Click on each page of the poem to zoom in
Showing posts with label Monarchy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Monarchy. Show all posts
Saturday, May 29, 2010
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Sacrava's Political Cartoon: The Historic Day of March 18, 1970
Cartoon by Sacrava (on the web at http://sacrava.blogspot.com)Thursday, February 04, 2010
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Cambodia needs 'systematic overhaul' of society
November 25, 2009By Gaffar Peang-Meth
Guest Commentary
UPI Asia.com
Washington, DC, United States, — A “progressive and systematic overhaul” of its society is what Cambodia needs, according to Dr. Naranhkiri Tith, a specialist in country risk analysis, former civil servant with the U.N. Conference on Trade and Development and a former professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies.
Overhaul Khmer society? Tith says that only by freeing itself from its past can Cambodia gradually resolve its economic, institutional, legal, political and social problems.
Cambodia has been a monarchy since the first century A.D. – except briefly under the 1970-1975 Khmer Republic under Lon Nol, and the 1975-1979 Democratic Kampuchea under Pol Pot. That is the legacy Tith refers to, although he knows that criticizing something that has been the only way and the only thought of a people for 2,000 years will not make him popular.
Yet Cambodia is the land of his birth, he insists, and no one is going to prevent him from thinking and applying his best thoughts to help bring change, even if he has to step on toes.
Actually, that’s what leaders do, says bestselling author, entrepreneur and blogger Seth Bodin. Leaders have curiosity, they ask questions, they challenge what is, and they commit to working to bring about change.
From the standpoint of former Czech playwright and dissident Vaclav Havel, who became the first president of the Czech Republic in 1993-2003, that’s what an intellectual does: to “constantly disturb … bear witness to the misery of the world … be provocative by being independent, rebel against all hidden and open pressures and manipulations … be the chief doubter of systems.” An intellectual “stands out as an irritant wherever he is,” says Havel.
And to borrow Burmese human rights activist Aung San Suu Kyi’s words, it is important for a person to have a “questing mind” that is always questioning and always seeking for ways and means to get out of and solve problems. For Suu Kyi, a questing mind is necessary to help withstand violence and oppression, especially in a society in which people are generally conditioned to obey without questioning the situation.
Khmer-born and Western-educated in Europe and the United States, Tith migrated to the United States in 1960-1961 because “I felt that I was not allowed to be myself,” he says. In other words, he could not grow.
Tith sees the “pervasive and crushing role of the monarchy,” combined with the conservative nature of Khmer society – “such as the belief in prophesies and the rigidity in social organization and behavior” – as contributing to the “inertia and the inability to allow new ideas and capable leadership and entrepreneurial spirit to emerge.” In the final analysis, this keeps Cambodia “perpetually underdeveloped,” he says.
For nearly five decades now I have reflected on Cambodia, which is also the country of my birth and of my primary and secondary education. I have thought about Tith’s descriptions of inertia and the inability to allow new ideas, capable leadership and entrepreneurial spirit to grow in Cambodia.
I remember reading a Cambodian statesman’s political analysis of Khmer history while doing research for my doctoral dissertation in the early 1970s, about Khmer valor, the Khmer Empire and the builders of Angkor, the Khmer “warrior race,” when Hindu influences were paramount. Then Buddha’s doctrine of peace, kindness, compassion and acceptance came to replace the old ways.
I have asked myself if there is a dichotomy within a person with an inner tug-of-war between the combative warrior personality and the peaceful Buddha-like personality.
I have read the late Khmer professor Sar Sarun’s “Proloeng Khmer” (1973) – and re-read time and again the translation, “Khmer Mentality,” in Tith’s website. Sarun describes the Khmer mentality as insensitive to social and legal rules except where there is coercion; an artistic spirit in a soft, fanciful and romantic state with a tendency to be confused about commitments.
I have asked myself, who and what is this Khmer whom Sarun was describing?
Visna Sann, author of “Who is Khmer?” (2005) wrote in Tith’s website, “Some Cambodians adhere to a policy of exclusion in which only 100 precent ethnic Khmers may be considered Khmer.” He described prejudices recounted by a Cambodian of Chinese heritage.
"I am disturbed by these examples of exclusion,” he wrote, “We cannot afford to exclude our own people.” Sann charged that Cambodia’s “policy of exclusion … has contributed to our country’s decline in the same way as Khmer fighting against Khmer.”
Tith includes in his website Marie A. Martin’s “Cambodia: a Shattered Society” (1994). She writes that, “respect for elders and for hierarchy remains sacrosanct” in Cambodia, and reminds us that, “In the traditions of Khmer moral training, to protest against a parent’s decision, to criticize one’s boss or spiritual master, to rebel against a husband is inadmissible.”
"It is understandable how such a mentality can lead to an abuse of power but also how dangerous a lack of wisdom and scruples can be, for once the link of confidence is broken, the divorce is irreparable and the authority is forever rejected. Younger persons must keep quiet,” wrote Martin.
"And adolescents have no chance to express themselves, much less to argue. It is not surprising if later they allow themselves to be trampled by an ‘elder’ who is in the wrong or less competent than they are, if they remain defenseless in the face of a national tragedy or prefer to let a foreigner speak or act in their place,” said Martin.
Of course, all these are not really pleasant to hear. But Tith isn’t afraid to confront them.
As the saying goes: “The past is behind, learn from it. The future is ahead, prepare for it.
The present is here, live it.”
--
(Dr. Gaffar Peang-Meth is retired from the University of Guam, where he taught political science for 13 years. He currently lives in the United States. He can be contacted at peangmeth@gmail.com. Copyright Gaffar Peang-Meth.)
Overhaul Khmer society? Tith says that only by freeing itself from its past can Cambodia gradually resolve its economic, institutional, legal, political and social problems.
Cambodia has been a monarchy since the first century A.D. – except briefly under the 1970-1975 Khmer Republic under Lon Nol, and the 1975-1979 Democratic Kampuchea under Pol Pot. That is the legacy Tith refers to, although he knows that criticizing something that has been the only way and the only thought of a people for 2,000 years will not make him popular.
Yet Cambodia is the land of his birth, he insists, and no one is going to prevent him from thinking and applying his best thoughts to help bring change, even if he has to step on toes.
Actually, that’s what leaders do, says bestselling author, entrepreneur and blogger Seth Bodin. Leaders have curiosity, they ask questions, they challenge what is, and they commit to working to bring about change.
From the standpoint of former Czech playwright and dissident Vaclav Havel, who became the first president of the Czech Republic in 1993-2003, that’s what an intellectual does: to “constantly disturb … bear witness to the misery of the world … be provocative by being independent, rebel against all hidden and open pressures and manipulations … be the chief doubter of systems.” An intellectual “stands out as an irritant wherever he is,” says Havel.
And to borrow Burmese human rights activist Aung San Suu Kyi’s words, it is important for a person to have a “questing mind” that is always questioning and always seeking for ways and means to get out of and solve problems. For Suu Kyi, a questing mind is necessary to help withstand violence and oppression, especially in a society in which people are generally conditioned to obey without questioning the situation.
Khmer-born and Western-educated in Europe and the United States, Tith migrated to the United States in 1960-1961 because “I felt that I was not allowed to be myself,” he says. In other words, he could not grow.
Tith sees the “pervasive and crushing role of the monarchy,” combined with the conservative nature of Khmer society – “such as the belief in prophesies and the rigidity in social organization and behavior” – as contributing to the “inertia and the inability to allow new ideas and capable leadership and entrepreneurial spirit to emerge.” In the final analysis, this keeps Cambodia “perpetually underdeveloped,” he says.
For nearly five decades now I have reflected on Cambodia, which is also the country of my birth and of my primary and secondary education. I have thought about Tith’s descriptions of inertia and the inability to allow new ideas, capable leadership and entrepreneurial spirit to grow in Cambodia.
I remember reading a Cambodian statesman’s political analysis of Khmer history while doing research for my doctoral dissertation in the early 1970s, about Khmer valor, the Khmer Empire and the builders of Angkor, the Khmer “warrior race,” when Hindu influences were paramount. Then Buddha’s doctrine of peace, kindness, compassion and acceptance came to replace the old ways.
I have asked myself if there is a dichotomy within a person with an inner tug-of-war between the combative warrior personality and the peaceful Buddha-like personality.
I have read the late Khmer professor Sar Sarun’s “Proloeng Khmer” (1973) – and re-read time and again the translation, “Khmer Mentality,” in Tith’s website. Sarun describes the Khmer mentality as insensitive to social and legal rules except where there is coercion; an artistic spirit in a soft, fanciful and romantic state with a tendency to be confused about commitments.
I have asked myself, who and what is this Khmer whom Sarun was describing?
Visna Sann, author of “Who is Khmer?” (2005) wrote in Tith’s website, “Some Cambodians adhere to a policy of exclusion in which only 100 precent ethnic Khmers may be considered Khmer.” He described prejudices recounted by a Cambodian of Chinese heritage.
"I am disturbed by these examples of exclusion,” he wrote, “We cannot afford to exclude our own people.” Sann charged that Cambodia’s “policy of exclusion … has contributed to our country’s decline in the same way as Khmer fighting against Khmer.”
Tith includes in his website Marie A. Martin’s “Cambodia: a Shattered Society” (1994). She writes that, “respect for elders and for hierarchy remains sacrosanct” in Cambodia, and reminds us that, “In the traditions of Khmer moral training, to protest against a parent’s decision, to criticize one’s boss or spiritual master, to rebel against a husband is inadmissible.”
"It is understandable how such a mentality can lead to an abuse of power but also how dangerous a lack of wisdom and scruples can be, for once the link of confidence is broken, the divorce is irreparable and the authority is forever rejected. Younger persons must keep quiet,” wrote Martin.
"And adolescents have no chance to express themselves, much less to argue. It is not surprising if later they allow themselves to be trampled by an ‘elder’ who is in the wrong or less competent than they are, if they remain defenseless in the face of a national tragedy or prefer to let a foreigner speak or act in their place,” said Martin.
Of course, all these are not really pleasant to hear. But Tith isn’t afraid to confront them.
As the saying goes: “The past is behind, learn from it. The future is ahead, prepare for it.
The present is here, live it.”
--
(Dr. Gaffar Peang-Meth is retired from the University of Guam, where he taught political science for 13 years. He currently lives in the United States. He can be contacted at peangmeth@gmail.com. Copyright Gaffar Peang-Meth.)
Friday, May 15, 2009
“I believe that King Sihamoni currently is merely a rubber stamp king, to say it bluntly": Cambodian expat from Lowell
(Photo: RFA)Cambodian expats’ opinion on the King’s role
14 May 2009
By San Suwidh
Radio Free Asia
Translated from Khmer by Socheata
Click here to read the article in Khmer
On the occasion of the national holiday celebrating the 56th birthday of King Norodom Sihamoni between 13 to 15 May, San Suwidh is reporting about the opinion of a number of Cambodian expatriates regarding the role of the current king of Cambodia.
King Sihamoni is the son of King Norodom Sihanouk and Queen Monineath Sihanouk. He was born in Phnom Penh of 14 May 1953, i.e. 6 months ahead of Cambodia’s access to independence from France.
During his youth, the prince liked to study dance, music and theater. In 1971, he received an award in his competition in classical dance at the Prague national conservatory of music and dance, in communist Czechoslovakia. Between 1976 and 1979, he was detained by Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge regime along with his parents and his younger brother, Prince Norindrapong.
Following his release from the killing fields, he completed several functions involving art, mainly in France. The king is expert in language. He speaks Cambodian, French, Czech and English. While living in Paris in 1993, he directed two films involving ballet: “Soben” (Dream) and “Theat Taing Buon” (The 4 matters).
On 14 October 2004, at the age of 51, he was selected by the council of the throne as the king of Cambodia.
It has been 5 years since the king acceded to the throne. On the day of his crowning, he swore that he will abide by his father’s teaching, and he publicly announced: “What must be remembered forever is pure nationalism. We must clearly avoid all sorts of corruption, and at all time. Everything that we must apply should be aimed at serving the supreme interest, the livelihood of the Khmer nation and people.”
He also announced openly that: “I will be close to all our compatriots, uncles, aunts, brothers and sisters, children, nephews, all of you, and I will share your fate forever.”
On the occasion of his 56th birthday, various government officials sent him warm well wishes. Cheam Yeap, a member of the CPP permanent committee and chairman of the National Assembly committee on finance and economy, praised the role of the king, saying: “He has very good opinion, he never embarrass the people, the government or the legislative branch. He always smoothed out the difficult tasks of the government, as well as those of the legislative branch and the judiciary branch.”
Nevertheless, a large number of Cambodians do not know very well their king. Even though he publicly claimed that the palace will not hide anything, and he is spending several days each week to serve his compatriots and meeting the people, in the past 5 years, the king is still unknown to his subjects. More seriously is the fact that Cambodian expatriates have negative opinions of the king.
Sim Huot, a Cambodian-American living in Stockton, California who claims to be a true royalist, is still puzzled about the king’s role: “When the king ascended to the throne, he promised to the people that he will work hard and pay attention to the people in general, he will absolutely oppose corruption, he will labor for his land, such as the border issue for example. But I don’t know what he is doing or not doing. On the border issue, I keep on hearing this issue discussed on Radio Free Asia which I listen to and the people are shouting about corruption, about forced evictions, did the king strongly intervene on these cases? When he ascended to the throne, he promised that he will follow his father’s footstep and he will absolutely oppose all forms of corruption.”
Sieng Sak, a former KR who currently lives in Lowell, Massachusetts, blamed the constitution which ties the king’s hands and does not allow him to do anything. Sieng Sak said: “I believe that King Sihamoni currently is merely a rubber stamp king, to say it bluntly. This is one issue. The second issue, based on the current feelings of Cambodians who respect the king, what King Sihamoni is doing is just enough to calm down Cambodians who want to have a monarchy only, but when speaking about serving the interest of the country, serving the country future peace, he did not do anything about them. The reason I am saying he is not doing anything on these issues is because the constitution is tying him up already, he reigns but he does not rule, so he has no power, he cannot represent anything, he cannot be anybody’s shade simply because he has no power.”
In reply to Sim Huot’s question above regarding the king’s interventions to help his subjects or not, Princess Ang Duon Nim Sophine said: “Regarding the king, it’s not that he is not doing anything to protect his subjects, but it is as if he is under some intense pressure, he is being under intense pressure. What he needs to do, he must ask the authorization from the prime minister. The constitution stipulates that the king has the power to pardon people on certain occasions, such as during the Pchum Ben ceremony, during his birthday, so he must use this prerogative, but I heard that when he asked the authorization [from the PM], they rejected his request. Whatever he tried, he couldn’t do it.”
In the midst of these opinions on the king’s role, Cambodian people are sending wishes to their king on his birthday which happens to be a 3-day holiday also.
King Sihamoni is the son of King Norodom Sihanouk and Queen Monineath Sihanouk. He was born in Phnom Penh of 14 May 1953, i.e. 6 months ahead of Cambodia’s access to independence from France.
During his youth, the prince liked to study dance, music and theater. In 1971, he received an award in his competition in classical dance at the Prague national conservatory of music and dance, in communist Czechoslovakia. Between 1976 and 1979, he was detained by Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge regime along with his parents and his younger brother, Prince Norindrapong.
Following his release from the killing fields, he completed several functions involving art, mainly in France. The king is expert in language. He speaks Cambodian, French, Czech and English. While living in Paris in 1993, he directed two films involving ballet: “Soben” (Dream) and “Theat Taing Buon” (The 4 matters).
On 14 October 2004, at the age of 51, he was selected by the council of the throne as the king of Cambodia.
It has been 5 years since the king acceded to the throne. On the day of his crowning, he swore that he will abide by his father’s teaching, and he publicly announced: “What must be remembered forever is pure nationalism. We must clearly avoid all sorts of corruption, and at all time. Everything that we must apply should be aimed at serving the supreme interest, the livelihood of the Khmer nation and people.”
He also announced openly that: “I will be close to all our compatriots, uncles, aunts, brothers and sisters, children, nephews, all of you, and I will share your fate forever.”
On the occasion of his 56th birthday, various government officials sent him warm well wishes. Cheam Yeap, a member of the CPP permanent committee and chairman of the National Assembly committee on finance and economy, praised the role of the king, saying: “He has very good opinion, he never embarrass the people, the government or the legislative branch. He always smoothed out the difficult tasks of the government, as well as those of the legislative branch and the judiciary branch.”
Nevertheless, a large number of Cambodians do not know very well their king. Even though he publicly claimed that the palace will not hide anything, and he is spending several days each week to serve his compatriots and meeting the people, in the past 5 years, the king is still unknown to his subjects. More seriously is the fact that Cambodian expatriates have negative opinions of the king.
Sim Huot, a Cambodian-American living in Stockton, California who claims to be a true royalist, is still puzzled about the king’s role: “When the king ascended to the throne, he promised to the people that he will work hard and pay attention to the people in general, he will absolutely oppose corruption, he will labor for his land, such as the border issue for example. But I don’t know what he is doing or not doing. On the border issue, I keep on hearing this issue discussed on Radio Free Asia which I listen to and the people are shouting about corruption, about forced evictions, did the king strongly intervene on these cases? When he ascended to the throne, he promised that he will follow his father’s footstep and he will absolutely oppose all forms of corruption.”
Sieng Sak, a former KR who currently lives in Lowell, Massachusetts, blamed the constitution which ties the king’s hands and does not allow him to do anything. Sieng Sak said: “I believe that King Sihamoni currently is merely a rubber stamp king, to say it bluntly. This is one issue. The second issue, based on the current feelings of Cambodians who respect the king, what King Sihamoni is doing is just enough to calm down Cambodians who want to have a monarchy only, but when speaking about serving the interest of the country, serving the country future peace, he did not do anything about them. The reason I am saying he is not doing anything on these issues is because the constitution is tying him up already, he reigns but he does not rule, so he has no power, he cannot represent anything, he cannot be anybody’s shade simply because he has no power.”
In reply to Sim Huot’s question above regarding the king’s interventions to help his subjects or not, Princess Ang Duon Nim Sophine said: “Regarding the king, it’s not that he is not doing anything to protect his subjects, but it is as if he is under some intense pressure, he is being under intense pressure. What he needs to do, he must ask the authorization from the prime minister. The constitution stipulates that the king has the power to pardon people on certain occasions, such as during the Pchum Ben ceremony, during his birthday, so he must use this prerogative, but I heard that when he asked the authorization [from the PM], they rejected his request. Whatever he tried, he couldn’t do it.”
In the midst of these opinions on the king’s role, Cambodian people are sending wishes to their king on his birthday which happens to be a 3-day holiday also.
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Question from one KI-Media reader to all KI-Media readers
As a monarchist and a Sihanoukist, a reader wrote the following as a response to others in a rather frustrated mood to defend Samdech Sihanouk:
"...And what best strategy these f...ing a..hole think they can save Cambodia without one with US and two with China? The King did have his men in the US side was Lon Nol and China side was Khiev Samphan.
The King did his utmost job to seek China helps, and Cambodia survived. We Khmers were not wiped out like Jews as the Youn and Thais expected.
Your f...ing radical fools need to sit down and read more than watching f...ing movies that's not real. What you saw was not the same what was written in a secret mission...1:45 AM,"
What would you, as reader, think? Thanks.
Passer-By (Anonymous KI-Media reader)
"...And what best strategy these f...ing a..hole think they can save Cambodia without one with US and two with China? The King did have his men in the US side was Lon Nol and China side was Khiev Samphan.
The King did his utmost job to seek China helps, and Cambodia survived. We Khmers were not wiped out like Jews as the Youn and Thais expected.
Your f...ing radical fools need to sit down and read more than watching f...ing movies that's not real. What you saw was not the same what was written in a secret mission...1:45 AM,"
What would you, as reader, think? Thanks.
Passer-By (Anonymous KI-Media reader)
Sunday, January 04, 2009
Cambodia Political Crown: a new shift
Saturday, January 3, 2009
Op-Ed by Khmer Young
On the web at http://cambodianbrightfuture.blogspot.com
Dear All,
Op-Ed by Khmer Young
On the web at http://cambodianbrightfuture.blogspot.com
Dear All,
To respond to Khmerization's analytical article [see below] about the King and the Republic, I am profoundly affected by the current appearance of new sort of a Political Crown in Cambodia.
To put it simply, the regards to present constitutional monarchy Cambodia is just a show. It is truly political show to having King but in reality Cambodia currently has no King. Present Cambodia has solely transformed into a new type of Political Crown.
The idea of this political crown has been witnessed by the transition of ancient feudal monarchy to cold war communist ideology. While communist blamed feudal and corrupted monarchical/elite system, they created new type of their own King (political crown) such as the Collectivism Camp, the Angkar or Top Commander...etc
As the result, we acknowledge the idea generalized "all communist political leaders or their polibureau are the new type of King, Crown, Feuds, or Monarch".
In Cambodia is not different from that transition. Hun Sen has gradually become the true King/Crown. This is the political shift which no one can oppose it in both academic debate and folklore communication.
In his longest primiership, Hun Sen and his cronies particularly under the galvanizing of his eternal friend the Vietnam, his gradually achievement to become Khmer King is clearly exhibited.
We might call new shift of Cambodia politic led by a man with no Kingship Blood like Hun Sen as Republic, but it is surely still relevant as a Political Crown.
Personally, I don't mind what Cambodia political system is going to shape. Or we can say the Cambodia Monarchy is abolished by Monarchical Members themselves to change Cambodia to republic, or we can say Cambodia in the future will become republic by Hun Sen's leadership; but the key issue is to keep Cambodia alive with true peace, stability, dignity and prosperity as all of us need.
However, our hope has been gradually derailed away because of continual Vietnam domination and puppet behavior of CPP.
Under Hun Sen's political leadership within CPP, Cambodia cannot move forward with brighter future. It has moved forward solely to satisfy his eternal friend, the Vietnam.
To articulate this argument empirically, we can conclude that:
KY
--
Cambodian Brighter Future depends on enduring conscience and tireless strivings of Cambodian Younger Generation!
http://cambodianbrightfuture.blogspot.com
To put it simply, the regards to present constitutional monarchy Cambodia is just a show. It is truly political show to having King but in reality Cambodia currently has no King. Present Cambodia has solely transformed into a new type of Political Crown.
The idea of this political crown has been witnessed by the transition of ancient feudal monarchy to cold war communist ideology. While communist blamed feudal and corrupted monarchical/elite system, they created new type of their own King (political crown) such as the Collectivism Camp, the Angkar or Top Commander...etc
As the result, we acknowledge the idea generalized "all communist political leaders or their polibureau are the new type of King, Crown, Feuds, or Monarch".
In Cambodia is not different from that transition. Hun Sen has gradually become the true King/Crown. This is the political shift which no one can oppose it in both academic debate and folklore communication.
In his longest primiership, Hun Sen and his cronies particularly under the galvanizing of his eternal friend the Vietnam, his gradually achievement to become Khmer King is clearly exhibited.
We might call new shift of Cambodia politic led by a man with no Kingship Blood like Hun Sen as Republic, but it is surely still relevant as a Political Crown.
Personally, I don't mind what Cambodia political system is going to shape. Or we can say the Cambodia Monarchy is abolished by Monarchical Members themselves to change Cambodia to republic, or we can say Cambodia in the future will become republic by Hun Sen's leadership; but the key issue is to keep Cambodia alive with true peace, stability, dignity and prosperity as all of us need.
However, our hope has been gradually derailed away because of continual Vietnam domination and puppet behavior of CPP.
Under Hun Sen's political leadership within CPP, Cambodia cannot move forward with brighter future. It has moved forward solely to satisfy his eternal friend, the Vietnam.
To articulate this argument empirically, we can conclude that:
- Vietnam's new approach of expansionism and Vietnamization in Cambodia is by impersonating in free marketing, flowing of illegal immigrants and creating physical border demarcation by neglecting international laws...etc
- CPP has been made by Vietnam. It is ideally to keep this machine alive in Cambodia.
- Under CPP's administration, there are still hundred thousands of Vietnamese soldiers and policemen are hiding and impersonating as Cambodian.
- In order to achieve its goal and to avoid the international condemn, Vietnam has arranged to maintain their agents to work as the Cambodian policemen entirely country.
- Is it safe and free and sovereign for Cambodian people as well as their beloved nation, when their safety guards are impersonating Vietnamese agents?
- Angkor Wat has been owned/concessed by Sok Kong, a Vietnamese businessman, are employing Vietnamese citizens and special agents.
- Vietnam sees clearly that Angkor Wat is the icon of nationalism and cultural identity of Cambodia, so to keep controlling Angkor Wat will ensure their expansionism.
- The day of January 7 has been reactivated by CPP again to celebrate as well as to manipulate Cambodian people to believe and trust in Vietnam. This is correct that, Vietnam can control Cambodia only when they can convince Cambodian people to believe in them.
- The celebration of the day of January 7 has no meaning at all for Cambodian people because we celebrate this day in order to stop the coming back of KR, but currently will KR come back?
- So the day of January 7 celebration is politically oriented and it is surely to celebrate in order to pay gratitude to foreigner.
- Not only celebrate the day of January 7, CPP under Vietnam's spearhead has tried to create chaos in Khmer society, for instance the present news of laying bombs on the ground in the capital city of Phnom Penh, is the good excuse to blame all other dissents.
- While general Cambodian dissents of the day of Junuary 7 are keeping silent, the CPP under Vietnamese spearhead will make this day overwhelmingly louder and louder.
KY
--
Cambodian Brighter Future depends on enduring conscience and tireless strivings of Cambodian Younger Generation!
http://cambodianbrightfuture.blogspot.com
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
The royals have the right to be involved in politics: Dr. Chhim Phal Vorun
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Everyday.com.kh
Translated from Khmer by Socheata
Everyday.com.kh
Translated from Khmer by Socheata
In an interview given to The Mekong Times regarding whether royal family members have the right to be involved in politics or not, Dr. Chhim Phal Vorun, director of the institute for Civil Education and a Constitutional expert, said that as Cambodian citizens, royal family members have the right to be involved in politics. He explained that the monarchy and the royal family members are two separate issues. Royal family members do not constitute the monarchy, this means that royal family members cannot defend the monarchy by themselves should all the Cambodian people stop defending the monarchy. Therefore, royal family members are individuals who belong to the royal family members but they are still Khmer citizens. Therefore, as Cambodian citizens, they have the right to be involved in politics. However, the question is: if they don they royal uniform to be involved in politics, they cannot forget one obligation, they cannot affect the honor and the name of the king, the throne and the monarchy. Dr. Chhim Phal Vorun said that if the royals use the people’s rights in politics, and they also claim the exclusivity to the monarchy and the king, then he thinks that this would be a waste.
Tuesday, June 03, 2008
Monarchy remains politically divisive issue for election
Tuesday, 03 June 2008Neth Pheaktra
The Mekong Times
In what many saw as an assault on the Royalist support base ahead of election campaigning, Prime Minister Hun Sen yesterday appealed for King Sihamoni to ban political parties from using the monarchy in campaigning. The request comes after a National Election Committee (NEC) prohibition on campaign references to the retired monarch Norodom Sihanouk, including photos, words and messages.
“I would like to appeal to the King to … stop political parties from using the monarchy as their own possession,” the premier said yesterday during a Siem Reap address.
The premier said that problems begin “when royalist parties cannot win the common people’s children ... They are always using the former King.”
“We want to protect monarchy but they destroy it,” he added.
The premier’s remarks were supported by Prince Sisowath Thomico, a member of the Cambodian royal family. “[I]f we cite the monarchy during campaigning, some Cambodian groups will no longer support the monarchy,” he said. “To avoid rejection and to show Cambodian people are unified and have a consensus on the monarchy, we mustn’t talk about the monarchy when campaigning.”
Muth Chantha, a spokesman for the royalist Norodom Ranariddh Party (NRP), totally rejected Hun Sen’s statement. He said he opposed the NEC’s ban because “monarchism belongs to all Cambodian people.”
“We are the NRP, the royalist party, and we have a bigger obligation than the CPP in protecting monarchism, because we do not want the Kingdom of Cambodia to become a second Nepal,” he said. “We intend to maintain constitutional monarchism.”
Keo Puthreasmy, president of the pro-royalist Funcinpec, said that while “Funcinpec adheres to the politics of monarchism … when conducting field visits, we do not use the name of the King to campaign.”
“We just remind [people of] the history of forming Funcinpec. Funcinpec also adheres to policies based on Sihanoukist policies and Sihanoukist leadership, like the policies of various countries adhere in the rest of the world,” he said. “It does not mean that the ex-King [Norodom Sihanouk] is involved in politics in Funcinpec.”
Thun Saray, director of local human rights group Adhoc, said political parties often twist monarchism to fit their own political ends. “What the civil society wants is a free and fair election,” he added.
Tep Nytha, NEC secretary general, warned that the NEC would take legal action if any party violates election rules.
“I would like to appeal to the King to … stop political parties from using the monarchy as their own possession,” the premier said yesterday during a Siem Reap address.
The premier said that problems begin “when royalist parties cannot win the common people’s children ... They are always using the former King.”
“We want to protect monarchy but they destroy it,” he added.
The premier’s remarks were supported by Prince Sisowath Thomico, a member of the Cambodian royal family. “[I]f we cite the monarchy during campaigning, some Cambodian groups will no longer support the monarchy,” he said. “To avoid rejection and to show Cambodian people are unified and have a consensus on the monarchy, we mustn’t talk about the monarchy when campaigning.”
Muth Chantha, a spokesman for the royalist Norodom Ranariddh Party (NRP), totally rejected Hun Sen’s statement. He said he opposed the NEC’s ban because “monarchism belongs to all Cambodian people.”
“We are the NRP, the royalist party, and we have a bigger obligation than the CPP in protecting monarchism, because we do not want the Kingdom of Cambodia to become a second Nepal,” he said. “We intend to maintain constitutional monarchism.”
Keo Puthreasmy, president of the pro-royalist Funcinpec, said that while “Funcinpec adheres to the politics of monarchism … when conducting field visits, we do not use the name of the King to campaign.”
“We just remind [people of] the history of forming Funcinpec. Funcinpec also adheres to policies based on Sihanoukist policies and Sihanoukist leadership, like the policies of various countries adhere in the rest of the world,” he said. “It does not mean that the ex-King [Norodom Sihanouk] is involved in politics in Funcinpec.”
Thun Saray, director of local human rights group Adhoc, said political parties often twist monarchism to fit their own political ends. “What the civil society wants is a free and fair election,” he added.
Tep Nytha, NEC secretary general, warned that the NEC would take legal action if any party violates election rules.
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Tuesday, April 01, 2008
People Power can change Cambodia
March 31, 2008By SOURN SEREY RATHA
UPI Asia Online
Guest Commentary
CRANSTON CITY, R.I., United States - The ruling party of Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen, in another politically motivated ploy to weaken rivals prior to national elections in July, arrested Tuot Saron of the opposition Sam Rainsy Party on March 18. He is now awaiting trial on trumped-up charges.
The authorities were planning to arrest at least two other party officials, whom they accused of intimidating and mistreating members of their own party who want to defect to the ruling Cambodian People's Party.
Rights watchdog Human Rights Watch said that such dubious arrests of opposition officials months ahead of an election "should set alarm bells ringing." Brad Adams, the group's Asia director, said, "This divide-and-conquer strategy is a well-known tactic of Prime Minister Hun Sen to subdue his opponents." He said human rights had been violated in every election cycle in Cambodia.
The only way Cambodians can break Hun Sen's divide-and-rule plan is to unite and launch a People Power initiative. The term typically refers to the popular protest movements in the Philippines that led to the ouster of two presidents, most famously Ferdinand Marcos in 1986. Such a movement should unite all opposition parties and the people of Cambodia to end Hun Sen's authoritarian rule.
People Power is also a social movement that could challenge Cambodia's Constitution and seek greater freedoms and rights for its people. Such collective and united efforts would not only give opposition parties the power to fight the current communist rule, but also the strength to denounce any government that comes to power and fails to act on its election promises of creating social harmony and looking out for the people's welfare.
In the past, Hun Sen has rejected People Power as a possibility. However, the ability of monks to vote is a real concern to the ruling party. Monks form an integral part of Cambodia's social community. They influence the faith and political perceptions of the people, 95 percent of whom are Buddhist.
Holding elections is a good thing, but most government atrocities and human rights violations occur after the elections are over. People Power can police the actions of any party that comes to power. In the current scenario, the legislative and executive branches of the government are controlled by the ruling Cambodian People's Party, which is averse to People Power. There is growing concern within the party that a mass protest movement could arise and depose Hun Sen.
Cambodia's veneer of political pluralism grew thinner in 2007. Last year saw the recurring pillage of Cambodian people's land and other natural resources and the jailing of government critics, independent media, and political dissenters, all under the pretext that the groups were attempting to weaken civil society. The Cambodian authorities have never conducted any serious investigations into these matters. Instead, Hun Sen has continued to arrest officials from opposition parties that voice dissent and organizers who stage demonstrations.
Politics in Cambodia have never fully recovered from the events of 1997. On March 30 that year, a grisly grenade attack at an opposition party rally led by former Finance Minister Sam Rainsy left 16 dead and more than 150 injured. In July of the same year a coup -- described by Cambodians as an executive usurpation of power by Hun Sen against Prince Norodom Ranariddh -- cost hundreds of lives. What remained after the coup was a ruthless pattern of extrajudicial executions aimed at rooting out Ranariddh loyalists. General Ho Sok was fatally shot -- presumed executed within the perimeter of the Interior Ministry building. After elections in 1998, Hun Sen presumably ordered his bodyguards and special police force to open fire on over 10,000 demonstrators gathered in front of the National Assembly.
From 1992 until 2006, almost 4,000 activists and supporters of the FUNCINPEC party -- National United Front for an Independent, Neutral, Peaceful, and Cooperative Cambodia -- Buddhist Liberal Democratic Party, Sam Rainsy Party, and other small parties have been killed. At least 130 families have sought refuge in other countries, while 56 families still await political asylum in sympathetic countries elsewhere.
In 2007, in Preah Vihea province, 317 innocent families were evicted and their houses burned. In Phnom Penh, Chhruoy Changva, and Tonle Basac, military police officers arrested, razed, and burned houses displacing thousands of families. The officers claimed that the land belonged to private companies that would utilize it for public projects. Later, thousands of displaced families were relocated -- or rather dumped at sites outside the capital. These sites lacked drinking water and proper sanitation facilities.
Authorities in Phnom Penh and Battambang province seized all 2,000 copies of the inaugural issue of the monthly "Free Press Magazine" when it was distributed on Nov. 2, 2007. Fearing arrest, the magazine's editor-in-chief, Lem Piseth, and distribution director, Heu Chantha, have been in hiding, according to the Phnom Penh-based Cambodian Center for Human Rights.
Hun Sen has been exemplary in demonstrating how a dictator should cope with the West. He has allowed the development of opposition parties, but murdered their activists. He has allowed opposition figures to emerge, but has not attempted to successfully co-opt them into his regime. He has allowed unions and human rights groups to exist, but prominent individuals within those groups have been killed. When critics or opposition parties increase their efforts to organize rallies and programs for the poor and victims of abuse, political oppression escalates as the elite dig in to defend their interests.
People Power is a challenge, not only to the ruling party but also for the people of Cambodia if they hope to change the leadership and the regime. It is time for Cambodians to conduct a countrywide survey on whether they want to keep the monarchy or become a republic.
Foreign aid, including from the United States, still makes up about 50 percent of Hun Sen's budget. While Hun Sen claims Cambodia is on its way to democracy, what is really happening is the Vietnamization of the country. It's a wake-up call for all Cambodians to gear up for People Power.
--
(Sourn Serey Ratha is chief of mission of the Action Committee for Justice and Equity for Cambodians Overseas, based in Rhode Island, United States. He was born to a farmer's family in Cambodia, earned B.A degrees in law and sociology in Phnom Penh and an M.A. in international policy from Mara University of Technology in Malaysia. He has been a social activist for his country on the national and international levels since 1997. ©Copyright Sourn Serey Ratha.)
The authorities were planning to arrest at least two other party officials, whom they accused of intimidating and mistreating members of their own party who want to defect to the ruling Cambodian People's Party.
Rights watchdog Human Rights Watch said that such dubious arrests of opposition officials months ahead of an election "should set alarm bells ringing." Brad Adams, the group's Asia director, said, "This divide-and-conquer strategy is a well-known tactic of Prime Minister Hun Sen to subdue his opponents." He said human rights had been violated in every election cycle in Cambodia.
The only way Cambodians can break Hun Sen's divide-and-rule plan is to unite and launch a People Power initiative. The term typically refers to the popular protest movements in the Philippines that led to the ouster of two presidents, most famously Ferdinand Marcos in 1986. Such a movement should unite all opposition parties and the people of Cambodia to end Hun Sen's authoritarian rule.
People Power is also a social movement that could challenge Cambodia's Constitution and seek greater freedoms and rights for its people. Such collective and united efforts would not only give opposition parties the power to fight the current communist rule, but also the strength to denounce any government that comes to power and fails to act on its election promises of creating social harmony and looking out for the people's welfare.
In the past, Hun Sen has rejected People Power as a possibility. However, the ability of monks to vote is a real concern to the ruling party. Monks form an integral part of Cambodia's social community. They influence the faith and political perceptions of the people, 95 percent of whom are Buddhist.
Holding elections is a good thing, but most government atrocities and human rights violations occur after the elections are over. People Power can police the actions of any party that comes to power. In the current scenario, the legislative and executive branches of the government are controlled by the ruling Cambodian People's Party, which is averse to People Power. There is growing concern within the party that a mass protest movement could arise and depose Hun Sen.
Cambodia's veneer of political pluralism grew thinner in 2007. Last year saw the recurring pillage of Cambodian people's land and other natural resources and the jailing of government critics, independent media, and political dissenters, all under the pretext that the groups were attempting to weaken civil society. The Cambodian authorities have never conducted any serious investigations into these matters. Instead, Hun Sen has continued to arrest officials from opposition parties that voice dissent and organizers who stage demonstrations.
Politics in Cambodia have never fully recovered from the events of 1997. On March 30 that year, a grisly grenade attack at an opposition party rally led by former Finance Minister Sam Rainsy left 16 dead and more than 150 injured. In July of the same year a coup -- described by Cambodians as an executive usurpation of power by Hun Sen against Prince Norodom Ranariddh -- cost hundreds of lives. What remained after the coup was a ruthless pattern of extrajudicial executions aimed at rooting out Ranariddh loyalists. General Ho Sok was fatally shot -- presumed executed within the perimeter of the Interior Ministry building. After elections in 1998, Hun Sen presumably ordered his bodyguards and special police force to open fire on over 10,000 demonstrators gathered in front of the National Assembly.
From 1992 until 2006, almost 4,000 activists and supporters of the FUNCINPEC party -- National United Front for an Independent, Neutral, Peaceful, and Cooperative Cambodia -- Buddhist Liberal Democratic Party, Sam Rainsy Party, and other small parties have been killed. At least 130 families have sought refuge in other countries, while 56 families still await political asylum in sympathetic countries elsewhere.
In 2007, in Preah Vihea province, 317 innocent families were evicted and their houses burned. In Phnom Penh, Chhruoy Changva, and Tonle Basac, military police officers arrested, razed, and burned houses displacing thousands of families. The officers claimed that the land belonged to private companies that would utilize it for public projects. Later, thousands of displaced families were relocated -- or rather dumped at sites outside the capital. These sites lacked drinking water and proper sanitation facilities.
Authorities in Phnom Penh and Battambang province seized all 2,000 copies of the inaugural issue of the monthly "Free Press Magazine" when it was distributed on Nov. 2, 2007. Fearing arrest, the magazine's editor-in-chief, Lem Piseth, and distribution director, Heu Chantha, have been in hiding, according to the Phnom Penh-based Cambodian Center for Human Rights.
Hun Sen has been exemplary in demonstrating how a dictator should cope with the West. He has allowed the development of opposition parties, but murdered their activists. He has allowed opposition figures to emerge, but has not attempted to successfully co-opt them into his regime. He has allowed unions and human rights groups to exist, but prominent individuals within those groups have been killed. When critics or opposition parties increase their efforts to organize rallies and programs for the poor and victims of abuse, political oppression escalates as the elite dig in to defend their interests.
People Power is a challenge, not only to the ruling party but also for the people of Cambodia if they hope to change the leadership and the regime. It is time for Cambodians to conduct a countrywide survey on whether they want to keep the monarchy or become a republic.
Foreign aid, including from the United States, still makes up about 50 percent of Hun Sen's budget. While Hun Sen claims Cambodia is on its way to democracy, what is really happening is the Vietnamization of the country. It's a wake-up call for all Cambodians to gear up for People Power.
--
(Sourn Serey Ratha is chief of mission of the Action Committee for Justice and Equity for Cambodians Overseas, based in Rhode Island, United States. He was born to a farmer's family in Cambodia, earned B.A degrees in law and sociology in Phnom Penh and an M.A. in international policy from Mara University of Technology in Malaysia. He has been a social activist for his country on the national and international levels since 1997. ©Copyright Sourn Serey Ratha.)
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Hun Sen added that: “It’s not just the prince, even the prince’s father will be attacked also”
Hun Sen: When it comes to Cambodia, it’s sure strange
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Everyday.com.kh
Translated from Khmer by Socheata
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Everyday.com.kh
Translated from Khmer by Socheata
Prime minister Hun Sen said that, in the world, only Cambodia carried out the win-win policy without using a single bullet, and it even has territorial unity. In a speech given at the army region 5 headquarters on 21 January, Hun Sen claimed that when it comes to Cambodia, it’s sure strange. He said that, just like the monarchy for example, it died for 23-year long, but it was revived again, and in this issue, it only happens in Cambodia. In other countries, when the monarchy is lost, it is lost forever, however, the Cambodian monarchy was revived after it disappeared for 23-year. And in Cambodia, the royals are even involved in politics, but that such situation does not exist in Thailand or Japan. Hun Sen added: “We don’t prevent the Cambodian royals from being involved in politics, please go ahead, but if you are involved in politics, this means that you will be touched (attacked) also.” Under this meaning, political analysts believed that the political involvements of the royals will open them to verbal attacks. Hun Sen added that: “It’s not just the prince, even the prince’s father will be attacked also.”
Monday, November 05, 2007
Simply branding people as "republicans" is not admissible evidence to prove that those people are republicans
OpEd by Lao Mong Hay
Simply branding people as "republicans" is not admissible evidence to prove that those people are republicans. Historical evidence has shown that royalists had started to abolish the monarchy in 1960 when King Suramarith died. We no longer had any king or queen until 24 Septembver 1993. Surprise?
For the record for posterity, when our King Suramarith died there was no election of a new king or queen to assume the function of head of state. Queen Kossamak, King Suramarith's wife and mother of our August, Great and Valorous King Sihanouk, was Queen only in name. She was not Head of State. She was made queen to symbolise the "throne" -preah reach palang- (or monarchy).
The likely candidate was our present August, Great and Valourous King Sihanouk, but had already vowed not to be ever king again when he abdicated in 1955 in favour of his father, King Suramarith. I heard him repeating that vow from time to time in public speeches broadcasted on radio in the 1950s and 1960s when I was a peasant boy attending a high school and later at a university. (I'm now an old man-63) He said the crown (makot) was too heavy and with a crown on his head he could not directly serve his people. He was right, wasn't he? And he was powerful (or a strong man), as "Father of the Nation" and head of Sangkum Reatr Nyum.
What to do then to break the "deadlock" (we faced a very similar one after the 2003 election)? In 1960 we simply amended our counstitution, as we enacted an additional constitutional law in 2004, to create the post of head of state and appointed our present August, Great and Valorous King as Head of State in 1960. He was not a constitutional, cemonial, figurehead monarch because he was not crowned king. He became effectively a president, but not a ceremonial, figurehead president, but a president with executive power. Cambodia became a republic with an executive president but name. In his own writings our August, Great and Valorous King, has also alluded ro the presidential nature of his regime from the time he had been made Head of State.
When UNTAC came to run our country and organise the election of a new government in 1992-1993, there was an attempt to get that UN body to also organise a presidential election aimed at getting our August, Great and Valorous King elected President of Cambdia. Apparently, he was willing to stand for that presidential election, and he would indeed have been elected when he was so popular that he was confined to the royal palace almost all the time after his return from Beijing 1n November 1992.
I, for one, objected to that rumoured presidential election and wrote an article for Phnom Penh Post to voice this objection. (I'm sending this article to KI-media.blogspot.com to kindly reproduce in its column). I talked to Samdech Son Sann, whom I served and from whom I have learned a lot, and also a few Son Sannist colleagues, I wanted to stand in that presidential election as well with only two-point political platform: (1) I wanted Cambodia to be a Kingdom; (2) If I was elected president, I would invite our present August, Great and Valorous King, to assume the thone, and after that I'd resign to be become just an ordinary "citizen Lao" (as a royalist called me from time to time-he was later made ambassador and since then has not returned to Cambodia). Samdech Son Sann and those colleagues were dismayed.
Back to the confication of the Free Press Magazine, the reason for it is not so much the "republican" issue as the issue of the murder of our famous actress Piseth Pilika. Some years ago, probably in 2003, a small book of the murder with the photo of our beautiful actress on its cover was published and sold in Phnom Penh. The copies of that small book were all confisticated.
An authoritiative French magazine, L'Express, published a story of her murder, citing our Prime Minister's affair with her and implicating his wife in the matter. Our Prime Minister's people vowed to sue L'Express magazine for defamation, but hey have never done so ever since.
The whole thing probably boils down to our memories (or ghosts) of our parents, relatives, teachers, friends and other fellow Cambodians who died at the hands of the Khmer Rouge, and the memory (or ghost) of our famous actress Piseth Pilika, haunting respecively those who had associated with the Khmer Rouge and those who were behind the murder of Piseth Pilika or who might know who might be her assassin yet have not acted to find justice for her.
LAO Mong Hay
For the record for posterity, when our King Suramarith died there was no election of a new king or queen to assume the function of head of state. Queen Kossamak, King Suramarith's wife and mother of our August, Great and Valorous King Sihanouk, was Queen only in name. She was not Head of State. She was made queen to symbolise the "throne" -preah reach palang- (or monarchy).
The likely candidate was our present August, Great and Valourous King Sihanouk, but had already vowed not to be ever king again when he abdicated in 1955 in favour of his father, King Suramarith. I heard him repeating that vow from time to time in public speeches broadcasted on radio in the 1950s and 1960s when I was a peasant boy attending a high school and later at a university. (I'm now an old man-63) He said the crown (makot) was too heavy and with a crown on his head he could not directly serve his people. He was right, wasn't he? And he was powerful (or a strong man), as "Father of the Nation" and head of Sangkum Reatr Nyum.
What to do then to break the "deadlock" (we faced a very similar one after the 2003 election)? In 1960 we simply amended our counstitution, as we enacted an additional constitutional law in 2004, to create the post of head of state and appointed our present August, Great and Valorous King as Head of State in 1960. He was not a constitutional, cemonial, figurehead monarch because he was not crowned king. He became effectively a president, but not a ceremonial, figurehead president, but a president with executive power. Cambodia became a republic with an executive president but name. In his own writings our August, Great and Valorous King, has also alluded ro the presidential nature of his regime from the time he had been made Head of State.
When UNTAC came to run our country and organise the election of a new government in 1992-1993, there was an attempt to get that UN body to also organise a presidential election aimed at getting our August, Great and Valorous King elected President of Cambdia. Apparently, he was willing to stand for that presidential election, and he would indeed have been elected when he was so popular that he was confined to the royal palace almost all the time after his return from Beijing 1n November 1992.
I, for one, objected to that rumoured presidential election and wrote an article for Phnom Penh Post to voice this objection. (I'm sending this article to KI-media.blogspot.com to kindly reproduce in its column). I talked to Samdech Son Sann, whom I served and from whom I have learned a lot, and also a few Son Sannist colleagues, I wanted to stand in that presidential election as well with only two-point political platform: (1) I wanted Cambodia to be a Kingdom; (2) If I was elected president, I would invite our present August, Great and Valorous King, to assume the thone, and after that I'd resign to be become just an ordinary "citizen Lao" (as a royalist called me from time to time-he was later made ambassador and since then has not returned to Cambodia). Samdech Son Sann and those colleagues were dismayed.
Back to the confication of the Free Press Magazine, the reason for it is not so much the "republican" issue as the issue of the murder of our famous actress Piseth Pilika. Some years ago, probably in 2003, a small book of the murder with the photo of our beautiful actress on its cover was published and sold in Phnom Penh. The copies of that small book were all confisticated.
An authoritiative French magazine, L'Express, published a story of her murder, citing our Prime Minister's affair with her and implicating his wife in the matter. Our Prime Minister's people vowed to sue L'Express magazine for defamation, but hey have never done so ever since.
The whole thing probably boils down to our memories (or ghosts) of our parents, relatives, teachers, friends and other fellow Cambodians who died at the hands of the Khmer Rouge, and the memory (or ghost) of our famous actress Piseth Pilika, haunting respecively those who had associated with the Khmer Rouge and those who were behind the murder of Piseth Pilika or who might know who might be her assassin yet have not acted to find justice for her.
LAO Mong Hay
Sunday, November 04, 2007
Reaction to the confiscation of the Free Press Magazine
03 November 2007
By Keo Nimol
Radio Free Asia
Translated from Khmer by Socheata
By Keo Nimol
Radio Free Asia
Translated from Khmer by Socheata
The Cambodian Action Committee for Justice and Equity (CACJE), the bankroller of the Free Press Magazine (FPM), issued a declaration condemning the Cambodian government which confiscated all issues of the FPM, and CACJE also warned that it will sue the government.
In their declaration issued on 02 November, CACJE and the FPM editors indicated that the confiscation of the magazine from newspapers’ kiosks is tantamount to using dictatorial force to shut down the freedom to express of opinion by the people.
This declaration also raised the fact that the confiscation of the magazine is a coward act, and it also accused that this action is nothing more than a threat against the editors of the magazine.
Hy Chantha, who claimed that he is a representative of the FPM, told RFA that the confiscation of the magazine generated a loss of about $1,000 of revenue.
Hy Chantha said: “Regarding the issue of the FPM confiscation in Phnom Penh, I am reacting back by saying that this is a shutdown of the freedom rights, and this action shows that Cambodia which proclaims to be a democracy, in reality, there is no freedom in the legal expression of opinion at all, quite to the contrary. We have a constitution which stipulates that our people have the right in front of the law, and they have the right to express their opinion. Furthermore, this magazine (FPM) in an independent magazine, and we wrote on both sides, we wrote according to the journalist code of conduct, why did the Ministry (on Information) confiscated the magazine in Phnom Penh, in Battambang, and in a number of other provinces?”
Regarding this confiscation of the magazine, Khieu Kanharith, the minister of information and government spokesman, rejected that the Ministry of Information asked the authority to confiscate the magazine.
Khieu Kanharith said: “Truly speaking, the king is inviolable, should the royal palace sue back (the FPM). Furthermore, when asked about the director of the magazine, he doesn’t know anything at all. Therefore, they are scorning the king too much, they should have left the king as some kind of symbol…”
The FPM published its first edition which included several articles related to the killing of movie star Pisith Pilika; the assassination of Chea Vichea, the former President of the Free Trade Union of Cambodia; the warning issued by Hun Sen against army chiefs; poems critical of prime minister Hun Sen; a cartoon in which the cartoonist poked fun on certain actions related to the former monarch of Cambodia, King Norodom Sihanouk.
In their declaration issued on 02 November, CACJE and the FPM editors indicated that the confiscation of the magazine from newspapers’ kiosks is tantamount to using dictatorial force to shut down the freedom to express of opinion by the people.
This declaration also raised the fact that the confiscation of the magazine is a coward act, and it also accused that this action is nothing more than a threat against the editors of the magazine.
Hy Chantha, who claimed that he is a representative of the FPM, told RFA that the confiscation of the magazine generated a loss of about $1,000 of revenue.
Hy Chantha said: “Regarding the issue of the FPM confiscation in Phnom Penh, I am reacting back by saying that this is a shutdown of the freedom rights, and this action shows that Cambodia which proclaims to be a democracy, in reality, there is no freedom in the legal expression of opinion at all, quite to the contrary. We have a constitution which stipulates that our people have the right in front of the law, and they have the right to express their opinion. Furthermore, this magazine (FPM) in an independent magazine, and we wrote on both sides, we wrote according to the journalist code of conduct, why did the Ministry (on Information) confiscated the magazine in Phnom Penh, in Battambang, and in a number of other provinces?”
Regarding this confiscation of the magazine, Khieu Kanharith, the minister of information and government spokesman, rejected that the Ministry of Information asked the authority to confiscate the magazine.
Khieu Kanharith said: “Truly speaking, the king is inviolable, should the royal palace sue back (the FPM). Furthermore, when asked about the director of the magazine, he doesn’t know anything at all. Therefore, they are scorning the king too much, they should have left the king as some kind of symbol…”
The FPM published its first edition which included several articles related to the killing of movie star Pisith Pilika; the assassination of Chea Vichea, the former President of the Free Trade Union of Cambodia; the warning issued by Hun Sen against army chiefs; poems critical of prime minister Hun Sen; a cartoon in which the cartoonist poked fun on certain actions related to the former monarch of Cambodia, King Norodom Sihanouk.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Echo from the past (17 Oct 1990) by Dr. Lao Mong Hay: Cambodia needs a King and UN
Cambodia needs a King and UN
17 Oct 1990
The Nation (Thailand)
17 Oct 1990
The Nation (Thailand)
M.H. Lao calls for the restoration of monarchy and an open-ended commitment of the United Nations in Cambodia.
The Cambodians themselves and the architects of a future peaceful settlement of the conflict in Cambodia may have to look harder at the realities of Cambodian society and to take them into account if they are to have an effective and efficient administration of the country by the United Nations and a lasting peace they, are working for.
Compared with almost all countries in the world, Cambodia does, not seem to have any strong pillars or institutions to support and sustain its society. The brutal Marxist revolution and foreign aggression before and after that revolution have broken that society to its very foundations. Cambodia's social, cultural, and above all moral and ethical values have largely been destroyed. War propaganda and political indoctrination have worked against proclaimed efforts to rebuild that society. Hate has been institutionalized in the form of Day of National Hatred (May 20) inside Cambodia. Vengeance has been exhorted among the young, especially among the Khmer Rouge orphans who have been recruited into the Vietnamese-trained army.
Nowadays one can almost be certain that there are hardly any national institutions that can control large sections of the population or around which large sections of the population are bound together. Some talk of the "rebirth" of Buddhism in Cambodia. But the state and status of this religion are almost nothing compared with those before 1970. Even then Buddhism had greatly lost its influence over Cambodian society. The Phnom Penh regime and its administrative machinery have been in a parlous state all along. They have lately been very divided and are seen to be very corrupt. The communist party which controls the regime and the administrative machinery from top to bottom is dislike and commands no trust from the people. The Phnom Penh army, however much support it has got from the Vietnamese troops, is very weak and has no will to fight.
In the liberated zones, the resistance forces have not been able to inspire complete trust in them on the part of the population and to establish stronger institutions and administrative machinery.
In this situation the United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia (UNTAC) provided for in the Big Five's peace plan would have to do a lot to be able to bring those bits and pieces of Cambodian society together. To be able to satisfactorily complete this task, which is crucial to a lasting' peace, would take much longer time than the proposed two years.
The Cambodians who wish to uphold the supreme interests of their nation and the international community, which has shown so much concern for the Cambodian people should strive to promote Cambodia's remaining national institutions which still command popular respect and support. One of, such institutions is the Monarchy.
Many including surviving members of Cambodia's royal family feel that the Monarchy is completely discredited and destroyed. This may be so for the elite but to the ordinary people, after experiencing the consequences of, many non-monarchical forms of government, the Monarchy is still seen as the least bad.
There is now the question of who could and would occupy the throne. Again most educated Cambodians, including this family for various reasons, But to the ordinary people and especially to the older generation Prince Norodom Sihanouk is the most popular.
How to reconcile these different attitudes prevailing in Cambodian society? Prince Sihanouk himself has already agreed to a parliamentary regime. With external help, a deal could be struck to consolidate the foundations of a constitutional monarchy while UNTAC is governing Cambodia.
It would make a great impact on the Cambodian people if Prince Sihanouk could be crowned again on the 50th anniversary of his first coronation, that is, in April 1991. A big celebration of this Golden Jubilee would contribute; tremendously to the unity of these people. With a people now psychologically and socially more united around its King and with his cooperation, UNTAC's task in the administration, would be easier and more effective.
UNTAC: A dangerous deadline
All parties concerned over the conflict-in Cambodia have agreed to an enhanced role of the UN in the administration of Cambodia in the transitional period leading to the election and setting up of a national government of Cambodia. All have also agreed to the setting up of UNTAC for this purpose.
All the big pieces of the jigsaw puzzle seem to be in place, at least on paper. However, as to the nitty-gritty of the actual implementation of the final agreements on ending the Vietnamese occupation of Cambodia and the actual administration of Cambodia by UNTAC, many thorny issues are yet to be addressed. Nevertheless, thus far, there has been some sort of consensus on a few important points of this administration:
It is likely that both communist parties, when under irresistable pressure, would simply go along with the Perm Five's transitional arrangements, make the most of them, behave before the elections and try to win them. They would just lie low and hide their fangs under UNTAC’s rule. It is very likely that the outcome of these elections would be unfavourable to at least one of these rival parties. The losing party would not be happy and would not hesitate to seize the opportunity offered by social disorganization and political instability to come back to power.
Its cadres including army officers who are used to having power and riches by the use of this power and who cannot find other satisfactory employment because of its shortage or of their lack of skills and knowledge would then organize themselves and resort to their old ways once UNTAC is out of Cambodia, History in the region has shown that the communists are very patient and can wait for a very long time. Two years away is simply tomorrow for them. The ineffective role and, at the end, the departure from Cambodia in the late 1960s of the International Control Commission that eventually led to the final collapse of Cambodia should be a strong reminder.
As has been well known already' very few former colonies have experienced political and social stability let alone, economic prosperity in the aftermath of the colonial rule. Cambodia itself experienced continued political instability after the departure of the French until it finally collapsed when the Vietnam war was extended to its territory. But then it had at least social and, until the early 1960s, economic stability thanks to its strong institutions such as its Monarchy, its religion and its vast land compared with a small population. But now Cambodia is in a much worse condition than it was in the aftermath of French rule. The probability of a dangerous political, social and economic instability and of the ensuing struggle for power is very high.
The international community which has been so generous to the Cambodian people should reconsider the deadline of UNTAC and make its commitment to looking after these people an open-ended one. The costs of this open-ended commitment may not be necessarily higher as it would force at least the present generation of communists to abandon right from the beginning all hopes of regaining power by their old ways and to learn, as lately in Eastern Europe and Mongolia, a democratic' way to power.
Once all abandon these hopes and the Monarchy restored UNTAC will have more cooperation from them and an environment far more conducive to its effective administration and could start to gradually phase out its costly staff earlier than planned until at the end it would simply need a skeletal staff of technical advisors to assist the Cambodian authorities.
M.H. Lao is director of the Institute of Public Administration of the Khmer People's National Liberation Front.
The Cambodians themselves and the architects of a future peaceful settlement of the conflict in Cambodia may have to look harder at the realities of Cambodian society and to take them into account if they are to have an effective and efficient administration of the country by the United Nations and a lasting peace they, are working for.
Compared with almost all countries in the world, Cambodia does, not seem to have any strong pillars or institutions to support and sustain its society. The brutal Marxist revolution and foreign aggression before and after that revolution have broken that society to its very foundations. Cambodia's social, cultural, and above all moral and ethical values have largely been destroyed. War propaganda and political indoctrination have worked against proclaimed efforts to rebuild that society. Hate has been institutionalized in the form of Day of National Hatred (May 20) inside Cambodia. Vengeance has been exhorted among the young, especially among the Khmer Rouge orphans who have been recruited into the Vietnamese-trained army.
Nowadays one can almost be certain that there are hardly any national institutions that can control large sections of the population or around which large sections of the population are bound together. Some talk of the "rebirth" of Buddhism in Cambodia. But the state and status of this religion are almost nothing compared with those before 1970. Even then Buddhism had greatly lost its influence over Cambodian society. The Phnom Penh regime and its administrative machinery have been in a parlous state all along. They have lately been very divided and are seen to be very corrupt. The communist party which controls the regime and the administrative machinery from top to bottom is dislike and commands no trust from the people. The Phnom Penh army, however much support it has got from the Vietnamese troops, is very weak and has no will to fight.
In the liberated zones, the resistance forces have not been able to inspire complete trust in them on the part of the population and to establish stronger institutions and administrative machinery.
In this situation the United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia (UNTAC) provided for in the Big Five's peace plan would have to do a lot to be able to bring those bits and pieces of Cambodian society together. To be able to satisfactorily complete this task, which is crucial to a lasting' peace, would take much longer time than the proposed two years.
The Cambodians who wish to uphold the supreme interests of their nation and the international community, which has shown so much concern for the Cambodian people should strive to promote Cambodia's remaining national institutions which still command popular respect and support. One of, such institutions is the Monarchy.
Many including surviving members of Cambodia's royal family feel that the Monarchy is completely discredited and destroyed. This may be so for the elite but to the ordinary people, after experiencing the consequences of, many non-monarchical forms of government, the Monarchy is still seen as the least bad.
There is now the question of who could and would occupy the throne. Again most educated Cambodians, including this family for various reasons, But to the ordinary people and especially to the older generation Prince Norodom Sihanouk is the most popular.
How to reconcile these different attitudes prevailing in Cambodian society? Prince Sihanouk himself has already agreed to a parliamentary regime. With external help, a deal could be struck to consolidate the foundations of a constitutional monarchy while UNTAC is governing Cambodia.
It would make a great impact on the Cambodian people if Prince Sihanouk could be crowned again on the 50th anniversary of his first coronation, that is, in April 1991. A big celebration of this Golden Jubilee would contribute; tremendously to the unity of these people. With a people now psychologically and socially more united around its King and with his cooperation, UNTAC's task in the administration, would be easier and more effective.
UNTAC: A dangerous deadline
All parties concerned over the conflict-in Cambodia have agreed to an enhanced role of the UN in the administration of Cambodia in the transitional period leading to the election and setting up of a national government of Cambodia. All have also agreed to the setting up of UNTAC for this purpose.
All the big pieces of the jigsaw puzzle seem to be in place, at least on paper. However, as to the nitty-gritty of the actual implementation of the final agreements on ending the Vietnamese occupation of Cambodia and the actual administration of Cambodia by UNTAC, many thorny issues are yet to be addressed. Nevertheless, thus far, there has been some sort of consensus on a few important points of this administration:
- UNTAC will administer Cambodia over a period of two years;
- It will run five key ministries (interior, defence, finance, foreign affairs and information) and have 10,000 peace-keepers and 10,000 civilian staff;
- The financial burden on the UN, that is, on the international community, will be between three and five billion US dollars.
It is likely that both communist parties, when under irresistable pressure, would simply go along with the Perm Five's transitional arrangements, make the most of them, behave before the elections and try to win them. They would just lie low and hide their fangs under UNTAC’s rule. It is very likely that the outcome of these elections would be unfavourable to at least one of these rival parties. The losing party would not be happy and would not hesitate to seize the opportunity offered by social disorganization and political instability to come back to power.
Its cadres including army officers who are used to having power and riches by the use of this power and who cannot find other satisfactory employment because of its shortage or of their lack of skills and knowledge would then organize themselves and resort to their old ways once UNTAC is out of Cambodia, History in the region has shown that the communists are very patient and can wait for a very long time. Two years away is simply tomorrow for them. The ineffective role and, at the end, the departure from Cambodia in the late 1960s of the International Control Commission that eventually led to the final collapse of Cambodia should be a strong reminder.
As has been well known already' very few former colonies have experienced political and social stability let alone, economic prosperity in the aftermath of the colonial rule. Cambodia itself experienced continued political instability after the departure of the French until it finally collapsed when the Vietnam war was extended to its territory. But then it had at least social and, until the early 1960s, economic stability thanks to its strong institutions such as its Monarchy, its religion and its vast land compared with a small population. But now Cambodia is in a much worse condition than it was in the aftermath of French rule. The probability of a dangerous political, social and economic instability and of the ensuing struggle for power is very high.
The international community which has been so generous to the Cambodian people should reconsider the deadline of UNTAC and make its commitment to looking after these people an open-ended one. The costs of this open-ended commitment may not be necessarily higher as it would force at least the present generation of communists to abandon right from the beginning all hopes of regaining power by their old ways and to learn, as lately in Eastern Europe and Mongolia, a democratic' way to power.
Once all abandon these hopes and the Monarchy restored UNTAC will have more cooperation from them and an environment far more conducive to its effective administration and could start to gradually phase out its costly staff earlier than planned until at the end it would simply need a skeletal staff of technical advisors to assist the Cambodian authorities.
M.H. Lao is director of the Institute of Public Administration of the Khmer People's National Liberation Front.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
An accidental royalist: Hun Sen stakes his claim on the re-establishment of the monarchy in Cambodia
Hun Sen recalls about the revival of the monarchy23 October 2007
By Mondul Keo
Radio Free Asia
Translated from Khmer by Heng Soy
One day prior to the 16th anniversary of the Paris Peace Agreements, prime minister Hun Sen recalled about the effort put by the CPP to invite the former monarch to return back to Cambodia to re-establish the monarchy.
In a speech given at the Phnom Ta Mao, located in Samrong district, Takeo province, during the inauguration of the opening of the Hun Sen-Phnom Ta Mao nursery plantation, Hun Sen reminded that in 1970, Marshall Lon Nol carried a coup d’état which toppled then-Prince Norodom Sihanouk, then-leader of the monarchy regime, and (Lon Nol) then established a republic.
Hun Sen added that after the fall of the Lon Nol republican regime, Pol Pot, the leader of the Democratic Kampuchea regime, continued the policy of suppressing the monarchy.
Hun Sen said: “The issue of the monarchy was that it was toppled and destroyed by a coup d’état, and a republican regime was established, along with the start of the war all over the country. His Majesty remained in exile, and when he returned back home, he was imprisoned by the Pol Pot group.”
At the same time, Hun Sen also recalled about the effort put the CPP, in combination with the intelligent thinking of the former Cambodian monarch, which contributed to the birth of the constitutional monarchy in Cambodia.
Hun Sen added: “On 14 November 1991, I and my wife accompanied His Majesty from Beijing to our capital Phnom Penh.”
Eng Chhay Eang, SRP Secretary-general, said that some politicians claim that they respect the king, but their actions in fact show the opposite.
Eng Chhay Eang said: “If one only talks the talk, but in reality, one does respect (the king), this is not right. For example, as we can see, a number of rights prescribed for the king as stipulated in the constitution, they are not being put into practice by some leaders.”
In 1993, during the first plenary session of the Cambodian National Assembly, this body unanimously decided to provide the role of State Leader to the former monarch.
Nevertheless, it is usually observed that various political parties tend to use the name of the former Cambodian monarch, King Norodom Sihanouk, for their popularity gain during the election period. Each time, the former monarch had to declare his neutrality in politics.
In a speech given at the Phnom Ta Mao, located in Samrong district, Takeo province, during the inauguration of the opening of the Hun Sen-Phnom Ta Mao nursery plantation, Hun Sen reminded that in 1970, Marshall Lon Nol carried a coup d’état which toppled then-Prince Norodom Sihanouk, then-leader of the monarchy regime, and (Lon Nol) then established a republic.
Hun Sen added that after the fall of the Lon Nol republican regime, Pol Pot, the leader of the Democratic Kampuchea regime, continued the policy of suppressing the monarchy.
Hun Sen said: “The issue of the monarchy was that it was toppled and destroyed by a coup d’état, and a republican regime was established, along with the start of the war all over the country. His Majesty remained in exile, and when he returned back home, he was imprisoned by the Pol Pot group.”
At the same time, Hun Sen also recalled about the effort put the CPP, in combination with the intelligent thinking of the former Cambodian monarch, which contributed to the birth of the constitutional monarchy in Cambodia.
Hun Sen added: “On 14 November 1991, I and my wife accompanied His Majesty from Beijing to our capital Phnom Penh.”
Eng Chhay Eang, SRP Secretary-general, said that some politicians claim that they respect the king, but their actions in fact show the opposite.
Eng Chhay Eang said: “If one only talks the talk, but in reality, one does respect (the king), this is not right. For example, as we can see, a number of rights prescribed for the king as stipulated in the constitution, they are not being put into practice by some leaders.”
In 1993, during the first plenary session of the Cambodian National Assembly, this body unanimously decided to provide the role of State Leader to the former monarch.
Nevertheless, it is usually observed that various political parties tend to use the name of the former Cambodian monarch, King Norodom Sihanouk, for their popularity gain during the election period. Each time, the former monarch had to declare his neutrality in politics.
Monday, March 19, 2007
Freedom of the press redux? King-Father wants to sue the Sralanh Khmer newspaper
Portion of the Friday's edition of the Sralanh Khmer newspaper article reporting the accusations made by Mr. Yin Sem (rigth). (Photo: Sralanh Khmer newspaper)19 March 2007
King-Father wants to sue the Sralanh Khmer newspaper
Everyday.com.kh
Translated from Khmer by Socheata
The Sralanh Khmer article (in Khmer) about the accusations made by Mr. Yin Sem, a French-Cambodian citizen, can be read here by clicking here:
Part 1 of the article
Part 2 of the article
Part 1 of the article
Part 2 of the article
Former King Norodom Sihanouk is planning to sue the Sralanh Khmer newspaper, a newspaper supporting the SRP, after the publication by the newspaper of an article last week which accused the former monarch[‘s involvement with] the Khmer Rouge regime. The Cambodia Daily said that in a message sent by email, King-Father is asking Kong Som Ol, the royal palace official, to bring a lawsuit in his name and that of his wife, Quen-Mother Norodom Monineath, against the editor of the Sralanh Khmer newspaper as well as the author of the article. King-Father said that the long article published by the newspaper attacked him and looked down on him unjustly, and that the article distort the history of Cambodia, as well as defaming his honor, and defaming the honor of the Khmer monarchy of the 20th and 21st century. The two-part article published by the Sralanh Khmer newspaper on Thursday and Friday accused King-Father and Prime Minister Hun Sen of involvement with the Khmer Rouge regime.
Sunday, February 11, 2007
Nhiek Bun Chhay: A small group of royal family members are creating political instability
Funcinpec: A small group of royal family members are creating political instability
10 Feb 2007
By Kem Sotheavin
Radio Free Asia
Translated from Khmer by Heng Soy
10 Feb 2007
By Kem Sotheavin
Radio Free Asia
Translated from Khmer by Heng Soy
The Funcinpec party charged that a small group of royal family members are fomenting political instability which could spell trouble for the stability of the monarchy.
In a statement issued by Funcinpec detailing the views of Nhiek Bun Chhay, Funcinpec secretary-general, the latter wrote that he is extremely worried, especially the situation involving the removal of royal family members from the political arena.
The 9 Feb statement accused the political activities led by a small group of royal family members who defame the honor, the name, and the respect of the Khmer monarchy, and that these activities could one day affect the stability of the monarchy itself.
In a statement issued by Funcinpec detailing the views of Nhiek Bun Chhay, Funcinpec secretary-general, the latter wrote that he is extremely worried, especially the situation involving the removal of royal family members from the political arena.
The 9 Feb statement accused the political activities led by a small group of royal family members who defame the honor, the name, and the respect of the Khmer monarchy, and that these activities could one day affect the stability of the monarchy itself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
