Neutrality and Justice

Chhun Yasith (L) and General Vang Pao (R)

April 7, 2008
New York Sun Editorial

'Contrary to the government's assertion, it is by no means self-evident that a person engaged in extra-territorial or resistance activities — even militant activities — is necessarily a threat to the security of the United States. One country's terrorist can often be another country's freedom-fighter."

* * *

It happens that those words were written by one of our wisest federal Judges, John Noonan, who rides the 9th United States appellate circuit. He was deciding, in 2004, an immigration case involving a Sikh militant. We thought of the judge's point as we were ruminating on two current criminal prosecutions on the Coast that are being levied by the Justice Department against individuals who are hardly neutral — they are on our side in a twilight struggle against remnant communist regimes in Indochina.

One, whose opening arguments last week were covered by our Josh Gerstein, involves the trial of a Cambodian American Yasith Chhun, an accountant who was indicted in May 2005 under the Neutrality Act for alleged acts against the government of Cambodia. The charges also included conspiring to kill in a foreign country, to destroy property overseas, and to use a weapon of mass destruction, namely, rocket propelled grenades. Mr. Chhun's defense, our Mr. Gerstein reported Wednesday, is arguing that he was engaged in a noble, if naive, attempt to free his countrymen from a despotic regime and that he had no desire to see anyone killed in the process. The head of the regime against which he plotted, Hun Sen, was, the defense has pointed out, a brigade commander under Pol Pot, one of the worst mass murderers in history.

The second case, which Mr. Gerstein has also been covering, involves the Hmong freedom fighter, Vang Pao, who, with ten other men, was indicted in June at Sacramento on a strikingly similar set of federal charges for their attempts to liberate their homeland of Laos. They were also charged with conspiring to violate the Neutrality Act and conspiring to kill abroad. The Hmong group also faces weapons charges because it allegedly tried to purchase weapons here in America. We have already voiced in these columns our alarm at the case against Vang Pao. In league with our Central Intelligence Agency, he led the Laotian hill tribes in the twilight struggle against the communist conquest of his, and neighboring, countries in Indochina. There are few men alive on the planet today to whom the cause of freedom owes as much as is owed to Vang Pao.

* * *

The issues in these trials, however, go way beyond Vang Pao and Yasith Chhun — to the question of America's traditional role in the world. "At least since 1848, the year of democratic revolutions in Europe," Judge Noonan wrote in the immigration case cited above, "the United States has been a hotbed of sympathy for revolution in other lands, often with emigres to this country organizing moral and material support for their countrymen oppressed by European empires such as those of Austria, Britain and Russia." He cited such famous figures as David Ben Gurion and Nelson Mandela and made a reference to the struggle for Tibet. The jurist issued a call for an evaluation of evidence rather than speculation that couldn't be more important as America regards the freedom-fighters operating against the remnant communist dictators in Indochina.

Comment to New York Sun Editor [regarding Chhun Yasith's trial]

April 3, 2008
By Kok Sap
Originally posted on http://neokhmer.wordpress.com

RE: At Trial, Cambodian-American Coup Plotter Portrayed as Reckless

Dear Editor,

The article compels me to comment. No slight the aftermath was from 3-6 killed and most likely all were insurgents and by standers caught in cross fire. The charges appear credible but raise confusion further. In light of 1797 neutrality laws and its interpretation by brilliant Attorney General Robert F Kennedy in April 20 1961 statement which appears inapplicable in Citizen Yasith case. Undoubtedly he is a sacrificial lamb for our foreign relations enhancement with Cambodia dictator. Conveniently his charges are based on outdated laws. This makes one wonder when we are getting sentimental with any known dictator.

In his arguments then there were major scale military operations Puma and Zapata led by Captain Zuniga Brigade 2506 which all were prepared, trained and departed from US to overthrow a foreign sovereignty. The Attorney General Robert F Kennedy, the boss of the very FBI famously put,” There have been a number of inquiries from the press about our present neutrality laws and the possibility of their application with the struggle for freedom in Cuba.

First may I say the neutrality laws are among the oldest laws in our statue book. Most of the provisions dated from our first year of independence, and with only minor revisions, have continued in force since the 18th century. Clearly they were not designed for the kind of situation which exists in the world today.

Second the neutrality laws were never designed to prevent the individuals from leaving the United States to fight for a cause in which they believed. There is nothing in neutrality laws which prevents refugee from Cuba from returning to that country to engage in the fight for freedom. Nor is individual prohibited from departing the United States, with others of like belief, to join still others in second country for an expedition against in a third country.

There is nothing criminal in individual leaving the United States with an intent of joining the insurgent group. There is nothing criminal in his urging others to do so. There is nothing criminal in several persons departing at the same time.

What the law does prohibit is as a group organized a military expedition from departing from United States to take action as a military force against a nation with whom the United States at peace.

There are also provisions of early origin forbidding foreign states to recruit mercenaries in this country. No activities engaged in by Cubans patriots which have been brought to our attention appear to be violations of our neutrality laws.”

From USINS angle, refugee definition fits all refugees whether from Cuba, Cambodia or Rwanda. All fled from fear of reprisal, persecution, stateless, and believes or fears of own life in danger. The United States has traditionally been proud of its claim, a home of the brave and the freed. The most adorable lady who stood tall in New York harbor said, ” Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

Given if Mr. Kennedy was still living, he probably argued in Citizen Yasith behalf that there was no law broken. The main thrust of his argument might be Citizen Yasith was not a military or mercenary recruiter. Beside in real earth time, during the event he had never set foot in either second (Thailand) or third country (Cambodia) and caught pants down in this so called plot of coup. Mr. Kennedy has clearly said, there is no criminal in his urging others to do so.

Citizen Yasith plead not guilty to the elevated charges. Seemingly it is a criminal act by showing his affection and enthusiasm in providing support of morale for a handful insurgents to take own initiative in revolting against a known dictator in Cambodia. Along the line there was another arrest of another coup plotter, General Vang Pao from Laos charged with conspiring to buy arms for the insurgents in Laos. Sadly, this General was no stranger but a staunch and instrumental ally in US war against Hanoi and China communism then. It is frightening to see the impact from US anti domino theory unrolls its friendly fire.

According to the imprisoned former police chief Heng Pov and FBI accounts per Mr. Ron Abney in March 1997, the very dictator had ordered the assassins to toss 4 grenades in the peaceful demonstration crowd which caused at least 20 death and hundreds of injured.

The irony was some US politicians were informed of the Cambodia Freedom Fighters intent. With strong hope, Citizen Yasith would have thought US take note seriously. Subsequently, the US grand jury is in action to condemn a delusional coup plotter as FBI agent called him with the help from Cambodia dictator selected 15 strong witnesses.

The US knows the dictator has the audacity to disobey the UNDP 1993 election laws and 1991 Paris Peace Accord not to say he used bloody coup in July 1997 to grab power. In this tyrant action alone cost more lives and property destruction than the accused Citizen Yasith in folds. CFF intent was to stop the dictator from terrorizing people furthermore.

In this mockery of US neutrality laws, April 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion was a full blown organized military expedition with US land, sea, and air forces support in addition to Brigade 2506 manned by Cuban exiles from Florida’s Everglades training base. The aftermath was phenomenal and historically heroic action for US foreign policy then.

For the sake of understanding and comparison from Wikipedia source, “By the time fighting ended on April 21, 1961 68 exiles were dead and 1,209 captured. A few were executed and the rest sentenced to thirty years in prison for treason. After 20 months of negotiation with the United States, Cuba released the exiles in exchange for $53 million in food and medicine. Cuba’s losses during the Bay of Pigs Invasion are unknown, possibly 4,000-5,000.

In one air attack alone, Cuban forces suffered an estimated 1,800 casualties when a mixture of army troops, militia, and civilians were caught on an open causeway riding in civilian buses towards the battle scene in which several buses were hit by napalm. The total casualties for the Brigade 2506 were 104 members killed, and a few hundred more were wounded. After the Bay of Pigs, Castro fearing the US might try to invade Cuba again.”

One can only assume this must be a daunting task for the prosecution to arrest and detain a criminal like Citizen Yasith. Meanwhile the lady from New York Harbor must be speechless that her words were no longer inspiring and meaningful. This is a new page of US history in foreign policy of SE Asia.