April, 2015

now browsing by month

Posted by: | Posted on: April 28, 2015

Political Paradigm of Pragmatism from Khmer Youth part 17

At the end, the Author concluded that Cambodia as a state has seems relentless to undertake a policy that led to success. He made an analogy statement like a lost traveler and a direction pointer, eventually the direction pointer is also clueless on the actual place a lost traveler is seeking for assistance.

This part, the Author Mr. Sophan Seng, has analysed the different between three countries of three ideologies-resulted struggles. For USA who has embraced pragmatism, this country was formerly under UK authority, has jumped up from a status as a colonial country to most civilized democratic country. George Washington who is named “Founding Father” of the United States once was a military chief belonged to England.

Policy Don Dien

From “In Search of Moral Authority: The Discourse on Poverty, Poor Relief, and Charity in French Colonial Vietnam” by Van Nguyen-Marshall

For Vietnam, their past history as a France colonial country has transformed their leadership into pure communism equipped by strict rules and deadly punishment on those corrupt officers. This country has practiced communism as the result bestowed by ideological statecraft. For Cambodia, we have experienced both colonialism and hybrid democratic post-colonial period and the post-cold war both Khmer Rouge and Vietnamese occupation, but as the result, Cambodia is a revolutionary state which is paralleled of third world country, a last sort.

Policy Khai Hoang

From “In Search of Moral Authority: The Discourse on Poverty, Poor Relief, and Charity in French Colonial Vietnam” by Van Nguyen-Marshall

For Vietnam, their ancestors had developed the policy of Don Dien which means sending the military into the distance areas of dense forests, in order to clear the forests to paving way for community/villages creating, bringing the people in to settle there by state’s supports, helping them with capacity-building by creating community/village system, and the military withdraw from those areas in search for further expansion etc. Those civilian Don Dien people have successfully expanded their territories for generations to come. In the year of 1986 or so, the Vietnamese government crafted Doi Moi policy to solve the problems of political and economic stigma/sanctions while their military and political domination experienced heavy hand in Cambodia. Doi Moi means “Renovation” to responding to the state’s policy of “socialist-oriented market economy” intended to achieve various reforms.

From "Socioeconomic Renovation in Vietnam: The Origin, Evolution, and Impact of Doi Moi" by Peter Boothroyd and Pham Xuan Nam

From “Socioeconomic Renovation in Vietnam: The Origin, Evolution, and Impact of Doi Moi” by Peter Boothroyd and Pham Xuan Nam

Hence, Cambodian people and experts have asked simple question on sending military into Cambodia in January 7, 1979 is the act of Don Dien, and to withdraw the military back in 1989 is the act of Doi Moi, or not? The prospect view to believing that Vietnamese Don Dien in this 21st century shaped different from that 18th century. While the Khmer Rouge whited out every thing in Cambodia, the coming of Vietnamese military and governmental officers including hundred thousand experts, are the biggest Don Dien expedition to rebuild this jungle land to come back to life. Thus, the military withdrawal in 1989 was voluntary by Vietnamese faction without having international inspection to the realistic and actual receding procedures. Many believed that Vietnamese military uniforms were sent back to Vietnam, while civilian Don Dien populations are continuing their tasks unobstructedly.

At the end, the Author concluded that Cambodia as a state has seems relentless to undertake a policy that led to success. He made an analogy statement like a lost traveler and a direction pointer, eventually the direction pointer is also clueless on the actual place a lost traveler is seeking for assistance.

Posted by: | Posted on: April 28, 2015

China to Cambodia: Don’t Mention the War

Only the Cambodian people shall fully affidavit the Chinese involvement in Cambodia politics, present and future.

China to Cambodia: Don’t Mention the War


China’s sledgehammer approach to diplomacy has won Beijing few friends in Southeast Asia. Its attitudes to maritime disputes in the South China Sea, massive land acquisitions by state-owned companies and its cash-for-influence strategyamong regional governments have all been the subject of unflattering headlines.

But expectations were raised when China’s top political advisor Yu Zhengsheng met with King Norodom Sihamoni of Cambodia and his mother, the former Queen Norodom Monineath Sihanouk, in Beijing on April 17thwith observers expecting more than the usual bland diplomatic tidings.

That day was the 40th anniversary of the Chinese-backed, Khmer Rouge takeover of Cambodia.

In Phnom Penh commemorations were underway, including a dawn service at the Killing Fields, book launches, and seminars amid a school holiday and religious ceremonies for what ranks among the most intensely observed cultural days on the Khmer calendar.

“China will continue to pursue a friendly policy towards Cambodia, and work closely with the country to implement the consensus reached between both leaders and build a community of shared destinies,” Yu said. That was about all he said.

Yu, chairman of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, also conveyed Chinese President Xi Jinping’s greetings, according to the Xinhua news agency.

“Hailing the friendship between both countries, Yu said King Sihamoni has claimed the legacy of his father, late Cambodian King Norodom Sihanouk, to develop bilateral friendship and make new contribution to enhancing ties with China,” Xinhua reported in a dispatch dated April 17.

Sihamoni spent much the 1975-79 Khmer Rouge reign, essentially as a prisoner, in the royal palace after his father Norodom Sihanouk had a falling out with Pol Pot, whom he had initially supported after he was voted out of political office by his own National Assembly in 1970.

Read More …

Posted by: | Posted on: April 25, 2015

Culture of Dialogue in Cambodian Context

In human societies there will always be differences of views and interests. But the reality today is that we are all interdependent and have to co-exist on this small planet. Therefore, the only sensible and intelligent way of resolving differences and clashes of interests, whether between individuals or nations, is through dialogue. The promotion of a culture of dialogue and non-violence for the future of mankind is thus an important task of the international community.

His Holiness the Dalai Lama
in a speech to the “Forum 2000” Conference,
Prague, Czech Republic, 4 September 1997

During this few weeks, the term “Culture of Dialogue” has been publicly conceptualized and verbalized. The two prominent leaders of Cambodia ie. Prime Minister Hun Sen of government leadership, and HE Sam Rainsy of main opposition CNRP leadership, have transformed the coinage of this term into tangible implementation. This term is rare in Cambodia politics to be heard and convinced by the Khmer politicians. Sometime, we have heard about it but not at the intention of implanting it concretely or making it a grand policy by the Cambodian leaders.

Looking back

Culture of Dialogue 2“Culture of Dialogue” is not new in the context of daily use for common communication. Humankind has communicated with each other at least since the birth of human social establishment. But when this term has developed and evolved itself into more professional level, the Culture of Dialogue ideally means a norm or guidance of a shared exploration towards greater understanding, connection and possibility.

Considering the dilemma of embedded human conflicts, which Aristotle formalized human beings are “social animals”, the World War I and World War II is the testament of this conflict nature, but Enlightenment theory such as Buddha and Voltaire before Christian era and during the 16th century, had paved foundation for the world’s leaders to halting confrontational nature by using diplomatic means of dialogue to completely end the war and to shake hand for shared responsibility and collective development.

For Cambodia, we have developed this dialogue during the post-colonial Culture of Dialogue 4politics. Sangkum Reastre Niyum led by King Norodom Sihanouk was merely a domestic “dialogue” while his foreign policy as a non-aligned country is considered a dialogue approach. But that non-alignment policy was staying on a ridge in between two tigers: USA and China. The slippery ridge finally knocked Cambodia down to the bottom line of catastrophe during 1970 to 1990. During the effort to bring about national reconciliation and peace mediated by the United Nations, the Paris Peace Agreement was crafted, that was all achieved by “Culture of Dialogue”. But this culture has considerably faded away after that.

Culture of Dialogue 3After the 2013 election, the embodiment of this culture promoted by HE Sam Rainsy and positively responded by Prime Minister Hun Sen has seen as the cornerstone for democratization and sustainable development in Cambodia if the two leaders shall always respect their speech and action, with no tricks in it and coercion to exploit this great grant policy.

What should be done in general context

According to co-intelligence.org, there are sorts of dialogue dictated following:

  • interpersonal dialogue in all relationships
  • group dialogue as the norm in all groups and organizations
  • intergroup dialogue among groups and organizations
  • issue-oriented dialogue among stakeholders (in the case of conflicts and decision-making)
  • community dialogue among citizens exploring and co-creating their shared future
  • regular dialogue programs woven into coherent activities that have recognized roles in the community, organization or culture
  • systemic dialogue which is the result of all of these and the context. It consists of a widespread expectation among people
    • that dialogue will happen whenever there is need to settle disputes, make decisions or learn and grow together;
    • that there are many forms of dialogue useful for various purposes which most people have a working knowledge of and access to expertise in; and
    • that dialogue is a normal and desirable part of life — in relationships, groups, organizations, communities and culture.

    When dialogue is systemic in a culture, it has been institutionalized: it shapes every institution from marriage to bureaucracy, from education to health care, from politics to business. Everyone in the culture is trying to explore, to connect with each other, to make things possible, and to learn and grow together.

  • living dialogue involves a dialogic approach to aliveness wherever it exists — in people, in nature, in all situations. In this sense, it can be practiced as a spiritual discipline. It can become a characterstic quality of a life, a group, an entire culture.

Read More …

Posted by: | Posted on: April 25, 2015



ក្នុងចំណោមប្រទេសដែលបានសិក្សាចំនួន១៥៨ប្រទេសជុំវិញពិភពលោក ប្រស្វីសជាប់ចំណាត់ថ្នាក់លេខ១ ប្រទេសកាណាដាលេខ៥ ក្នុងខណៈពេលដែលប្រទេសសហរដ្ឋអាមេរិកលេខ១៥។ ចំណែកប្រទេសកម្ពុជាគឺស្ថិតក្នុងលេខ១៤៥។

យ៉ាងណាក៏ដោយការសិក្សាដាច់ឡែកមួយទៀតបោះពុម្ពផ្សាយតាមបណ្តាញអិនតេីរនិតក្នុងខែតុលា ២០១៤ បញ្ជាក់ថាកម្ពុជាជាប់លេខពីររឿងពុករលួយក្នុងចំណោម១៥ប្រទេសដែលអាក្រក់ជាងគេបង្អស់ក្នុងពិភពលលោក។

worlds-unhappiest-countries 2 worlds-happiest-countries 1