Monday, November 08, 2010

Nobel Peace Prize 1991: Aung San Suu Kyi

Today (Sunday, Nov. 7), the military junta in Burma held an election in 20 years to cement its continuing military rule behind a civilian façade. The International Herald Tribune writes: “The appearance of electoral legitimacy and civilian institutions may make it easier for Myanmar’s neighbors to embrace what has been a pariah, but it was unlikely by itself to ease a policy of isolation and economic sanctions among Western nations. Both President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton condemned the election Sunday.” It is time the International Criminal Court issues arrest warrants for General Than Shwe and his men for crimes against humanity in the same manner it has issued an arrest warrant for the warlords of the Lord’s Resistance Army in northern Uganda. We are all Aung San Suu Kyis. We are all Sam Rainsys. United we stand for justice. United we stand for peace. United we stand for reconciliation. Here, again, the emphasis is mine.

- Theary C. Seng, Phnom Penh, 7 Nov. 2010
Theary Seng for Facing Genocide screening at International Rome Film Festival (Italy, 2 Nov. 2010)


Justice is not neutral. Justice stands on the side of the peacemakers, the democrats, the oppressed, the homeless, the victims of human rights abuse. Join me in posting this Sam Rainsy Justice Photo on your website, your Facebook, yourTuk-tuk, your car windshield etc. to proclaim loudly NO! to impunity! NO! to the corrupt judiciary! NO! to violence! NO! to delusional, destructive, lunatic leadership!
My two heroes together in Rangoon, Burma in 1996.


Peace vigil in front of Burmese Embassy in Phnom Penh, 2007.
. . . . . . 
Nobel Peace Prize 1991: Aung San Suu Kyi

Award Ceremony Speech: Presentation by Francis Sejersted,
Chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee

Your Majesties, Your Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,

We are assembled here today to honor Aung San Suu Kyi for her outstanding work for democracy and human rights, and to present to her the Nobel Peace Prize for 1991. The occasion gives rise to many and partly conflicting emotions. The Peace Prize Laureate is unable to be here herself. The great work we are acknowledging has yet to be concluded. She is still fighting the good fight. Her courage and commitment find her a prisoner of conscience in her own country, Burma. Her absence fills us with fear and anxiety, which can nevertheless only be a faint shadow of the fear and anxiety felt by her family. We welcome this opportunity of expressing our deepest sympathy with them, with her husband, Michael Aris, and with her sons, Alexander and Kim. We feel with you, and we are very grateful to you for coming to Oslo to receive the Nobel Prize on behalf of your wife and mother.


Our fear and anxiety are mixed with a sense of confidence and hope. In the good fight for peace and reconciliation, we are dependent on persons who set examples, persons who can symbolize what we are seeking and mobilize the best in us. Aung San Suu Kyi is just such a person. She unites deep commitment and tenacity with a vision in which the end and the means form a single unit. Its most important elements are: democracy, respect for human rights, reconciliation between groups, non-violence, and personal and collective discipline.

She has herself clearly indicated the sources of her inspiration: principally Mahatma Gandhi and her father, Aung San, the leader in Burma's struggle for liberation. The philosopher of non-violence and the General differ in many respects, but also show fundamental similarities. In both, one can see genuine independence, true modesty, and "a profound simplicity", to use Aung San Suu Kyi's own words about her father. To Aung San, leadership was a duty, and could only be carried out on the basis of humility in face of the task before him and the confidence and respect of the people to be led.

While no doubt deriving a great deal of inspiration from Gandhi and her father, Aung San Suu Kyi has also added her own independent reflections to what has become her political platform. The keynote is the same profound simplicity as she sees in her father. The central position given to human rights in her thinking appears to reflect a real sense of the need to protect human dignity. Man is not only entitled to live in a free society; he also has a right to respect. On this platform, she has built a policy marked by an extraordinary combination of sober realism and visionary idealism. And in her case this is more than just a theory: she has gone a long way towards showing how such a doctrine can be translated into practical politics.

For a doctrine of peace and reconciliation to be translated into practice, one absolute condition is fearlessness. Aung San Suu Kyi knows this. One of her essays opens with the statement that it is not power that corrupts, but fear.(1) The comment was aimed at the totalitarian regime in her own country. They have allowed themselves to be corrupted because they fear the people they are supposed to lead. This has led them into a vicious circle. In her thinking, however, the demand for fearlessness is first and foremost a general demand, a demand on all of us. She has herself shown fearlessness in practice. She opposed herself alone to the rifle barrels. Can anything withstand such courage? What was in that Major's mind when at the last moment he gave the order not to fire? Perhaps he was impressed by her bravery, perhaps he realized that nothing can be achieved by brute force.(2)

Violence is its own worst enemy, and fearlessness is the sharpest weapon against it. It is not least Aung San Suu Kyi's impressive courage which makes her such a potent symbol, like Gandhi and her father Aung San. Aung San was shot in the midst of his struggle. But if those who arranged the assassination thought it would remove him from Burmese politics, they were wrong. He became the unifying symbol of a free Burma and an inspiration to those who are now fighting for a free society. In addition to his example and inspiration, his position among his people, over forty years after his death, gave Aung San Suu Kyi the political point of departure she needed. She has indeed taken up her inheritance, and is now in her own right the symbol of the revolt against violence and the struggle for a free society, not only in Burma, but also in the rest of Asia and in many other parts of the world.

We ordinary people, I believe, feel that with her courage and her high ideals, Aung San Suu Kyi brings out something of the best in us. We feel we need precisely her sort of person in order to retain our faith in the future. That is what gives her such power as a symbol, and that is why any ill-treatment of her feels like a violation of what we have most at heart. The little woman under house arrest stands for a positive hope. Knowing she is there gives us confidence and faith in the power of good.

Aung San Suu Kyi was born in 1945. Her father was killed when she was two. She has no personal memories of him. Her mother was a diplomat, and Aung San Suu Kyi was to spend many of her early years and much of her later life abroad. In 1967, she took a degree in Politics, Philosophy and Economics at St. Hugh's College, Oxford. From 1969 on, she worked for two years for the United Nations in New York. In 1972 she married Michael Aris, a British specialist on Tibet. For a time the family lived in Bhutan, but in the mid-seventies they moved back to Oxford. In addition to being a housewife with two small children, Aung San Suu Kyi kept up her academic work, gradually concentrating on modern Burmese history and literature. She was a visiting scholar at Kyoto University in Japan and at the Indian Institute of Advanced Studies in New Delhi. On her return to Burma in 1988, she broke off her studies at the London School of Oriental and African Studies. There is little in these outward events to suggest the role she was to embark on in 1988. But she was well prepared.

There is a great deal of evidence that the fate of her own people had constantly weighed on her mind. Her husband has told us how she often reminded him that one day she would have to return to Burma, and that she would count on his support.(3) Her studies, too, as we have seen, became increasingly concentrated on Burma's modern history. The study of her father and the part he played in Burmese history no doubt increased her political commitment and sense that his mantle had fallen on her.(4)

In moving to Japan, she was virtually following in her father's footsteps. During the Second World War, it was from a base in Japan that Aung San built up Burma's independent national army. When Japan invaded Burma, Aung San and his men went too. Before long, they switched from fighting the British colonial power to resisting the occupying Japanese and supporting the retaking of Burma by the Allies. After the war, he led the negotiations with the British which were to lead to final independence. Aung San Suu Kyi appears to have felt an urgent need to study the process which led to Burma's independent statehood, and to understand the ideals governing the politics. In a beautiful essay comparing the Indian and Burmese experience of colonization, she also brings out the special features of Burma's cultural heritage.(5) History is important. You choose who you are by choosing which tradition you belong to. Aung San Suu Kyi seeks to call attention to what she sees as the best aspects of the national and cultural heritage and to identify herself with them. Such profound knowledge and such a deep sense of identity are an irresistible force in the political struggle.
The occasion of Aung San Suu Kyi's return to Burma in 1988 was, characteristically enough, not the political situation but her old mother's illness. The political turbulence had just begun, however. There had been demonstrations and confrontations with the police with some two hundred killed. The unrest continued while she was nursing her dying mother. That was the situation in which she resolved to take an active part in what she herself called "the second struggle for national independence".

The military regime had seized power in Burma in 1962. The disturbances which broke out in 1988 were a reaction to growing repression. In the summer of that year, at a time when the situation was very uncertain, Aung San Suu Kyi intervened with a open letter to the government, proposing the appointment of a consultative committee of respected independent persons to lead the country into multi-party elections. In the letter, she emphasized the need for discipline and for refraining from the use of force on either side, and demanded the release of political prisoners.(6)

A couple of days later, she addressed several hundred thousand people in front of the large Shwedagon Pagoda in Rangoon, presenting a political program based on human rights, democracy and non-violence. On the 18th of September, after hesitating for a few weeks, the armed forces reacted by tightening the restrictions. The so-called "State Law and Order Restoration Council" (SLORC) was established, and martial law was introduced under which meetings were banned and persons could be sentenced without trial.

Political parties were not prohibited (perhaps with meetings banned it was thought unnecessary). A week after the establishment of SLORC, Aung San Suu Kyi and a few other members of the opposition founded the National League for Democracy, the NLD. She went on to engage in vigorous political activity, defying the ban on meetings and military provocations, and holding heavily attended political meetings all over the country. One remarkable feature of her political campaign was the appeal she had for the country's various ethnic groups, traditionally at odds with each other.

It must have been her personal prestige which caused the regime to hesitate so long, but in July 1989 she was placed under house arrest. In May 1990, elections were held, in which the NLD won an overwhelming victory and over 80 per cent of the seats in the national assembly. There is general agreement that this was principally a triumph for Aung San Suu Kyi.

Why did the SLORC allow free elections? Probably because they expected a very different result, a result which would somehow have provided the legitimacy they needed to retain power. The dilemma of such regimes was demonstrated - trapped in their own lies. At any rate, they refused to accept the election result. The election was in effect annulled. The SLORC continued, but with reduced legitimacy. Lack of legitimacy is often made up for by increased brutality. Amnesty International has reported continuing serious violations of human rights.(7) Today, the Burmese regime appears to have developed into one of the most repressive in the world.

In recent decades, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has awarded a number of Prizes for Peace in recognition of work for human rights.(8) It has done so in the conviction that a fundamental prerequisite for peace is the recognition of the right of all people to life and to respect. Another motivation lies in the knowledge that in its most basic form, the concept of human rights is not just a Western idea, but common to all major cultures. Permit me in this connection to quote a paragraph of Aung San Suu Kyi's essay In Quest of Democracy:

Where there is no justice there can be no secure peace.
...That just laws which uphold human rights are the necessary foundations of peace and security would be denied only by closed minds which interpret peace as the silence of all opposition and security as the assurance of their own power. The Burmese associate peace and security with coolness and shade:

The shade of a tree is cool indeed
The shade of parents is cooler
The shade of teachers is cooler still
The shade of the ruler is yet more cool
But coolest of all is the shade of the Buddha's teachings.

Thus to provide the people with the protective coolness of peace and security, rulers must observe the teachings of the Buddha. Central to these teachings are the concepts of truth, righteousness and loving kindness. It is government based on these very qualities that the people of Burma are seeking in their struggle for democracy.(9)

This is not the first time that political persecution at home has prevented a Peace Prize Laureate from receiving the prize in person. It happened to Carl von Ossietzky in 1936, ill in one of Hitler's concentration camps.(10) It happened to Andrei Sakharov and to Lech Walesa. Ossietzky died before the regime fell, but Sakharov and Walesa saw their struggles succeed.(11) It is our hope that Aung San Suu Kyi will see her struggle crowned with success.

However, we must also face up to the likelihood that this will not be the last occasion on which a Peace Prize Laureate is unable to attend. Let that remind us that in a world such as ours, peace and reconciliation cannot be achieved once and for all. We will never be able to lower our standards. On the contrary, a better world demands even greater vigilance of us, still greater fearlessness, and the ability to develop in ourselves the "profound simplicity" of which this year's Laureate has spoken. This applies to all of us as individuals, but must apply especially to those in positions of power and authority. Show humility and show fearlessness - like Aung San Suu Kyi. The result may be a better world to live in.
__________________
1. "Freedom from Fear" in Freedom, pp. 180-185. The reference is to the oft-quoted dictum of Lord Acton, "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely".

2. In 1988, despite opposition by the government, Aung San Suu Kyi made a speechmaking tour throughout the country. She was walking with her associates along a street in a town, when soldiers lined up in front of the group, threatening to shoot if they did not halt. Suu Kyi asked her supporters to step aside, and she walked on. At the last moment the major in command ordered the soldiers not to fire. She explained later, "It seemed so much simpler to provide them with a single target than to bring everyone else in."

3. Freedom, Introduction, p. xvii.

4. "My Father", in Freedom, pp. 3-38. First published by Queensland Press in 1984 in the Leaders of Asia series under the title of Aung San. Reprinted in 1991 by Kiscadale, Edinburgh, as Aung San of Burma: A Biographical Portrait by His Daughter.

5. "Intellectual Life in Burma and India under Colonialism", in Freedom, pp. 82-139.

6. "The Formation of a People's Consultative Committee", 15 August 1988, translated by Suu Kyi, in Freedom, pp. 192-197. Her first political initiative.

7. Amnesty International received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1977. See Irwin Abrams, ed., Nobel Lectures, Peace. 1971-1980 (Singapore: World Scientific, 1997): 161-177. Amnesty International campaigned for Suu Kyi's release from detention as a "prisoner of conscience".

8. The 1935 award to the concentration camp prisoner Carl von Ossietzky may be considered the earliest human rights prize. Later such recipients were Albert Lutuli (1960), Martin Luther King, Jr. (1964), René Cassin (1968), Séan MacBride (1974), Amnesty International (1977), Adolfo Pérez Esquivel (1980), Lech Walesa (1983), Desmond Tutu (1984), Elie Wiesel (1986), and the 14th Dalai Lama (1989). After 1991 such grantees were Rigoberta Menchú Tum (1992), and the 1996 laureates from East Timor, José Ramos-Horta and Bishop Belo. See Abrams, The Nobel Peace Prize and the Laureates (Boston: G.K. Hall), 3rd printing, 1990): 175-6 and entries on these laureates. Also the lectures of the most recent human rights laureates in Abrams, ed., Nobel Lectures, Peace. 1971-1980, cited in the previous endnote, and the companion volume for 1981-1990.

9. Quest for Democracy", in Freedom, pp. 167-179, esp. pp. 177-178.

10. The international campaign for the prize for Carl von Ossietzky had already brought about his removal from the camp to a hospital in Berlin before the Norwegian Nobel Committee announced in 1936 that he would be awarded the postponed prize of 1935. The Nazi government refused permission for him to go to Oslo for the award ceremony. See Irwin Abrams, The Nobel Peace Prizes, pp. 125-129; Abrams, "Carl von Ossietzky Retrospective", The Nobel Prize Annual 1989 (Boston: G.K. Hall, 1990): 12-23.

From Nobel Lectures, Peace 1991-1995, Editor Irwin Abrams, World Scientific Publishing Co., Singapore, 1999

24 comments:

Anonymous said...

Power to the women! Power to Asian women! Power to Cambodian women!

Anonymous said...

Yesterday(Sunday, Nov. 7), the military junta in Burma held an election in 20 years.

But in upcoming national election in 2013 in Cambodia Hun Sen military junta will win again.

Because not less than a million of Viet Congs solders in Khmer civilian uniforms will vote for Hun Sen.

Because 5 million illegal Yuon living in Cambodia will vote for Hun Sen to legitimize Hun Sen regime as they already did in the previous election.

Hun Sen must meet a miserable end.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Dear Theary,

Thank you for sharing another excellent journal. It was striking when you wrote, “We are all Aung San Suu Kyis. We are all Sam Rainsys.” Although His Excellency Sam Rainsy may have encountered quite a few political troubles, I am not sure that we could equate his stature to that of Aung San Suu Kyis.

It was unreasonable or unjust for the court to have rendered such sentence. Twelve years in prison for removing a couple of posts is excessive. Any fair minded person, organization, or nation should protest and condemn such act by the court which has condoned by the Cambodian government.

When it comes to the degree to which HE Sam Rainsy and Aung San Suu Kyis’ commitments to standing firm against injustice, Aung San Suu Kyis has distinguished herself from that of HE Sam Rainsy. Suu Kyis has been in house arrest in Myanmar for years for her principles while HE Sam Rainsy has conveniently lived in exile.

I am sure that HE Sam Rainsy has been brave and courageous. I am just not sure that he should deserve such praise -at least not yet.

Other than that I enjoyed your journal.

Thank you.
Koun Khmer

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr. Sam Rainsy !
I always on your side, even I am not Sam Rainsy Party member.
Election in democratic country is very vitat, but election in Hun Sen regime is not.
If Mr. Sam Raisny want to joint 2013 national election in Cambodia you will lose because:
1. Because 5 million illegal Yuon living in Cambodia will vote for Hun Sen to legitimize Hun Sen regime as they already did in the previous elections.
2. Because not less than a million of Viet Congs solders in Khmer civilian uniforms will vote for Hun Sen.
You ( Mr. Sam Rainsy ) must work with other Khmer nationalists to find better strategies otherwise one more term for Hun Sen mean one more victory for Ho Chi Minh in Indochina Federation.
Cambodia and Burma national elections result are total difference:
For Burma who win who lose the election their country still on the world map.
For Cambodia who win who lose the election our country still on the world map on paper only.

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr. Sam Rainsy !
I always on your side, even I am not Sam Rainsy Party member.
Election in democratic country is very vitat, but election in Hun Sen regime is not.
If Mr. Sam Raisny want to joint 2013 national election in Cambodia you will lose because:
1. Because 5 million illegal Yuon living in Cambodia will vote for Hun Sen to legitimize Hun Sen regime as they already did in the previous elections.
2. Because not less than a million of Viet Congs solders in Khmer civilian uniforms will vote for Hun Sen.
You ( Mr. Sam Rainsy ) must work with other Khmer nationalists to find better strategies otherwise one more term for Hun Sen mean one more victory for Ho Chi Minh in Indochina Federation.
Cambodia and Burma national elections result are total difference:
For Burma who win who lose the election their country still on the world map.
For Cambodia who win who lose the election our country still on the world map on paper only.

Anonymous said...

Yesterday(Sunday, Nov. 7), the military junta in Burma held an election in 20 years.

But in upcoming national election in 2013 in Cambodia Hun Sen military junta will win again.

Because not less than a million of Viet Congs solders in Khmer civilian uniforms will vote for Hun Sen.

Because 5 million illegal Yuon living in Cambodia will vote for Hun Sen to legitimize Hun Sen regime as they already did in the previous election.

Hun Sen must meet a miserable end.

Anonymous said...

Dear KI Media Administrator,

Thank you for removing these obscene comments from the blog.

Great job!!!

Koun Khmer

Anonymous said...

For Burma who win who lose the election their country still on the world map.
For Cambodia Hun Sen win the election ( 2013 )our country still on the world map on paper only.

Anonymous said...

Dear Koun Khmer,

Have you seen any people emerging other than Sam Rainsy who has the courage to stand up to Hun Sen ? Most of them come and go, but not Sam Rainsy. He has lasted so long in the face of constant threat and violence. How many times did he escape a near death experience, do you remeber ? Oh, do you want him to end up as a Benazair Bhutto or locked up for 20 useless years like Aung San ?

Sam Rainsy has done so much to wake up the people. He is still lacking a lot in hisleadership, but who is perefect ? And who else has the gut to come out ? It doesn't have to be from the SRP but someone else completely diferent. Until then Sam Rainsy is still the only strong and best opposition leader so far.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Dear 10:00 AM,
I find myself agreeing with most of your comment. I am sure as you have stated that thus far he has done so much to wake up the people. This is why I still hold out because I want to see what kind of legacy he will have on the opposition politics if he continues to be in exile.

The true test is the survival of party. Great leader builds a party or an organization to withstand the very condition in which the SRP is experiencing. If the party or should I say the movement is stronger without Sam Rainsy staying in Cambodia, I will praise him as one of our great Khmer leaders. But if his activities undermine the movement in any form or way, we all will know what kind of leader he will be.

May I deviate from the topic just a moment, if you don’t mind?

It is depressing, wouldn’t you think, to put so much faith on one person. Somehow, we as a society attract to this style of leadership. My father’s generation put so much faith with Samdech Norodom Sihanouk. CPP has Prime Minister Hun Sen. The opposition party has HE Sam Rainsy.

For better or for worst, we are fighting in our very own way to maintain this status quo. It is also in our psyche that if one leader is down, we are waiting for another hero to show up. We are addicted to what Max Weber, the German Philosopher, would call the traditional leader or where power is granted through family lineage form one generation to the next.

May be in reality, there is no such thing as the next hero. There are, however, people like Theary Seng, Mu Sochua, or Son Chhay who already has tremendous courage and guts. They are the leaders. In my mind, the people who are members of the party also are the true heroes. They are there no matter what.

Let me get back to the topic.

I almost agree with everything you have stated. I just wanted to be very sure before I praise him. That is all.

Koun Khmer

ជនពាល said...

នៅក្នុងនេះ ! បែប មានអ្នកណាម្នាក់ ដេកយល់សប្តិចង់ទទួលបានរង្វាន់ណូបែល ដូច លោកស្រី​ Aung San Suu Kyi ហើយណ៎ ។
បើចង់បានរង្វាន់ណូបែលផ្នែកសន្តិភាព ទី១​៖ គឺ
ត្រូវហ៊ានជាប់គុកជាមុនសិន ដូចជា លោកLiu Xiaobo និងលោកស្រី​ Aung San Suu Kyi
ទី២ ៖ លុះត្រាណា តែប្រទេសកម្ពុជា ជាប្រទេសដែលមានថ្នាក់ដឹកនាំផ្ដាច់ការ គ្មានការបោះឆ្នោតដោយសេរី ។
ទី៣៖ ត្រូវមានពលរដ្ឋដ៏ច្រើនលើសលប់គាំទ្រ ដល់សកម្មភាពរបស់ខ្លួន ។

បើមានរឿងអីដាក់មេផាយប្រូច របៀបនេះ​
គឺ គ្មានផ្លូវឡើយ រង្វាន់ណូបែល មិនតែប៉ុណ្ណោះ
ទោះបីចង់យល់សប្តិឃើញរង្វាន់ណូបែលក៏មិនបានផង ៕

Anonymous said...

Dear Kaun Khmer,

You talk so sensibly and you are so educated. Yes, maybe Max Webber was right. Asian way, Khmer is no different, is personality politics. Those that broke away from the SRP and formed thei own parties have quietly disaapeared altogether. Confronting daily intimidation - physically, legally, I am surprised the SRP has managed to hang to to 26 seats ! I only admired them. The sissy way of the Funcincpec's leadership had seen this party gone to the grave. The current environment demands a stable and tough opposition. Sam Rainsy is not the perfect but close enough we can afford. The SRP always survive without the physical presence of the SR. In fact, Mu Sochua, Son Chhay, etc , have been defacto leaders, more or less, for a long time. I ma frustrated but ican put up with this situation. It was forced on them by Hun Sen.

Khmjer is a broken society. I bet it will be so long before a good opposition leader emerges. Khmer people are so bak sbat, when it comes to politics - dam daem kor !!! Ah Na the ei ther tov, klach ngoeb. At least Sam rainsy still has the courage to hang on. Extremely hard for him. The man deserves some credit and encouragement, not from those Hanoist people. At kleast when we are witnessing the dirt poor masses being down trodden every minute. Also, Theary seng, how can you have the motivation to go on, my dear ? You are an angel and I( love you !

Anonymous said...

Dear Neak pakdevath 12:08 PM,

Why things have to be that way? I am very sure that both Aung San Suu Kyi and Liu Xaobo never dreamed of such honor or planned to go to prison in order to receive the Nobel. I can point to many recipients who have received the honors without spending a day in prison. Why can we work together as Khmer to mitigating the conflicts?

How can we allow ourselves to behave in such way? I am quite embarrassed to seeing us Khmer demonstrated the lack of capacity to resolving our own conflicts and have to have foreigners involved.

Our ancestors did that and look what happened to our nation. Kampuchea at one point almost disappeared from the face of the earth. That was because we have conflicts we ran and asked for helps from foreigners. In the end, they divided and governed.

Do you enjoy seeing the lawsuit in foreign countries and letters from this country that country lecturing us how we should get along. No matter who wins or loses, we are degrading our nationality.

If you have the power to make a difference, please help to resolving the conflicts. After all, we are Khmer.

Thank you in advance.

Koun Khmer

Anonymous said...

12:09 PM

I can see your point as well as from Kaun Khmer's point. Rainsy is indeed one of the strongest opposition Khmer for the time being! Kaun Khmer just merly point out - that Khmer still keeping the mantality which Max Webber had pointed out many decades a goes already. - Thus, shouldn't the Khmer start to think difference from the old ways...First, Kaun Khmer wants to point out that each Khmer are capable to be a leader, such as the name had mention above; second, praying one success is not the same as another recognize your success! Khaun Khmer just point out that Rainsy is not Aung San Suu Kyi yet...this point - I agreed with Khaun Khmer...leadership - come with responsibility to the title one's hold....Rainsy is not there yet! If he want people to pray him like Aung San Suu Kyi...he might as well pray himself! The same goes for Theary...she is not their either...Just like buddha said...everybody has the quality of being a Buddha...but how many men can claim that he is the Buddha?

people are not stupid...if the person deserve to be pray...they will pray...but don't demand that people to pray Rainsy - and I don't think that Rainsy would want to people to do that either (ture praying and untrue praying - which one is worth more?). If people don't want to call Rainsy as an Aung San suu Kyi for Cambodia - don't force them to do so, period! If Rainsy does want people to do that, he is no difference that Hun Sen - just different side of the same coin!

OK 12:09 - go and rethink about your counter's point to Kaun Khmer!

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr. Sam Rainsy !
I always on your side, even I am not Sam Rainsy Party member.
Election in democratic country is very vitat, but election in Hun Sen regime is not.
If Mr. Sam Raisny want to joint 2013 national election in Cambodia you will lose because:
1. Because 5 million illegal Yuon living in Cambodia will vote for Hun Sen to legitimize Hun Sen regime as they already did in the previous elections.
2. Because not less than a million of Viet Congs solders in Khmer civilian uniforms will vote for Hun Sen.
You ( Mr. Sam Rainsy ) must work with other Khmer nationalists to find better strategies otherwise one more term for Hun Sen mean one more victory for Ho Chi Minh in Indochina Federation.
Cambodia and Burma national elections results are total difference:
For Burma who win who lose the election their country is still on the world map.
For Cambodia Hun Sen win the election ( 2013 )our country still on the world map only on ink paper only.
For ChampaWhere is Champa country now?
Who removed their country from the world map.?
For Kampuchea Krom who took it away?
Look at Loa Yuon everywhere.
Look at Cambodia now Yuon everywhere.
Who is behind all of these?

Ho Chi Minh Indochina Federation is behind all of these.

Anonymous said...

Thanks Kaun Khmer for your input..reasonable and quality discussion is well needed on this blog...your input on Max Webber well put in this discussion! What Khmer country is going through right now - had happended already... thus, history do not have to be repeat...one just have the quest to understand the situation! The wealth of information is all over the web - just google! But people such as yourself, Kaun Khmer, your voice and your knowledges are needed to be express and share with Khmer population at larg...hide your knowledge is no longer your option!!!!!!!

I believe this is the time that all Kaun Khmers should be United, build one voice, the voice that refuse to be silence by fear and threat by dictatorship...each and every one of Kaun Khmer have the rights and freedom to choose our own future...I am calling upon all Kaun Khmer...the power to take down dictatorship is in your very own hands...go out and vote in 2013...take the dictator out without sacrifying any Khmer's blood!! KNOW THE POWER IS IN YOUR HANDS!

May each and everyone of you realize your own full potential and power!

Anonymous said...

In the futur, Hun Sen will behavior exactely as actual Burmese leader. As soon as Cambodia doesn't need INTERNATIONAL HELP, he will show Cambodians, his true color, he will be a DICTATOR.

Anonymous said...

Hun Sen is now a dictator.

Anonymous said...

Dear 2:57 PM

“May each and everyone of you realize your own full potential and power!” Isn't this the essence of democracy.

Many confuse democracy with elections. While election is an important process for democracy, but essence of democracy is creating an environment where each individual can fulfill his/her potential.

With this framework in mind, the role of government become an important factor to achieving this objective. In the U.S. One can certainly hear the debate between liberals (progressive) and conservatives about the role of government based on this framework.

I think our discussion here will be much more meaningful, we can sometime debate or discuss on specific idea or framework.

I am glad to hearing you said what you said.

Thank you,

Koun Khmer

Anonymous said...

Koun Khmer - if there a possibility that you (school Vice, Peasant, etc) could make a suggestion topics to Ki Media to be posted either on every Thursday or Friday to be debate or make a disscussion over the weekend? Topics suggestion:
1. Current Khmer govt.'s domestic policy/foreign policy impact on Khmer society in long-run vs short-run
2. What is the role, rights and responsibility of each an indivitual Khmer citizen? (concert efford needed - individual Khmer can no long stand on side line - and expect foriegners to bring peace back for Khmer people).
3. Priority of young Khmer generation (example - responsibility young khmer under 30 yrs old - what should it be their priority responsibity to their country?).
4. How could Khmer people realize that they are creat their own destiny and their responsibility to maintain Khmer as it own independent nation, without subject to foreign dormination?

Welcome any further constructive suggestions...

May each and every Kaun Khmer nameste each and everyone of Kaun Khmer

Anonymous said...

Correction -nameste - should be Namaste -

which mean "Namaste is significant because it is a humbling gesture. Namaste is done as a recognition that we are all on equal standings, all of us are children of divinity. We are one."

Another meaning of Namaste -
"For a teacher and student, Namaste allows two individuals to come together energetically to a place of connection and timelessness, free from the bonds of ego-connection. If it is done with deep feeling in the heart and with the mind surrendered, a deep union of spirits can blossom." or I would like to keep the translation more simple - which mean -
May the best nature within you will bring the best nature within me!

Namaste to all bloggers

Unknown said...

Nobel Prize for Aung San Suu Kyi is nice. Thanks for sharing this with us.