| Written by Sophan Seng | |
| Tuesday, 31 March 2009 From The Phnom Penh Post | |
Dear Editor,The benefits to be had from a fair court are more important than the thought of social instability. The participation from all political leaders and the people can enhance the achievements of the court. The benefits of thinking outside the box in relation to the tribunal are more beautiful and elegant than just assigning blame and pointing fingers. I was deeply impressed by Noam Chomsky’s perspectives on political dissent ["Tribunal ignoring US role, says Chomsky", The Phnom Penh Post, March 27, 2009]. In the US, Chomsky is well-known for his radical ideas about US foreign policy. He is a renowned linguist, but what made him a vital political commentator was his strong opposition to the Vietnam War. Chomsky saw nothing wrong with the North Vietnamese struggle and nothing wrong with the Vietnamese troops invading Cambodia to topple the Khmer Rouge. In the interview, Chomsky addresses US support for the Khmer Rouge. I don’t intend to challenge Chomsky on his sharp criticism of the US and the Khmer Rouge tribunal. It is not simply a matter of pointing fingers and assigning blame, as depicted in the amusing “Sacravatoons No 1348 ["Point the finger", at www.sacrava.blogspot.com] The Khmer Rouge tribunal has a more fundamental meaning than just pointing fingers at each other. The central goals of this tribunal are the achievement of national healing, national reconciliation, a national collective consciousness, national unity, the strengthening of Cambodia’s judicial system and the elimination of impunity, among others. In addition to these expected outcomes, the tribunal will also help Cambodia become a “full and progressive sovereign state”. Political thinker Charles Tilly has argued that “war makes a state” in the context of European state-making. If this theory is applied to Cambodia, then the agony endured by the Cambodian people in past wars and under the brutal reign of the Khmer Rouge can enlighten all Cambodian people and their political leaders. As the Khmer proverb says: “After the dark sky, the bright moon and stars will shine”. Will the Khmer Rouge tribunal yield such fruit?
The answer wholly depends on Cambodian political leaders, Cambodian people and their national collective consciousness. If they see the Khmer Rouge tribunal simply as part of a political game, the “full and progressive sovereign state” of Cambodia might disappear. Moreover, if the Cambodian people and their collective consciousness view the tribunal simply as punishment for a handful of perpetrators, the “full and progressive sovereign state” of Cambodia might also disappear. It should be noted that the Khmer Rouge tribunal, the independence of the court, and the expansion of the number of defendants - including current political leaders - will enrich the tribunal, not distort the court or cause instability in Cambodia at all. The benefits to be had from a fair court are more important than the thought of social instability. The participation from all political leaders and the people can enhance the achievements of the court. The benefits of thinking outside the box in relation to the tribunal are more beautiful and elegant than just assigning blame and pointing fingers. Sophan Seng
|
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
The tribunal should not be about pointing fingers
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
20 comments:
I am pointing my finger at HUN SEN.
He is the one that is very dangerous to Cambodia. If we can't stop this guy before he strike that would be a plus to Cambodia.
Listen to his comments was hinting us that he wants war. So he the one to watch out. Cause right now he holds absolute power. He can cause war.
Trial all those fools. Especially HUN SEN, so he can't keep threat us every day. We don't want war.
Remove HUN SEN from Power ASAP!!!!
Non non non HS n'est qu'un produit de samdach Ta qui a apllaudit quand les roquettes sont tombes sur PPENH et qui a ameuté les ivtognes KR et ses jeunes drogués khmers qui a demandé de l'aide des vietnamiens qui a fait le sourd et resté aveugle devant les rapports alarmants de la présences des VIetcongs établis par le patriotiste Sirimatak qui a souflé la haine et la vengeance depuis Pékin aà partir de 1970 Est ce que les khmers à cette période ont ils tous PRO AMERICAINS QUI QUI QUI il faut démasquer le coupable C'est facile d'accuser l'impérialismes US et qui a facilité les transports d"armement pour les Vietcongs et qui a cédé les terres khmers et qui a pleuré devant le cercueil de HO CHI MINH QUI QUI Duch HS ne sont que des comparses des sans grades surtout duch
Moronic Khmer mind still persists like the two above.
I side with Chomsky for criticizing this tribunal because of its so-called international community sanction attempt to bring justice. My Ass. These justice seekers right now were the ones that helped the Khmer Rouge following 1979'f collapse of the regime because it was in their best political interest. Remember that? Go read and watch Cambodia the Betrayal.
I also support CHomsky's approval of Vietnamese invading of Cambodia because the Khmer Rouge were self-murdering their own people systematically and they attacked the Vietnamese first trying to be badass like all these moronic blindly led extreme nationalist racist asshole Khmer on here.
Learn the reality of things, morons. Khmer Krom and Khmer Surin are gone. They won't be back. The sooner you realize this is a dream, the sooner you can get your ass off of it and get your act together if you wanna do actual help to the country.
p.s. I just wanna laugh all the stupid Khmer overseas who condemned Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia. WIthout them invading and kicking out the Khmer Rouge, would you be alive to talk about it so selfishly and ungratefully from you air conditioned homes today?
yes, for once, set a good example by taking full responsibility for their action! did you know that blaming others for something wrong is so immature, to say the least! stop acting like little children, we are all adult here!
9:52 PM,
Not all Khmer overseas condemned Vietnam invasion. The opinions of those who're being self-righteous online or by some dysfunctional sitcom Khmers are not valid to be presented.
Vietnam invasion was great in one chapter we Khmers should be all grateful for that, but the plan of Phan Bội Châu to Ho Chi Minh didn't just start yesterday.
Phan Bội Châu visited Japan in 1905and visited Thaialnd in 1908 to settle a base resistance to oust France from Indochina was not an accident. He asked helps from Japan and Thaialnd to free Indochina from France in exchange the temporary control Indochina by Japan and the partition of Cambodia between Vietnam and Thailand were not accident either.
I also knew there're some Vietnamese who were born in Vietnam have carried Khmer ID (Khmer names) working for some organizations in Europe, and many Khmer Generals I knew have houses in Vietnam and plenty of US Dollars to spend.
The clash of the two generations between old and the young today is the disagreement between them.
No laughing matter, the old generation is running short, it has to change its old conventional wisdom to catch up with this globally competitive.
Btw: This KRT is a Show if you ask me.
Vietnam invasion has been banned by the major vote in the UN, why some of us here still see Vietnam's invasion is right?
If a Khmer man agrees that Vietnam invasion is right, he/she should go to live in VN rather than shouting from Cambodia land.
In reality, VN has planned to annex Cambodia long time ago. Their invasion of Khmer land was not intending to free Cambodia, but to install their puppet for their long term domination.
Use your brain again!
2:55 AM
You don't have to go live in Vietnam just because you see Vietnamese invasion as a positive thing for Khmer race. Only ignorant racist Khmer that let ethnic racism be the barrier between them and the truth.
Vietnam invaded Cambodia. What did Cambodian people lose? Maybe here and there but nothing compared to the million of lives saved and the Khmer cultures. If Vietnam didn't invade, how many of you so high and mighty self-proclaimed Khmer warriors would be here to express your opinions so freely?
Despite whatever the intention of the invasion was, Vietnam consequentially saved Khmer people and culture from extinction. If you have been through the Khmer Rouge time, you would be a cynic or a legally retarded person to disagree with that.
Just by accepting the fact that Vietnam did save Khmer's ass doesn't mean I am worshiping them. I am simply able to come to term with what actually happened, unlike some people.
There are many Khmer who turned themselves into cynics just because they can't accept history for reality's sake.
I apologize to generalize Khmer overseas as being ignorant of that. I know that there are Khmer overseas who can see what is what and not have extreme ethnic racism blind them from the truth. Many of those Khmer I'm talking about are from Canada. Many of whom believe in the progress and the current Khmer government but afraid to openly say so. That's what I hear from my uncle in Canada. However, that is changing because many of them are starting to voice their beliefs and opinions over those cynical bunch. If you're from Canada, you know what I'm talking about exactly.
3:20AM
Khmer has experienced badly about the accusing of "political involvement" or "racism" when Cambodians express their opposite view to the government. Current government has learned well how to label the opposite dissents. They have learned well from the Khmer Rouge.
The idea of disfavoring the presence of VN in Cambodia land and their invasion is not linked to racism or disrespectful to the dignity of Vietnamese people at all. You should not overstate about that.
Simple things for you to consider:
1. The UNs as well as the international communities have condemned VN of their invasion in Cambodia and they have to withdraw all troops. So, this decision is wrong for you? Or this decision is racist to VN?
2. For the sake of Khmer and future Khmer, do we favor foreign invasion in our land? Or do we favor brutality happens in our land? The answer is both of them are piss!
3. What is your central productive debate for Cambodia? Or your central debate is to divert the Cambodian people who has less understanding about the situation, the internal laws, the brutality, and the sentiment of Cambodians?
Learn more and use your brain before throwing something unproductive like this.
But what we have seen now, Hun Sen government has paid much attention to VN, so does this evidence not show the VN's long term intention to keep their status quo in Cambodia or what? VN's domination over Cambodia is still ongoing or not?
2:55 AM and 4:08 AM,
My post is 2:47 AM. I signed my name Free Spy.
After I read your reply I don't believe you understood my comments.
Your words are your own bombs, so fix it and use your brain before you write a reply.
Getting too excited doesn't help.
Ask me what I meant but don't change my word from great to right.
More corrupt degrees like Sophan Seng won't help Cambodia to become a competitive nation with other develop and competitive nations in the world.
Degrees like this only help to create more corruption over the already so rotten in Cambodia.
Many Khmers before Sophan Seng earned PhD in Political Science at oversea Univ., but they couldn't do much to help the country. Not many jobs available for them if they don't have Computer skill to do the job. Yes Sophan Seng i sgoing to have a tough time to earn the living with that no use degree. May be Sophan Seng can join Theary Seng with a good income in Cambodia. By the time the ECCC runs out of cash at least each has a few hundred thousand dollars in their bank account. Then go to the next one.
I am wondering "sake of the degree" is for money or for fame or for goodness or for what?
But criticizing his academic degree with that idea reflecting only the persons who always think and practice in that way.
4:08 AM
You tell other to go back and learn more but you seem to be the one that just doesn't read thoroughly or comprehend fully what my comment meant.
Can you quote when in my comments on this article did I mention or even refer to any welcoming of Vietnamese invasion? You yourself need to learn stop putting words in people's mouth and need to learn to listen to what other are saying, not just listen but hearing only what you want to hear because it seems whatever I wrote down doesn't get through your ear canal at all.
You still think I am saying I welcome Vietnamese invasion because you are so open-minded that you only pick up from my comment what you want to hear. Maybe, something you should learn is to not jump into a discussion with a preconceived mindset.
If you read my comment carefully you would get that I said Vietnam invaded Cambodia but whatever their intention, they saved our asses. Now accept that fact or not, regardless of any of your nationalistic ego. The history has it Vietnam invaded Cambodia. Vietnam drove out the autogenocidal Khmer Rouge. Those are historical accounts.
I am not trying to give credits to Vietnam because their intention was something different from saving Khmer but I am grateful as a normal human being would, despite their intention, of them because they did kick out the Khmer Rouge from power and thus Khmer people were saved from the Khmer Rouge's murdering campaign.
Now, can you comprehend the above?
Let me put it in an analogy term what I am saying.
You are standing waiting to cross the street on a curb. A drunk driver is driving recklessly on the road and is going to hit you. By the time you realize this approaching car, it is too close already for you to escape. You are bound to get hit for sure. A biker out of nowhere hits you from behind before the car hits you and knocks you out of the way of the car. You are alive with a few bruises.
The biker didn't have the intention of saving your life. His knocking you out of the way of the car was not intentional at all. But, he did save your life, didn't he?
Would you be mad at the biker or be a decent human being and thank this guy for saving your life even if it was unintentional of him?
My point in understanding and appreciating the Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia is the same as the analogy above. They didn't invade to save Khmer but they did. Can you get that notion? You wouldn't go cuss and beat the shit out of the biker that just unintentionally saved your life, would you? Get it?
As for appearing to be a victim of double standard in racism. I am a Khmer person and I lived in Cambodia and in the US so I can tell from personally experience that Khmer are very racist toward the Vietnamese. Don't try to justify that using the old I'm a victim technique. Now, I am no Vietnamese so I don't know if they are racist toward us but from my experience as Khmer, I know for a fact that Khmer are racist toward the Vietnamese.
5:49AM
Comparing like a biker and the drunk driver is not realistic to the situation, particularly political situation happened between Cambodia and Vietnam. If you spend your time a little to read the history of Cambodia and Vietnam relationship from the past to the period of brutality, you will learn new thing and perceive some complex things better than just analogy such a simple one.
Every scholar and historian concluded that VN created Pol Pot party, and VN created CPP. The designer painted this story. The KR and CPP are the two outstanding actors in this play. Take your time to watch the movie called "Resident Evils". You will realize the concept of the play writer and the play actors. Cambodian people through these two outstanding groups are the actors. Actors can only act, cannot rewrite the play?
Your simple assumption is like that: you are the actor, you can not upgrade yourself to rewrite the play. Cambodia will loss its race if it cannot update to rewrite the play. More we act, more we loss to the play writer.
Regarding RACISM. We don't have empirical study that Khmers are racist towards VN. First, many researchers assumed that KR is racist toward Vietnamese people. But they found out that many Vietnamese still survived from the KR. If we compare the number of death, we can see that KR's cadres and their families/members died more than other groups including Buddhist monks, Muslims, minority, Vietnamese, Chines etc.
So, be in empirical analysis...don't use your own emotion to judge others.
Khmers are not racist at all. Part of their extreme opinions are caused by the political leaders and political environment that have been using violent political rhetoric to contend their opponents. Khmer people are easy out going, honest, smiling and kind...etc But the culture of violence-prone from their leaders make them worse.
You should spend more time to study general Khmer characteristic.
6:33 AM
"Khmers are not racist at all. Part of their extreme opinions are caused by the political leaders and political environment that have been using violent political rhetoric to contend their opponents."
No matter what your motive is. Justification for racism is all the same. Worthless.
The white people justify slavery by saying black people are subhuman. Even scientific studies conducted by the white men support his ideology of white superiority. Does that justify slavery? You make the call.
As for Khmer who are subjected to your so-called violent political landscape, your action defines who you are. Your justification for racism among Khmer are caused by a system of self-defense? The white felt like they were defending themselves too to keep black enslaved.
The KKK justifies their racism as a self-defense against the extinction of white race. Does their justification make them not a racist? They are just defending themselves, right?
You and other people who justify your hatred by saying you're defending yourself from unfavorable political environment?
You say you're not racist but just reacting to events. Maybe you should consider this. Your unfavorable events make you defensive and a racist in the process.
Like I said, I am Khmer and Khmer are just like other race. There are nice and bad ones. There are racist Khmer and there are open-minded Khmer. Don't try to cover up the racism we have. The way to solve problem isn't to justify it using bogus excuses but to face it and work from there.
A person can be a loving open-minded one to some people but not so to others. Khmer are no exception. Khmer could be so nice and welcoming to our own kind and say white people but not so much to black huh? My uncle didn't want to buy a house because it was located next to a black family. Is his action a defense for his safety or his concern for his safety brings out racism from him?
I am no perfect person so I am also fallible to all these problems. But, at least, according to me, I see that. Some people become instantly blind when it is their mistakes.
7:54AM,
Humans are all racist to some extent, just that some don't show like some do.
You can argue about what racism means, but surely not that it means absolutely nothing.
Not every French colonist identified himself as White Supremacy, or not every Vietnamese identidied himself as the invader, or not every Khmer identified himself as the bad Buddhist.
We use the English language as a form of our communication, but not every critic understand ours.
7:54AM
Now you are dragging to the big topic of racism. So, now you get that the problem of self-defending is racist or not? Khmers from the past to present are the victim. So, when the victim reacted to the perpetrator, it is racist or not? Between Khmer and Vietnam, which one is the perpetrator and which one is the victim.
I don't want to detail this problematic issue.
But to have empirical study about RACISM in Cambodia would be worthier.
In America, there were handful evidence of racism because the white enslaved the black, traded the black, and pissed out the black for centuries. Nazi Hitler targeted the Jews and tended to extinct them.
How about Khmers? How about Khmer Rouge regime that is known for its most brutality? Did KR kill all other race like Hitler? Or everyone single family of Cambodia also lost their relative?
So, get into your mind now. Khmers in empirical study since the past to present, we don't have evidence that Khmers are racist at all? We heard that Khmers are racist from Vietnam part only?
Vietnam labeled Khmers as racist,and Hun Sen followed that, and you also follow that too?
Um, both the Khmer Republic and Democratic Kampuchea purposefully killed a lot of Vietnamese civilians. Not that I defend Vietnam, or Thailand for that matter, but the idea that Cambodia has also been a victim is a result of nationalist education, or distorted sense of diaspora. How do you think Khmer Empire got to be an empire in the first place if Khmers were always victims?
So, when you link to the very long time of history of Khmer Empire about its victim or perpetrator, it has two premises:
1. Vietnam and Thailand were not born in that time.
2. So, what your productive debate linking to present?
Our central debate now is abut Khmers are racist to Vietnamese or not?
What else do you want to make our debate precise?
Vietnam also killed many Khmers and Khmer Krom.
Thailand also killed many Khmers at the camp.
We have all the evidence to study about this killing. But it seems not in case of racism. It was just a trajectory of political hatred.
Post a Comment