people have a short memory instead and are unable to remember anything happening in the SRP, let us remind you that a couple of months before the 2003 election campaign was due to start, SEVEN SRP parilamentarians defected to the FUNCINPEC party. And then after the official proclamation of the 2003 polling results, there were more defection cases such as those of Phy Thach, Ou Bun Long or even your own physician, Dr. Kim Vien. And you are not ashamed of calling a large alliance to defeat the CPP?
Mr. Sam Rainsy, every morning when you look into the mirror to either comb your hair or straighten your tie, please ask yourself as to whether or not you look like a unifier. We do not need a world's renowned psychologist to tell us that you are a hypocrite. We can see it and people in the streets can see it too.
For any problem arising within your party, big or small, you have adopted thus far one strategy and one strategy only. You forget it and hope it will either go away or solve itself. A few cases we have just mentioned above prove beyond any doubt that those problems never go away or solved themselves.
Therefore, there are only 2 approaches within your strategy:
1- You would not give a damn to either your members or your supporters because you have no respect for them. In other words, you look down on them. You just want them to sacrifice everything even their lives for you, but you never want to risk a single penny for them. YOU LIE, CHEAT AND STEAL.
2- YOU LACK PEOPLE SKILLS. YOU HAVE NO LEADERSHIP QUALITY!!!
Yet you unashamedly call upon small parties to join you in the push for a regime change. MR. SAM RAINSY, LET US TELL YOU THAT YOU ARE NOT A POLITICIAN, YOU ARE A DEMAGOGUE!!!
you are so pathetic annon. @12:26 PM
Okay people, enough of politic,
put the election behind us, and
let's all roll our sleves up and
get something done before the
2008's election comes, which is
not very long from now.
Be nice you idiot 10:54a.m. Not all gringo are bad. Mr. Sam Rainsey is our Hero too!
Once again, we are fighting each other before the game starts..
I don't see any lightness, but only the darkness...
True 7:40, I know Mr. Rainsy is
a good person, and I know he came
from a very respectable family, but
he's trying too hard to break world
record, that is to eliminate
corruption in a poor country.
Tell me strait: what are the chance
that his cabinet is non-corrupted?
BTW, I found a party that is named
after a person, and it is indeed
a dictator. It is Kuomintang party
of Taiwan (also known as KMT), but
they did great for Taiwan though.
Furthermore, they were defeated
by the DPP (Democratic Progressive
Party, I love the name) in the
last election ... . Just google
for KMT if you want to learn about
them.
UH! fool you 2:11am
What? Did your tongue froze up,
moron?
CPP always strategizes their policy of win win. So why not SRP?
In order to bring prosperity, peace, independence and glory to Cambodia....why SRP hesitate to work with whoever that can energize democratic power.
Good All Democratic Movements
Okay, keep on moving west into the
sunset, phoney Democrat.
Post a Comment