Archives

now browsing by author

 
Posted by: | Posted on: May 5, 2021

Chinese subversion has not worked well in countries with strong transparency and oversight

THE SUBVERSIVE METHOD

China often provides economic inducements in illicit and opaque ways that circumvent political processes and institutions. As Chinese companies have increasingly invested overseas, state-owned enterprises or private companies, sometimes with the tacit approval of Chinese officials, have offered bribes and kickbacks to elites in countries receiving investment or aid projects in order to grease the wheels of bureaucracy. At other times, Chinese companies have bypassed the process of competitive bidding and regulatory approval to secure a contract, often at inflated costs, generating extra profits for both Chinese actors and local elites. I call such inducements “subversive carrots.” In many ways, their use reflects China’s domestic political economy, where businesses depend on official connections, corruption is widespread, and few regulations govern foreign investment and foreign aid. My research shows that this method works best in countries that also have little public accountability—where the flow of information is restricted, and political leaders need not worry about public opinion and the rule of law.

Cambodia stands as a case in point. The longtime prime minister, Hun Sen, and his family control the military, the police, and much of the economy. Media outlets are beholden to the government, and journalists, activists, and opposition politicians are routinely silenced through intimidation and violence. As a result, the details of Chinese aid and investment projects in Cambodia are murky, but what information has come out suggests a government deeply corrupted by Chinese influence.

The projects financed by China tend to enrich elites while evicting the poor and degrading the environment. In the southwestern province of Koh Kong, for example, a Chinese investment group is building a massive development complex that is to include a resort, a port, an airport, power plants, manufacturing zones, and roads and highways—all adding up to an estimated $3.8 billion. While Cambodian elites have used the project to line their own pockets, the construction has destroyed ecologically sensitive areas and forced residents from their homes. Beijing may stand to benefit: the resort seems excessively large for the number of tourists the area can attract, but the airport and port appear well designed for Chinese military use.

Xi at the launch of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank in Beijing, China, October 2014
Xi at the launch of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank in Beijing, China, October 2014Takaki Yajima / Reuters

Such largess has allowed China to buy Cambodian advocacy on its behalf—in particular, regarding its aggressive maritime claims in the South China Sea. At a 2012 summit of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, Cambodia wielded its position as chair to block discussions of South China Sea disputes, and for the first time in ASEAN’s history, the organization was unable to issue a joint statement. At one point, the Cambodian foreign minister cut off delegates who tried to raise the issue, and at another, he stormed out of the room when they proposed even a watered-down statement. Government officials I’ve interviewed in the region have described Cambodia’s behavior at the summit as the result of a “straight-up monetary deal” in which Beijing paid off the Cambodian government in exchange for its support. In the months before the meeting, senior Chinese leaders visited Phnom Penh, offering additional grants and loans for infrastructure and development projects worth hundreds of millions of dollars. The investment has paid off handsomely: since 2012, ASEAN has become more divided and incoherent, allowing Beijing to consolidate its position, rhetorically and militarily, in the South China Sea.

A similar dynamic is playing out in eastern Europe. The increasingly illiberal governments of Hungary and Serbia have happily accepted handouts in exchange for promoting Chinese foreign policy positions. A high-speed railway running across the two countries, for example, remains shrouded in secrecy, even as costs have ballooned and doubts have arisen about its economic viability. Part of the project is being built by a Chinese state-owned enterprise previously blacklisted by the World Bank for irregularities, and another part, by a corrupt business ally of the Hungarian prime minister. In return, Hungary and Serbia have behaved obsequiously toward China. Hungary has issued official statements echoing Beijing’s position on the South China Sea, and Serbia’s president, in addition to kissing the Chinese flag in gratitude for receiving medical supplies early in the COVID-19 pandemic, has expressed support for China’s repressive national security law in Hong Kong. In Europe, China has plucked the low-hanging fruit, such as public statements and vetoes within the EU, and no country in the region has radically altered its foreign policy orientation. Still, Beijing has managed to dampen international criticism and trigger embarrassing public divisions about issues on which European countries used to be united.

Chinese subversion has not worked as well in countries with greater transparency and oversight. Take the Philippines during the presidency of Gloria Arroyo, who served from 2001 to 2010—a time when the country enjoyed a vibrant media sector and a competitive political system, despite high levels of corruption. Under Arroyo, China agreed to finance and build $1.6 billion worth of railway and telecommunications infrastructure. Many of the projects were awarded through vastly overpriced no-bid contracts. A planned commuter rail line called Northrail, for example, was shaping up to have the dubious distinction of being the world’s most expensive railway per mile. Costs for a national broadband network, to be built by the Chinese state-owned company ZTE, skyrocketed by $130 million to $329 million because of kickbacks to key political players, including the chair of the Philippines’ electoral commission and the president’s husband. As if on cue, in 2005, the Philippines’ national oil company signed an undersea resource exploration agreement that legitimized China’s maritime claims.

Chinese subversion has not worked well in countries with strong transparency and oversight.

Yet all this malfeasance was exposed by the press, and a public backlash ensued. Over the course of 2007 and 2008, the Philippine Senate held 13 public hearings, culminating in a long and scathing report that took Philippine politicians and Chinese companies to task for their corruption. Politicians, activists, and civil society groups organized antigovernment rallies in Manila and other cities. In response, the government suspended and reviewed a range of Chinese-financed projects, and some of the implicated elites were charged and tried in court.

It would be hard to characterize China’s campaign in the Philippines as a success. In 2010, Benigno Aquino III was elected president on an anticorruption platform and proved to be more skeptical of Beijing than his predecessor. Even though the current president, Rodrigo Duterte, has been more eager for Chinese investment, he is still partly constrained by legislators who have pushed for greater transparency and by government agencies that have implemented more stringent review procedures. At the end of the day, the country’s policy on the issue China cares about most, the South China Sea, has remained fundamentally unchanged: the Philippines has stuck to its own territorial claims.

Such fallout is common. In Australia, Beijing used Chinese businesspeople as proxies to make campaign contributions and fund academic institutes in an attempt to persuade politicians and other voices to support China’s positions on the South China Sea and human rights. The backlash was swift: in 2017, a prominent politician who allegedly accepted Chinese money and was seen as toeing the Chinese line was forced to resign, and the following year, Australia’s Parliament tightened the country’s laws on foreign political interference. In 2015, the president of Sri Lanka was voted out of office after greenlighting billions of dollars’ worth of unsustainable and corrupt Chinese infrastructure projects, and three years later, the same fate befell the president of the Maldives.

Something similar happened in Malaysia in 2018. The incumbent prime minister, Najib Razak, was mired in corruption scandals over the mismanagement of Malaysia’s state investment fund, some of which implicated Chinese-financed investments in which contract costs were inflated to cover the fund’s debts. Voters dealt his party a resounding defeat in elections that year, forcing him from office and marking the first opposition victory in Malaysia’s 61 years as an independent country. His successor, Mahathir Mohamad, quickly suspended a number of projects, renegotiated plans for a major railway, and spoke out vocally against Beijing’s actions in the South China Sea—unlike Najib, who has been sentenced to 12 years in prison. Time and again, China’s subversive statecraft has run aground on the shoals of accountable political systems.

Continue to read lengthy original content at ForeignAffairs.Org

Posted by: | Posted on: March 27, 2021

US-China relationship of President Joe Biden clashed at Alaska

ទំនាក់ទំនងរវាងអាមេរិក-ចិន អាចវាយតំលៃបានពីការជួបប្រជុំគ្នារវាងមេដឹកនាំកំពូលៗនៅរដ្ឋអាឡាស្កាសប្តាហ៍មុននេះ។

មើលវីដេអូទាំងមូល

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1QWiVwulSQ
Posted by: | Posted on: January 7, 2021

A Letter from a Cambodian Woman in Exile

Prime Minister Hun Sen’s onslaught against the Cambodian opposition has not ceased.By Mu Sochua January 07, 2021   For your reference, please refer to The Diplomat

A Letter from a Cambodian Woman in Exile
Credit: Unsplash/Pj Go

I am writing this letter in the last weeks before my planned return to my motherland, facing the prospect of living out my last years behind bars. I write this letter from exile to provide the background to the charges my colleagues and I are accused of, and explain the reason for my planned return.

As deputy president of the opposition Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP), I have been charged with a range of crimes including “conspiring to commit treason” and “incitement to commit felony,” and am one among 125 opposition leaders, members, supporters and activists facing a politically-driven mass trial in Cambodia in the coming months. If found guilty, I face up to 30 years in prison.

In September 2017, shortly after the CNRP came close to legitimately defeating Hun Sen’s Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) in an important local election, our leader Kem Sokha was arrested on trumped-up charges. Weeks later, in fear of being detained, several other CNRP leaders and I fled the country. In direct response to the party’s popularity, in November 2017, Hun Sen – in power for over three decades – and his ruling government dissolved the CNRP, accusing it of attempting to overthrow the government.

Hun Sen’s onslaught against the opposition has not ceased. In 2020, at least 45 CNRP members and supporters have been arrested on falsified charges, leading to the current trials taking place.

Returning to one’s homeland is a fundamental right, as is being present at one’s own trial. For me, it is important to be present in solidarity with our party members and supporters who have been threatened, physically assaulted, unjustly arrested, tried, and sentenced to lengthy prison sentences. Among the victims is an 15-year-old boy with autism and a pregnant woman. The latest case is an activist detained with her four-year-old son. My planned return to Cambodia is also a call for peaceful action for national reconciliation three years after the CNRP was unconstitutionally dissolved as part of Hun Sen’s plan to win the 2018 election uncontested. As a result, Cambodia is now a one-party state.

My Cambodian passport was revoked last year, and I have no alternative than to apply for a visa to enter Cambodia as a U.S. citizen. If authorities grant me the right to return for my trial, I will likely be immediately arrested and put in detention until there is a verdict.

I have been on this journey for justice for more than two decades as a human rights defender and politician, on a stance that echoes Dr Martin Luther King Jr.’s definition of “positive peace as the presence of justice.”

I had the honor to be the first woman in Cambodia to lead the Ministry of Women’s Affairs, between 1998 and 2004, conducting a campaign aimed at combating gender-based violence, leading to the adoption of the Prevention of Domestic Violence Law. Speaking to women about their experiences showed me the struggles they live each day and opened my eyes to the real meaning of injustice and discrimination.ADVERTISEMENT

The wrongs our women face are embedded in society, in every sector, and particularly the judicial system. There is nothing more demoralizing or frightening for a young woman than to be forced by the courts to remain with a man who beats and controls her, simply because he is the father of her children. The world over, democracies are increasingly measured by the number of women in parliament – and yet, they continue to face more gender-based harassment than their male peers, only to be told “not to be so emotional” or, worse, that sexual slander is “normal” and not even a crime.

What I witnessed and experienced in the role of Minister became the base for me to advocate for policies that ensure equitable and sustainable development. I saw it as a necessity to equip these women with the knowledge of laws to protect them and to enhance their self-confidence and resilience as survivors.

In 2004, I quit my own party and stepped down as minister, when it became clear I could no longer serve a corrupt government and be part of the unjust status quo. I joined the opposition party and began a new journey towards justice and peace for all Cambodians.

I won my parliamentary seat for two five-year terms, leading the opposition in key provinces. Our calls for major reforms gained tremendous support, not only in urban areas but even in former strongholds of the ruling party.

Those years serving the constituents took me off the beaten track to witness sides of Cambodia I would have never otherwise seen. This included many uplifting moments, but also many heartbreaking ones. We tended to the wounds inflicted upon villagers by squads and army soldiers hired to carry out forced and brutal evictions, and spoke with mothers who had breastfed their infants as they watched their homes burned to the ground – all in the name of economic development. Cambodia is being put up for sale.

Even today, many of these communities are replaced with private developments, industrial economic zones, or gated communities. The legitimate owners receive almost no compensation, forcing them to move and live as squatters in the cities. Many young men head to Thailand as migrant workers, while young women often work in factories for low wages producing garments for markets in Western countries.

I participated in, and at times, led many public protests. I was briefly put in prison. Not once did we call for the use of violence, but instead we adhered to the fundamental principles of active non-violence and peaceful resistance.

Leading protests against injustice is not treason. It is about demanding solutions to conflict through dialogue, and turning tension into opportunities to build trust. Referring to universal human rights principles is not treason, but empowering people to defend their dignity and their rights to live as free people, not subject to discrimination and ill treatment. We say: “Fear No More.”

We stand with our people to defend freedom of speech and assembly. We demand free and fair elections so we can put Cambodia back on a democratic track. We incite no one to commit a felony, but aim to empower the people.

Our party may have been dissolved by the authoritarian regime in Cambodia, and our members inside the country silenced, but we have kept the international community informed and engaged in finding solutions to saving democracy in our country.

Together we speak with one voice to deliver to our people the justice they have been denied. We must not accept a double-standard applied to justice. We must not wait silently for courts to submit false charges. We will face prison, if that’s what it takes. We call on all democratic governments to do their part to act on the obligation to protect and defend human rights.

Dialogue is not a sign of weakness but a demonstration of tolerance.  We are one people. We are one nation.

Mu Sochua is an outspoken and respected Cambodian politician who has dedicated her life to fighting for women’s rights and democracy in S. E. Asia. She is deputy president of the banned Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP).

Posted by: | Posted on: January 5, 2021

‘Be a leader’: Sochua calls on king to intervene to ensure her return

‘Be a leader’: Sochua calls on king to intervene to ensure her return

For your reference, please refer to original article of Southeast Asia Globe

With a revoked Cambodian passport in hand and a ruling party intent on blocking her return, Cambodian National Rescue Party deputy leader Mu Sochua has called on King Sihamoni to ‘be courageous’ and ensure her right to a fair trial

Holding a revoked Cambodian passport, a ruling party intent on stifling her return, and now even a pandemic-hit global travel sector, the odds of a successful homecoming for Mu Sochua in the coming weeks seem slim at best. 

But that’s not stopping the exiled opposition figure, the vice-president of the Supreme Court-dissolved Cambodian National Rescue Party, from exploring every potential avenue to facilitate her return – now even calling on King Norodom Sihamoni to intervene. 

“The king has a lot of power, and he’s not using it,” she said. “I’m sorry, as citizens, as his subjects, we have to ask the king to be courageous – be a leader.” 

During a January 4 phone interview with the Globe from the US state of Rhode Island, she explained that, without her Cambodian passport, she had unsuccessfully applied for a visa as a US citizen in an attempt to return to the Kingdom to face trial. Regardless, she said her team has booked a Singapore Airlines flight to the Kingdom that arrives on January 17, replacing an earlier cancelled one.

In a last ditch attempt to gain entry to the country, Sochua said, she and the CNRP executive committee were preparing a letter to be sent to the monarch on January 5. 

“One of my last resorts is to ask the king to call a meeting of the Supreme Council of the Magistracy to question the court and the judges,” she said, pointing to the body Sihamoni heads that is officially tasked with guaranteeing the independence of the judiciary. 

She continued that the courts, if truly independent, have the power to force the hand of the government to issue her a visa, upholding her constitutional right to be present at her own trial. 

“The king should ask the judiciary, why are you not taking measures to ensure that these defendants can be present in court?” she said.

The king has a lot of power, and he’s not using it. I’m sorry, as citizens, as his subjects, we have to ask the king to be courageous – be a leader

Read More …