Denouncing corruption: A US tradition
05 June 2009
By A.C.
Cambodge Soir Hebdo
Translated from French by Luc Sâr
Click here to read the article in French
The speech given by the US ambassador during the “Clean Hand” concert held on 30 May regarding corruption [in Cambodia] continues to create controversies.
Blunder or not? It’s hard to tell for now. Inside the premises of the Olympic Stadium, during a concert organized by several civil society associations, the US ambassador explained that corruption in the Kingdom represents a loss of revenue “of about $500 million per year, the equivalent of building 20,000 schools each having 6 classrooms.”
Through a press communiqué, Hor 5 Bora, the Cambodian ambassador to the UK and son of Hor 5 Hong, Cambodia’s minister of Foreign Affairs, is also getting involved in the affair, although not without diplomatic irony.
He reminded Carol Rodley that “this is [her] first posting as Ambassador, [and that diplomats] seek to maintain neutrality at all costs and refrain from commenting on the internal affairs of the nation to which [they] have been appointed [as] envoy.”
Hor 5 Bora event went beyond simply lecturing a newcomer who would have committed an error because of lack of experience, he also wonders about a possible alliance between the US ambassador and the Global Witness NGO which regularly accuses the government that Hor 5 Bora serves on this corruption issue. On 6 May, Hor 5 Bora attacked Global Witness following the latter’s publication of the “Country for Sale” report which details the Cambodian government’s use of revenue from sale of natural resources. Finally, Hor 5 Bora discussed about “misinformation” and he asked Carol Rodley to “clarify her position.” Up to now, no other embassy in Cambodia dare make any comment on this affair.
However, maybe this is an American tradition. In 2005, the word “corruption” marked the first speech given by Joseph Mussomeli as the new US ambassador to Cambodia. “Rich and developed countries could almost afford corruption. They already have the infrastructure, but not Cambodia. Cambodia cannot afford the luxury of corruption,” Mussomeli then declared. The only difference with Mussomeli was that he did not provide any amount attached to the corruption in Cambodia.
Blunder or not? It’s hard to tell for now. Inside the premises of the Olympic Stadium, during a concert organized by several civil society associations, the US ambassador explained that corruption in the Kingdom represents a loss of revenue “of about $500 million per year, the equivalent of building 20,000 schools each having 6 classrooms.”
Through a press communiqué, Hor 5 Bora, the Cambodian ambassador to the UK and son of Hor 5 Hong, Cambodia’s minister of Foreign Affairs, is also getting involved in the affair, although not without diplomatic irony.
He reminded Carol Rodley that “this is [her] first posting as Ambassador, [and that diplomats] seek to maintain neutrality at all costs and refrain from commenting on the internal affairs of the nation to which [they] have been appointed [as] envoy.”
Hor 5 Bora event went beyond simply lecturing a newcomer who would have committed an error because of lack of experience, he also wonders about a possible alliance between the US ambassador and the Global Witness NGO which regularly accuses the government that Hor 5 Bora serves on this corruption issue. On 6 May, Hor 5 Bora attacked Global Witness following the latter’s publication of the “Country for Sale” report which details the Cambodian government’s use of revenue from sale of natural resources. Finally, Hor 5 Bora discussed about “misinformation” and he asked Carol Rodley to “clarify her position.” Up to now, no other embassy in Cambodia dare make any comment on this affair.
However, maybe this is an American tradition. In 2005, the word “corruption” marked the first speech given by Joseph Mussomeli as the new US ambassador to Cambodia. “Rich and developed countries could almost afford corruption. They already have the infrastructure, but not Cambodia. Cambodia cannot afford the luxury of corruption,” Mussomeli then declared. The only difference with Mussomeli was that he did not provide any amount attached to the corruption in Cambodia.

