Dear lauk At Keo:
Thank you for your Open Letter (posted on KI Media on Jan. 2) with the kind sentiments and the request to elaborate on what I mean by “it was liberation through invasion (not ‘volunteer humanitarianism’)” in my countering the revisionist history of January 7.
Liberation through Invasion
No one could reasonably contest that the Vietnamese soldiers (accompanied by the Khmer Rouge defectors, e.g. Hun Sen, Heng Samrin, Chea Sim etc.) ended the Khmer Rouge genocide on 7 January 1979. In this regard, it was “liberation”. The presence of Vietnamese soldiers and KR defectors put an end to the KR regime on January 7. This is fact; it is not disputable. And we should all learn genuinely to say “Thank you”.
It is also not disputable that Vietnam invaded Cambodia on Christmas day in 1978 culminating in its full control of Cambodia on 7 January 1979. It was Vietnam’s third and successful incursion during the KR reign. This is fact; it is not disputable. Hence, Vietnam’s invasion led to our liberation from the Khmer Rouge.
Occupation and Vietnamization
However, to our dismay, Vietnam stayed, fulfilling its historical design of the Vietnamization of Cambodia. This short-lived liberation from the Khmer Rouge was immediately followed by Vietnamese occupation. And by definition, occupation is living under the control of a foreign power, thus the antithesis of freedom.
Either naivete or pure dishonesty leads a person or a group to revise history to say Vietnam, for humanitarian reasons, came to save Cambodia, that the invading Vietnamese forces were not soldiers but “volunteers”.
One is often presented with the false choice of ‘liberation’ or ‘invasion’. It was both: a short-lived liberation which ended the Khmer Rouge and the Vietnamese invasion which began the occupation.
Vietnam would have continued to occupy Cambodia to this day had it not been for the collapse of the Soviet Union (and Cold War), of which Vietnam was a dependent satellite, and for international pressure and sanction from the western powers and ASEAN led by Singapore.
Vietnamization is not a new concept to an honest reader of Southeast Asian history. Read any books on Cambodia of David Chandler, William Shawcross, Milton Osborne, Elizabeth Becker, Evan Gottesman, etc. (See below for a few excerpts from a very cursory recollection of my past readings and limited timeframe for a more lengthy analysis.)
This is not in dispute; what is contentious have been the geopolitical spins and the violent reactions by different parties, e.g. the March 1970 pogroms against the Vietnamese, the political motivation (to justify invasion) for the starting of the Tuol Sleng museum, the glorification of January 7 to revise history and divide society, etc.
We, Cambodians, are frustrated because the foreigners do not take our grievances seriously. The foreigners, in turn, are frustrated by our unsophisticated, and at times, violent language and action against Vietnamese people.
We, the Cambodian leaders and the people, need to be more sophisticated, knowledgeable and creative in our response to realpolitik. Many of us now respond with emotionalism, naiveté or outright disingenuous propaganda.
A History of Cambodia (2nd Ed.) by David Chandler (also in Khmer produced by Center for Khmer Studies), Chapter 7 “The Crisis of the 19th Century” has 3 sections including (i) “The Imposition of Vietnamese Control”, (ii) “The Vietnamization of Cambodia, 1835-1840”. Please read or re-read this important basic history book on Cambodia to put into context the following excerpts:
“Invaded and occupied again and again by Thai and Vietnamese forces, the kingdom also endured dynastic crises and demographic dislocations… [t]he first half of the 19th century bears some resemblance to the 1970s in terms of foreign intervention, chaos, and the sufferings of the Cambodian people.” (p. 117)
“…pursued a dangerous policy apparently aimed at preserving independence (or merely staying alive) by playing the Thai and the Vietnamese off against each other.” (p. 117)
“Each of these events marked a stage in the process of Cambodia’s diminishing ability to control its own affairs.” (p. 118)
“…in the words of the Vietnamese emperor, ‘an independent country that is the slave of two’” (p. 119).
“…as a result of Vietnamese support for an anti-Thai rebellion that erupted…” (p. 122).
Under Vietnamization of Cambodia: according to Truong Minh Giang “…After studying the situation, we have decided that Cambodian officials only know how to bribe and be bribed. Offices are sold; nobody carries out orders; everyone works for his own account.” (p. 124)
“This program was matched to the south and east by an intensive program of Vietnamization, which affected many aspects of Cambodian life.” (p. 124)
“Ming Mang’s policy of Vietnamizing Cambodia had several facets. He sought to mobilize and arm the Khmer, to colonize the region with Vietnamese, and to reform the habits of the people.” (p. 125)
“Because ethnic Khmer cause so many problems, Ming Mang sought to colonize the region with Vietnamese. He justified this policy on the grounds that ‘military convicts and ordinary prisoners, if kept in jail would prove useless. Therefore, it would be better for them to be sent to Cambodia and live among the people there, who would benefit from their teaching’” (p. 126).
“…this divide was to be savagely exploited in the 1970s, first by Lon Nol and later by Pol Pot.” (p. 127)
“In yet another memorial, Ming Mang outlined plans for replacing Cambodian chaovay sruk with Vietnamese, beginning with sruk close to Phnom Penh.” (p. 127)
"The most recent book on the Cambodian tragedy makes an important claim; that the Vietnamese occupation was essentially doomed because of events inside the country, and not very much because of the outside allegiance ranged against it. It is an extreme view, but Evan Gottesman does his best to back it up with important new research and background gained during a three-year effort to help build post-1978 Cambodia. . . . His book is a wonderful book, the best yet, at the struggles of nation building and the toll it takes, until one man finally emerges from the contenders. . . . In light of January's riots, encouraged and spurred on by certain Cambodian politicians, this account of how Hun Sen got to the top on little but sheer will and ruthlessness is timely."—Alan Dawson, Bangkok Post
Evan Gottesman's three years of field work in Cambodia with the American Bar Association Law and Democracy Project gave him an exceptionally solid base from which he launched this study of the history of the PRK and SOC regimes. His use of documents dug out of the National Archives is, as David Chandler has remarked, "masterful." His interviews with the former holders of power provide fascinating insights into the minds of key personalities seldom reached by Westerners. The epilogue is chock full of understated, reasonable, fair, and on-the-mark assessments of the reality on the ground in Cambodia today -- "Cambodian democracy often seems an abstraction...Although the methods of control have changed, the personnel governing the country remain largely the same ... (they) have accepted a new level of political discourse, but they do so only to the extent that it does not jeopardize their power." –A. Arant
When the Vietnamese army overthrew the Khmer Rouge in 1979, Cambodia was a political and economic wasteland. It had no government, no functioning economy, and no cultural institutions. Its population was decimated, its educated class nearly eliminated. For the next twelve years, Cambodia struggled to emerge from this chaos, despite a Western diplomatic and economic embargo, a Vietnamese occupation, and a civil conflict fueled by the Cold War. The first account of this turbulent era, Cambodia After the Khmer Rouge, tells how the turmoil gave shape to a nation. Drawing on previously unexplored archival sources, interviews, and secondary materials, Evan Gottesman recounts how a handful of former Khmer Rouge soldiers and officials, Vietnamese-trained revolutionary cadres, and surviving intellectuals simultaneously jostled for power and debated fundamental policy questions. Gottesman describes the formation of a Vietnamese-backed regime and its attempts to co-opt the Khmer Rouge, the relationship between the Cambodians and their Vietnamese advisors, the treatment of the ethnic Chinese, and the constant tension between patronage politics and communist ideology. He not only tracks how the current leadership rose to power in the 1980s but explains how the legacy of this period influences events in Cambodia to this day.
"Evan Gottesman’s masterful, fair-minded study lifts a curtain onto a secretive, enigmatic regime and deepens our understanding of a crucial decade of Cambodian history, as well as of Cambodian politics ever since. Drawing on previously unexploited archival sources, interviews, and secondary materials, Gottesman draws a subtle, often unnerving picture of an impoverished Marxist-Leninist dictatorship seeking an identity of its own in the context of an ongoing civil war and an often smothering alliance with Vietnam."—David Chandler, author of The Tragedy of Cambodian History: Politics, War and Revolution since 1945
I highly encourage the readers to do a Google search on “K5 Plan” and read and/or re-read these primer history books on Cambodia.
It is disingenuous to deny the Vietnamese design over Cambodia by putting a humanitarian face on the invasion; “Vietnamization” is nothing new.
Now think back to 1989 when Vietnam knows it will have to retreat from Cambodia by giving up physical occupation. An occupation Vietnam had sought for decades and achieved under the humanitarian face of saving Cambodia from the Khmer Rouge. Ten years Vietnam had complete control of Cambodia.
What do you think was Vietnam’s response when it was told it had to leave Cambodia in 1989?
“Uh, shucks! Okay!” and innocently left, completely relinquishing control of all the major influential Ministries (of Interior, of Defense, of Foreign Affairs etc.) by recalling its advisors and political strategists home to Vietnam, without another thought.
Let’s not be naïve or be disingenuous.
Theary C. SENG, former director of Center for Social Development (March 2006—July 2009), founded the Center for Justice & Reconciliation (www.cjr-cambodia.org) and is currently writing her second book, under a grant, amidst her speaking engagements.
Thank you for your Open Letter (posted on KI Media on Jan. 2) with the kind sentiments and the request to elaborate on what I mean by “it was liberation through invasion (not ‘volunteer humanitarianism’)” in my countering the revisionist history of January 7.
Liberation through Invasion
No one could reasonably contest that the Vietnamese soldiers (accompanied by the Khmer Rouge defectors, e.g. Hun Sen, Heng Samrin, Chea Sim etc.) ended the Khmer Rouge genocide on 7 January 1979. In this regard, it was “liberation”. The presence of Vietnamese soldiers and KR defectors put an end to the KR regime on January 7. This is fact; it is not disputable. And we should all learn genuinely to say “Thank you”.
It is also not disputable that Vietnam invaded Cambodia on Christmas day in 1978 culminating in its full control of Cambodia on 7 January 1979. It was Vietnam’s third and successful incursion during the KR reign. This is fact; it is not disputable. Hence, Vietnam’s invasion led to our liberation from the Khmer Rouge.
Occupation and Vietnamization
However, to our dismay, Vietnam stayed, fulfilling its historical design of the Vietnamization of Cambodia. This short-lived liberation from the Khmer Rouge was immediately followed by Vietnamese occupation. And by definition, occupation is living under the control of a foreign power, thus the antithesis of freedom.
Either naivete or pure dishonesty leads a person or a group to revise history to say Vietnam, for humanitarian reasons, came to save Cambodia, that the invading Vietnamese forces were not soldiers but “volunteers”.
One is often presented with the false choice of ‘liberation’ or ‘invasion’. It was both: a short-lived liberation which ended the Khmer Rouge and the Vietnamese invasion which began the occupation.
Vietnam would have continued to occupy Cambodia to this day had it not been for the collapse of the Soviet Union (and Cold War), of which Vietnam was a dependent satellite, and for international pressure and sanction from the western powers and ASEAN led by Singapore.
Vietnamization is not a new concept to an honest reader of Southeast Asian history. Read any books on Cambodia of David Chandler, William Shawcross, Milton Osborne, Elizabeth Becker, Evan Gottesman, etc. (See below for a few excerpts from a very cursory recollection of my past readings and limited timeframe for a more lengthy analysis.)
This is not in dispute; what is contentious have been the geopolitical spins and the violent reactions by different parties, e.g. the March 1970 pogroms against the Vietnamese, the political motivation (to justify invasion) for the starting of the Tuol Sleng museum, the glorification of January 7 to revise history and divide society, etc.
We, Cambodians, are frustrated because the foreigners do not take our grievances seriously. The foreigners, in turn, are frustrated by our unsophisticated, and at times, violent language and action against Vietnamese people.
We, the Cambodian leaders and the people, need to be more sophisticated, knowledgeable and creative in our response to realpolitik. Many of us now respond with emotionalism, naiveté or outright disingenuous propaganda.
**********
A History of Cambodia (2nd Ed.) by David Chandler (also in Khmer produced by Center for Khmer Studies), Chapter 7 “The Crisis of the 19th Century” has 3 sections including (i) “The Imposition of Vietnamese Control”, (ii) “The Vietnamization of Cambodia, 1835-1840”. Please read or re-read this important basic history book on Cambodia to put into context the following excerpts:
“Invaded and occupied again and again by Thai and Vietnamese forces, the kingdom also endured dynastic crises and demographic dislocations… [t]he first half of the 19th century bears some resemblance to the 1970s in terms of foreign intervention, chaos, and the sufferings of the Cambodian people.” (p. 117)
“…pursued a dangerous policy apparently aimed at preserving independence (or merely staying alive) by playing the Thai and the Vietnamese off against each other.” (p. 117)
“Each of these events marked a stage in the process of Cambodia’s diminishing ability to control its own affairs.” (p. 118)
“…in the words of the Vietnamese emperor, ‘an independent country that is the slave of two’” (p. 119).
“…as a result of Vietnamese support for an anti-Thai rebellion that erupted…” (p. 122).
Under Vietnamization of Cambodia: according to Truong Minh Giang “…After studying the situation, we have decided that Cambodian officials only know how to bribe and be bribed. Offices are sold; nobody carries out orders; everyone works for his own account.” (p. 124)
“This program was matched to the south and east by an intensive program of Vietnamization, which affected many aspects of Cambodian life.” (p. 124)
“Ming Mang’s policy of Vietnamizing Cambodia had several facets. He sought to mobilize and arm the Khmer, to colonize the region with Vietnamese, and to reform the habits of the people.” (p. 125)
“Because ethnic Khmer cause so many problems, Ming Mang sought to colonize the region with Vietnamese. He justified this policy on the grounds that ‘military convicts and ordinary prisoners, if kept in jail would prove useless. Therefore, it would be better for them to be sent to Cambodia and live among the people there, who would benefit from their teaching’” (p. 126).
“…this divide was to be savagely exploited in the 1970s, first by Lon Nol and later by Pol Pot.” (p. 127)
“In yet another memorial, Ming Mang outlined plans for replacing Cambodian chaovay sruk with Vietnamese, beginning with sruk close to Phnom Penh.” (p. 127)
"The most recent book on the Cambodian tragedy makes an important claim; that the Vietnamese occupation was essentially doomed because of events inside the country, and not very much because of the outside allegiance ranged against it. It is an extreme view, but Evan Gottesman does his best to back it up with important new research and background gained during a three-year effort to help build post-1978 Cambodia. . . . His book is a wonderful book, the best yet, at the struggles of nation building and the toll it takes, until one man finally emerges from the contenders. . . . In light of January's riots, encouraged and spurred on by certain Cambodian politicians, this account of how Hun Sen got to the top on little but sheer will and ruthlessness is timely."—Alan Dawson, Bangkok Post
Evan Gottesman's three years of field work in Cambodia with the American Bar Association Law and Democracy Project gave him an exceptionally solid base from which he launched this study of the history of the PRK and SOC regimes. His use of documents dug out of the National Archives is, as David Chandler has remarked, "masterful." His interviews with the former holders of power provide fascinating insights into the minds of key personalities seldom reached by Westerners. The epilogue is chock full of understated, reasonable, fair, and on-the-mark assessments of the reality on the ground in Cambodia today -- "Cambodian democracy often seems an abstraction...Although the methods of control have changed, the personnel governing the country remain largely the same ... (they) have accepted a new level of political discourse, but they do so only to the extent that it does not jeopardize their power." –A. Arant
When the Vietnamese army overthrew the Khmer Rouge in 1979, Cambodia was a political and economic wasteland. It had no government, no functioning economy, and no cultural institutions. Its population was decimated, its educated class nearly eliminated. For the next twelve years, Cambodia struggled to emerge from this chaos, despite a Western diplomatic and economic embargo, a Vietnamese occupation, and a civil conflict fueled by the Cold War. The first account of this turbulent era, Cambodia After the Khmer Rouge, tells how the turmoil gave shape to a nation. Drawing on previously unexplored archival sources, interviews, and secondary materials, Evan Gottesman recounts how a handful of former Khmer Rouge soldiers and officials, Vietnamese-trained revolutionary cadres, and surviving intellectuals simultaneously jostled for power and debated fundamental policy questions. Gottesman describes the formation of a Vietnamese-backed regime and its attempts to co-opt the Khmer Rouge, the relationship between the Cambodians and their Vietnamese advisors, the treatment of the ethnic Chinese, and the constant tension between patronage politics and communist ideology. He not only tracks how the current leadership rose to power in the 1980s but explains how the legacy of this period influences events in Cambodia to this day.
"Evan Gottesman’s masterful, fair-minded study lifts a curtain onto a secretive, enigmatic regime and deepens our understanding of a crucial decade of Cambodian history, as well as of Cambodian politics ever since. Drawing on previously unexploited archival sources, interviews, and secondary materials, Gottesman draws a subtle, often unnerving picture of an impoverished Marxist-Leninist dictatorship seeking an identity of its own in the context of an ongoing civil war and an often smothering alliance with Vietnam."—David Chandler, author of The Tragedy of Cambodian History: Politics, War and Revolution since 1945
**********
I highly encourage the readers to do a Google search on “K5 Plan” and read and/or re-read these primer history books on Cambodia.
It is disingenuous to deny the Vietnamese design over Cambodia by putting a humanitarian face on the invasion; “Vietnamization” is nothing new.
Now think back to 1989 when Vietnam knows it will have to retreat from Cambodia by giving up physical occupation. An occupation Vietnam had sought for decades and achieved under the humanitarian face of saving Cambodia from the Khmer Rouge. Ten years Vietnam had complete control of Cambodia.
What do you think was Vietnam’s response when it was told it had to leave Cambodia in 1989?
“Uh, shucks! Okay!” and innocently left, completely relinquishing control of all the major influential Ministries (of Interior, of Defense, of Foreign Affairs etc.) by recalling its advisors and political strategists home to Vietnam, without another thought.
Let’s not be naïve or be disingenuous.
Theary C. SENG, former director of Center for Social Development (March 2006—July 2009), founded the Center for Justice & Reconciliation (www.cjr-cambodia.org) and is currently writing her second book, under a grant, amidst her speaking engagements.
58 comments:
I agree with Seng Theary with a very very very small THANK YOU because I saw how Vietnameses killed Khmers before 1975 and in 1979.
It would be a very big THANK YOU if the goal of 1979 event was really to liberate Khmers from Pol Pot BUT it was not.
The Youn government have no creditbility, The CPP have no creditbility!
It was first liberation, Then Invasion. If it was fully liberation? ( have question answered first )
Why does the Hanoi still dictates to the hun sen government?
Why does, youn military still in cambodia?
Why the CPP does nothing about vietnam encroachment, and millions of illegal youn in cambodia?
Only stupid people or cpp government tries to justifies something WITHOUT approiate reasoning or justification!
justification without facts is is brainWash!
Whether we called it a liberation or invasion, a couple of questions remain:
1. Cambodia's population was systematically exterminated by the KR regime before the Vietnamese came.
Which one is the lesser of two evils: extermination or subjugation?
2. The French also left Cambodia in the 50's. Did they leave behind "hidden" forces? Did the American leave behind "hidden" forces in Cambodia after 1975?
Why are only the Vietnamese able to leave hidden forces but not other countries? Are Khmers so biased to the Vietnamese that they only see the worst from Vietnam but not other countries?
Theary - I wish someone can translate your response into Khmer and be available to all khmers in Cambodia to read. I also wish some hard head older khmers to read this too so they can learn from younger generation. Those hard head older khmers are very stubborn never want to learn new thing at all.
Viet wanted to hit DK since the quarrel and incursion over Koh Tral and others back in 1976.Viet never gave up the attempts to infiltrate to rework their agents like Samrin or So Phim in DK rank and Cambodia up to 1978.
Viet was intolerant of Pol Pot resistance and passive aggression.Pol Pot exposed Yuon plan of Cambodia annexation to CPC core leadership.
Ieng Sary and Nuon Chea can attest to that.And that's why most of DK leaders agreed to listen to and accept Pol Pot as their leader in spite of Pol Pot limited education and academia stance.
Invasion or liberation is in the eyes of beholder.
If the Vietnamese honestly helped to save Cambodia from the Khmer Rouge genocide. The Vietnamese troops must not stay and do not bring millions and millions of Vietnamese civilians into the Cambodian soil. Just look at American troops invaded Japan, Puerto Rico, Grenada, and Iraq these countries was independence and autonomy. If we needed to repay for the cost of the war we must pay them in money not land. The Vietnamese treated Hun Sen very good but it is very bad to the Khmer people by forced evictions and lost of land. Any Vietnamese businesses and investments are to helps and supports the Vietnamese living in Cambodia, the Khmer people get nothing and homeless in their owned country by the Vietnamese expansion.
The arguments on both sided of the isle are corrected and make sense .Without invasion,polpot may still control Cambodia until today.In another hand that invasion led to the occupation in which khmers don't like it.
សំណូមពរ គឺសុំឲ្យជនជាតិចំកួតហ្នឹងឈប់ឈ្លោះគ្នាតទៅទៀត។រៀបចំស្រុកទេសឲ្យមានលក្ខណះប្រជាធិបតេយ្យច្បាស់លាស់។កំក្រាញនៅក្នុងអំណាច ទាល់តែវ៉ៃក្បាលទើបចុះចេញ នោះមិនត្រូវទេ ។
3:34
You are born from the most stupid old khmer parents. You worth a worm in the vietnamese shit.
Theary, I have to disagree with you on this issue. Your response concentrate on the invasion but not on the cause surrounding it and why?
I don't understand why everyone still talks about the past... We all know what Vietman is doing toward Khmer. Read someone's book and analyze it. Does this make you an ??? Refocus your energy and time thinking what to do going forward...
4:47 AM,
if you want to move forward and except what ever youn is doing to khmer do it.
Don't come here to read the stuff and make stupid comment.
go ahead, " going forward "" get lost.
From the continuation of history can we see this thing this way:
Viet have crouched into South East Asia for centeries and never sease to stop (It swallow whole of CHAM) and big chunk of Cambodia! already)
Just in mordern history after the end of Frech era the vietnamese had kidnap Cambodia Kids for future traine to controled Cambodia (Exemple: Pen Sovan)
This show that the Vietnamese Communist has a long long time plane to take over Cambodia!
In 1975 the Vietnamese Communist create Pol Pot and help Pol Pot take over Cambodia ( Vietnamese motherfucker is the creator of the killer monster Pol Pot)
After helped and doctrinated Pol Pot to Kill millions of Cambodia, motherfucker Vietnamese creat and invasion so they can get credit as a good guy and save the live of its spies (Hor NamHong, Kiet Chorn, and the liked)
Can any body see the fucking evil of the Vietnamese motherfucker!
May lightning strike the traitors of the nations and religion!
And motherfuckers go to hell!!!!!!
អញ្ជឹងមានតែលោក ៤:៣១AM ឯងយកចំពាមកៅស៊ូ
របស់លោកឯងទៅបាញ់ក្បាលរបស់វាអោយបែកអស់
ទៅ នោះវានឹងចុះចេញអស់មឹនខាន។ នេះគ្រាន់
តែជាយោបល់ដ៏ស្ដួចស្ដើងរបស់ខ្ញំមួយប៉ុណ្ណោះ!
to say thank you is one thing, but to worship is another, and the latter is usually shows a society of ignorant. i mean, i rather worship my parents for given me birth, not viet/youn for helping to liberate cambodia from the ultra-stupid KR regime and their backward, dark age policy, etc... i mean, even a sincere thank you should know our limit. you can't keep repeating it forever to the detriment of cambodia's independence and sovereigned state and so forth. it it ignorant to thank them repeatedly to the point of given away lands, given them too much reprieve, forgiven them for pillaging and destroying khmer society, etc, etc, you name it, ok! a simple thank you is ok, but be smart and professional about it. but to be show ignorant and outdated thinking like selling out the country to viet/youn without thinking about the national interest of khmer race, etc, is a dangerous propaganda which show some individual in our society is purely stupid or ignorant, really, to say the least! my point is know the limitation, ok! be smart, clever and professional about it. of course, cambodia can become friends with viet/youn, however, not if it is detrimental to cambodia's independence, sovereigned, at the expense of cambodia over ignorance, stupidity, flattery, etc, should be examined closely, really! it's not funny when it comes to compromising our national interest over a historical, distrustful viet/youn enemies of khmer people, really. know the difference between stupid and being smart and clever about it all, ok. wake up, people! there are more to cambodia than you and i, really! think about it, really!
This so cool an enlightment. So Vietnamization of Cambodia is not even a recent phenomenon at all but simply an endless of revival of the Vietnamese past predatory policy. F*ck all ah YOUNs. Opportunistic YOUNs just love to take every advantage of any Khmer people's problems.
THE PRICE OF INDEPENDENT.
Since the first Frenchman Henri Monhot discovered Prasath Angkor Wat in the year 1876, this city of Khmer's Empire lost in the jungle, the city of no manland.At that time the khmer's population were nearly in the state of extinction.
The French colonial saved Cambodia from kingdom of Siam in the north and impire of Annam in the south.
French installed institutions,education,health for khmer administration.Most of khmers intellectuels were borned in that period.
Cambodia obtained independent from France in 1954.
The khmer leaders who ruled the country after the departered of French.
1- Norodom Sihanouk
From Saangkum Reash Neyum to collapsed.(the king always reason)
2-Lon nol
From Republic to desasted.(big corruption)
3-Pol Pot
From revolution Moha loth plosth to self destruction.(Toul Sleng had the door to go inside but no Exit, all belong to Angkar).
4- Hun Sen
From the liberation to occupation.(the law of silence).
May be Khmer's people will return to the state of extinction like before? no more liberator?
again, isolation and ignorance is the real enemies of cambodia and khmer people, think about it, really! maybe bad karma, too perhaps. what have khmer done to get bad karma, maybe it's time for cambodia to do a self-scrutinization or something! it's called enlightment, yes! wake up already!
In my opinion, it's not about Yuon's strengths but it's all about Khmer's weaknesses. If we refuse to accept the reality we will fail all the ways.
Looking around myself I see alot of debate on who was/are wrong and who was/are right. But I don't see much of whom are doing the right things they were and are talking about.
Why can't we just keep doing the right things and let other do the things that they believe is right. It's democracy, right?
There's no one in this wrong or right in this forum because it's for freedom of expression.
If those believe Youn was helping, let it be. For those who object the "liberation of 7 January 1979", let it be. You may have millions of arguments, but you cannot expect that certain people will change their mind because they also have millions of other arguments for them to believe.
KI fan
Mr. Gaffar Peang-Meth and Ms. Seng Theary are looked as couple..they should be the most matched-couple in KI-World.
Khmer
You look sexy,Thary. You are working hard, but don't forget SEX.I love you!
3:33 am
Please try to know more about Cambodian history. What did the Americans and French do when they were in Cambodia? What did the Vietnamese do? Do the Vietnamese care about Human Rights? What they care about is their benefit.......
7 January is the " between the CROCODILE in the river and the TIGER on the Land" . Cambodian people know that,Except the Stupid Hun Sen and the CPP.
The whole thing about January 7th 1979 is that on the surface, the argument can go either way: invasion or liberation. But, Western authors and Dr. Theary Seng fail to take into account the linkage between the viets and the KR at the inception of the khmer rouge movement. The fact of the matter is the KR was initiallly created by the Viet. History also tells us that the viet assisted the Khmer Rouge to topple Lon Nol regime. At some point after the fall of the Lon Nol govt the Khmer Rouge started taking order from the so-called "Angkar Leu" (high organition)to kill all khmer intellectuals--teachers, doctors, lawyers, etc. So who was angkar leu? Most people believe Angkar Leu was created by the viet and the khmer rouge cadres took order from Angka leu. If Angka Leu was truly created by the viet, then one can infer that the viets orchestrated the Khmer rouge revolution to include the invasion and they were behind the killing fields. Dr. Theary Seng stops short of acknowledging the connection between the viets and the Khmer Rouge. If one logically connects the dots, then one can make sense of the "khmer rouge" game. Why do you think the viets befriend themselves with the khmer rouge at the outset? Wasn't it part of the game? Think about this scenario: If an arsonist started a fire at your house without you knowing it and he or she shows up at your house to help put out the fire, you would probably thanks him or her but you had no idea that he or she was the one who started the fire.
9:39
Excellent comment, I couldn't of said any better. That's one thing that I don't get and understand when I read Ms. Theary Seng's column, she doesn't state the fact that the Khmer Rouge was backed up by Communist China and Viet/Hanoi. Pol Pot did not have many soldiers, the majority of the Khmer Cadre were VietCongs dressed as Khmer Rouge soldiers and many of them infiltrated various ranks of the Khmer Rouge Regime. The execution of millions of Khmer were orchestrated by the Viet/Hanoi. If you listen to Khieu Samphan's interview, he stated that he and the rest of the top leaders did not know anything about the mass execution. They were all worried about their own safety and the safety of Norodom Sihanouk, who was under house arrest. The Viet/Hanoi were also out to kill the top Khmer Rouge leaders as well as the entire Khmer population. The Viet/Hanoi wanted to kill us off, starting with all the intellectuals, the ones that would be able to catch on to their little scheme. They were just planning to brainwash all the others and bring Vietnamese people to live in Cambodia.
Knowing this, I cannot thank the Viets for liberating us, because they did not. They killed millions of Khmer people, and when Pol Pot refused to take their orders, they got rid of him by officially invading Cambodia. I can't technically call it an invasion because the Viet/Hanoi were already here in 1975, when the Khmer Rouge took over Cambodia from Lon Nol's government. When all of the cities in Cambodia were evacuated in 1975, Vietnam came in and began looting all of the goods out of Cambodia. Cars, appliances, Windows, furniture, etc...were shipped off to Vietnam. Remember the Vietnam war has just ended and they needed these material items to rebuild their own country.
I see alot of angry people on this board. Take the whole country, vietco.
I hate Vietnam, because they have murdered millions of Khmer people during the Pol Pot Regime and hundreds of thousands of Khmer Krom people in Kampuchea Krom. They are still killing the livelihood of our people in Cambodia by installing a Viet/Hanoi puppet regime that runs the country like a slave ship. Viet/Hanoi continues to oppress and erradicate Khmer Krom people. We are so unlucky to have such an evil, cruel neighbor such as Vietnam! I can never forgive or trust them and will never respect them, because they are a cold killing machine, with no regard for Khmer life.
3:33
Please realize that the Vietnamese were the master mind behind Pol Pot's killing Machine. They just fooled you and millions of other people. The Killing Field was committed by Viet/Hanoi.
Yes the French and the Americans left without leaving any hidden forces behind. However the Vietnamese, never left, they don't play fair like the other countries. They only pretended to leave. They made sure that they installed a Cambodian government that would work for them in realizing the Vietnamization of Cambodia. They shipped so many Vietnamese people to come and live in Cambodia. Sadly they will slowly take over Cambodia, because we have a crooked government that works for Vietnam and no Cambodians are not biased towards Vietnam, Vietnam has worked really hard over the centuries to earn our much deserved hatred and disgust for them. They learned from their former colonizer, Communist China. They are both evil countries, no regards for human rights, just only after their own national interest!
I just wanted to comment that when the French Colonized Cambodia, they did not open any schools for Khmer people. They didn't care about our growth or our well being as a country, Education wasn't a concern. They only cared about what was good for France. Very few schools were opened in Cambodia, Universities didn't exist when the French were in control. Prince Norodom Sihanouk was the one who started opening up many schools and Universities when he took over and gained independence for Cambodia in 1949. Plus they favored Vietnam, because the Yuons were aggressive and schemed very well. In the 1800's France put Vietnamese officials in charge to rule over Kampuchea Krom and they illegally ceded it to Vietnam in 1949.
I have seen and read those first few paragraphs before, but not written by you. But its okay, thanks for re-addressing these topics again.
Dear friend @ 9:39 AM,
Brief historical facts and reasonable arguments.
thank you and thank you everyone.
One confused "anekchon" lawyer!!!
This should be read by all Khmers. Very good analysis.
Chandler misuses the word "Vietnamization" as it is typically used by historians and political scientists. It is used to refer to the period of the American involvement in Viet Nam when they US forces were attempting to turn over the major military operations and political responsibilities of the war to the South Vietnamese army, thus reducing the US`role there. Of course, it did not happen because the South was not up to the task and were overwhelmed by the North. Just a point I wanted to make to avoid confusion of this term.
8:37 AM,
Dr. Peang has a very beautiful and educated Khmer wife. Don't joke around. Have some respect, dude.
Mr. 3:33 AM: Quote"
2. The French also left Cambodia in the 50's. Did they leave behind "hidden" forces? Did the American leave behind "hidden" forces in Cambodia after 1975?
Why are only the Vietnamese able to leave hidden forces but not other countries? Are Khmers so biased to the Vietnamese that they only see the worst from Vietnam but not other countries?"
I wonder if the reader had a chance to reflect or whether he even knows how to reflect at anything.
No insult, but how can you compare Viet to French and American force and asked the obvious question that everyone have the answer too "Did the American leave behind "hidden" forces in Cambodia after 1975?"
When you look at a French or American face you can't tell that they're not Vietnamese or Cambodian? Are you that blind?
Another thing to consider was the French and American emperialism was a just a brief hype in history of European expansion and supremacy. It was just convenient economically for a short time, it could never last because of the distance.
But if you look at Khmer and Viet vs Khmer and Thai, this is an ongoing aggression for almost a thousand year, to systematically destroy Khmer nationhood and thereby taking our natural resources.
Like Ms. Theary said, this is nothing new.
If you have not waken up yet, please wake up now. I a Khmer Krom am appealing you Khmer Kandal to not ignore history and suffer the same fate due to your blind gratitude.
Know that the robber and the savior can be one and the same!
11:27 am,
I read and I completely disagree with Theary Seng.
Theary Seng would you contest with below site?
http://khmer-heroes.blogspot.com
Tgheary got i accurate, generally. The KR was created out of the Viets, but the KR kicked the viets out around 1972 when the former was strong enough. But the Viets still allowed chinese weapons to pass through ho chi minh trail, as they always saw indochina as a single battlefield. But the KR was so nationalistic, they refused to let the viets dominate them like before. the 1975 victory was obtained at their own effort, not due to viet, no viets involved in the liberation of phnom penh ( but don't tell this to Khmer Krom people).
The people behind the killings was Pol Pot, Nuon Chea, Son Sen, a few more. Just like Hun Sen, these people are good at denying the truth. The killings wee done based on long held historial hatred of class in Khmer society- too much oppression, corruption, decadence in our society, revenge was so strong and pervasive. Many viets were also killed.
If we want to cure our society, we must be serious in accepting some truth. All KR jails were run by the Khmer rouge - khmer people. Yes, hisotrically, the viets were involved in the formation of the khmer communist movement, but we must be careful as how far we can put the blame on the viets.
If we study our society now, all the factors leading to killings, revolution are still existing now as it was then. we hate our own khmer people more than foreigners. We rather let the viets illegal migrants in, but deported tim sakhan, jailed the rightful owners of the farm lands, stripped off immunity of parliamentarians who dare state the truth, stand up to rogue rulers. The list goes on.
I am not saying the viets had no hands in our tragedy, but we khmer must bear alot too. By avoiding the truth, our society will never be healed and reconciliation will be far away.
Tgheary got i accurate, generally. The KR was created out of the Viets, but the KR kicked the viets out around 1972 when the former was strong enough. But the Viets still allowed chinese weapons to pass through ho chi minh trail, as they always saw indochina as a single battlefield. But the KR was so nationalistic, they refused to let the viets dominate them like before. the 1975 victory was obtained at their own effort, not due to viet, no viets involved in the liberation of phnom penh ( but don't tell this to Khmer Krom people).
The people behind the killings was Pol Pot, Nuon Chea, Son Sen, a few more. Just like Hun Sen, these people are good at denying the truth. The killings wee done based on long held historial hatred of class in Khmer society- too much oppression, corruption, decadence in our society, revenge was so strong and pervasive. Many viets were also killed.
If we want to cure our society, we must be serious in accepting some truth. All KR jails were run by the Khmer rouge - khmer people. Yes, hisotrically, the viets were involved in the formation of the khmer communist movement, but we must be careful as how far we can put the blame on the viets.
If we study our society now, all the factors leading to killings, revolution are still existing now as it was then. we hate our own khmer people more than foreigners. We rather let the viets illegal migrants in, but deported tim sakhan, jailed the rightful owners of the farm lands, stripped off immunity of parliamentarians who dare state the truth, stand up to rogue rulers. The list goes on.
I am not saying the viets had no hands in our tragedy, but we khmer must bear alot too. By avoiding the truth, our society will never be healed and reconciliation will be far away.
12:35 PM,
your comments confused me. or perhaps, I don't know much.
"liberation through invasion", what can you not understand?
4:47 AM,
If you have shit stain on your ass, would you still moving forward?
I bet she would say yes.
Youn's ulterior motive was invasion, pure and simple. There was/is no such thing as liberation of the Khmer people from the jaw of death under Pol Pot or any regime for that matter in their mantra. It was a perfect opportune time of centuries that they could invade Cambodia while the world and above all some Khmer people saw it as a liberation. There remain a few who still see it as a liberation. Now there is a word game that those few are playing. They call it "liberation through invasion". It is for the convenience and ignorance to a great extend for some individuals.
I find this clarification is rather LAME. It is a half hearted attempt due to the lack of knowledge and thinking depths. It is very likely that this Theary Seng has her own ulterior motives for her own self. She can not speak for the masses.
Live Theary Seng, do you know who behind the killing fields from the year 1975 to the year 1979 and from the year 1979 to around 1992, after I telling you please you tell other nations know, from 1975 to 1979 during Khmer Rouge / Pol Pot regime under A cruel Vampire Yuonese / Vietnamese hidden faces behind the killing fields, and from 1979 to 1992 Cambodians Victims dies by Hun Sen Yuonese / Vietnamese slaver send them to the mine fields in border with Cambodia & A cruel Siam, from the year 1975 to 1979 during Khmer Rouge / Pol Pot regime one of my Cousin brother he is work for A Vampire Yuonese secret agent and after A Vampire used him and killed him in 1977 narby 1978, on times my cousin know so late and during Khmer Rouge / Pol Pot regime I seen the Khmer Rouge armies wear back clothes and spoken the Yuonese / Vietnamese language as I am understanding some Yuonese language, you should know that event our Khmer poor education still not so stupid kill our own nation ( is true )? but some out Khmer / Cambodians believing that our Khmer was been killed own nation during Khmer Rouge / Pol Pot regime from 1975 to 1979, if you live nearby A Yuonese / Vietnamese group or the area they live and you will know how A Vampire Yuonese playing drama to out Khmer, Ms:Theary Seng, if you want to know more more information please contacting me through my postal address below is: CAMBODIAN VICTIM FROM 1975 TO 1979 DURING KHMER ROUGE / POL POT REGIMES UNDER A CRUEL VAMPIRE YUONESE / VIETNAMESE HIDDEN FACES BEHIND THE KILLING FIELDS, POST OFFICE BOX-178, SPRINGVALE VICTORIA 3171 AUSTRALIA, this is my friend postal address, but you can contact through to this postal adddress as I have asked my friend and he agree let me use that postal address, CAMBODIAN VICTIM FROM 1975 TO 1979 DURING KHMER ROUGE / POL POT REGIMES UNDER A CRUEL VAMPIRE YUONESE / VIETNAMESE HIDDEN FACES BEHIND THE KILLING FIELDS,
I don't blame Vietnam. One aspect that Vietnamese are better than Cambodian: They have good networks like many other nations such as Chinese, Korean, Indian etc. One clear example from High School through College, where I had a few friends of Vietnamese students taught each other and passed old exams to one another. They helped each other to suceed in school. Khmer's mentality is opposite. We are always look down each other. If he/she have better education, they look down an uneducated one. If they are rich, they look down the poor. If she is pretty and smart, she dates white guy. Vietnamese like other nations, love each other. They speak Vietnamese at home and help each other business. If you open a Phnom Penh noodle house, how many Vietnamese come to eat at your place? none. I saw some Khmer people go eat at PHo place. Well, let put it to simple phrase: Vietnamese help each other. Khmer criticize each other. What theary wrote is all past history. she should concentrates on helping khmer communities in US. Khmer rouge existed 35 years ago, and Vietnamese occupation existed 30 years ago. Move on with our lives. pick a better topic.
Cpp supporter....
10:49,
I agreed with you. France never like Cambodia from the beginging. For 90 years of coloinization, how many institutions have they built for Cambodia? only primary schools and a few roads. Even Somdach Chhoun Nath had to travel to Hanoi for Sanskrit Class with a french scholar. If the french helped build institions like they did in Vietnam and other countries they colonized, Cambodia would be much better. French indeed look down at Khmer race. They considered us a "weak race". You have to know that french love women and wine. They fit perfectly with Vietnamese women. They waged many wars with British, but never won. "Impossible ne pas Francaise". Give me a break, FROG.
9;23pm.
No Khmer race or chen or youn race.
People born in Cambodia called Khmers and people born in China called chen and people born in Vietnam called youn.
No Khmers are dumb, but the system in Cambodia they adopted is dumb, but not the people. Not Muslim women are shy but the system of Muslims makes them cover their faces and their whole bodies.
Not youn are smart but the system they adopted is to sell pussies for the countries, to help each others to cheat in classes make them finsih school and get jobs and make money. Fin
11:15 pm,
You are far from the truth on youns cheating in school. I saw with my own eyes in high school and then in university. Copying each other homework, sharing test results and plagiarizing were the names of their game. Many of times, they got caught and kicked out of the university. They could never return even after the appeal.
Just to add a bit on the youn cheating part. They are certainly not any smarter than anybody or Khmer in particular.
^^^^^^ In 11:41 PM, I meant to say "You are NOT far from the truth...." not otherwise.
To a certain extend, I do agree with your statement. However, I am outraged when you point out all the sources that contributed to the withdrawal of Viet forces from Cambodia but failed to mention the most Important element of all - the Khmer resistant fighters who sacrified everything for Cambodia and many of them are homeless and beg for a living on the streets of major city today. Without these brave freedom fighters ( FUNCINPEC, KPNLF or even the Khmer Rough), no outside forces could change the course of Viet invasion - perhaps all Khmer people live inside a country would be speaking and writing Viet by now.
Thank you for speaking out.
Khmer K
11:41,
oh, I thought I am the only one who witness the cheating of viets students in school. I knew one viet guy who finished the top score in high school failed first term and drop off school at university, because of cheating.
article of theary is too ambiguous and confusing that it will finish by confusing herself
or theary seng afraid to stand her belief or she has hidden agenda. am interest to know.
if theary seng want the last khmers thank to yuons; theary seng is not different from any khmer rouge or those she criticize
"The yuons are certainly not any smarter than anybody or Khmer in particular"
Then how do we explain that Khmers have been losing grounds to the yuons for centuries?
If Khmers are just as smart, shouldn't we figure out a way to stop them already?
Are we being honest with ourselves or just being fools here?
Honest Khmer
^^^^ hey 1:25 am, the simple fact that you ask this very question reflects badly on yourself as an individual. Go back and read the last five posts again especially pay close attention to the 11:15 PM post. Above posts merely point to the individual basis who happens to belong to a differ ethnicity namely youn, Khmer, and any others in general in school.
If you continue to deface yourself and have inferior complex, when will you individually wrestle out of the bind that we are in now as a group of people? I am not saying this to ignore the reality.
Ms. Seng Theary is right - we live in a upside down word where black is call white and what is white is call black. Some comments are so disproportionate that it is hard to take seriously and shameful.
Just want to add a piece of information: OK. Most people agree that the Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia stop the genocide of Cambodia, but at the same time, the Vietnamese also started another genocide on the Cambodians as well. Remember the K5 program and anti-international relief programs? In addition, darker-skinned Khmer folks were harrassed and mistreated by the light-skinned Vietnamese troops who thought they were "The Khmer Rouge". Lol. The Viets thought that the Khmer Rouge were actually "Red Skinned" People and "Dark-skinned" People. Du Ma Mey ah Nherng.
Post a Comment