now browsing by category
ថ្ងៃនេះខ្ញុំសូមសំដែងនូវសេចក្តីសោកស្តាយនិងចូលរួមកាន់មរណៈទុក្ខដល់ក្រុមគ្រួសារនិងញាតិមិត្តលោកបណ្ឌិត Benny Widyono ដែលបានលាចាកលោកនេះកាលពីខែមីនា ១៦ ឆ្នាំ២០១៩។ លោកធ្លាប់ជាលេខាប្រចាំប្រទេសកម្ពុជារបស់អគ្គលេខាធិការអង្គការសហប្រជាជាតិក្នុងសម័យអ៊ុនតាក់ UNTAC។
តែអ្វីដែលខ្ញុំចង់លើកមកបង្ហាញគឺវគ្គមួយក្នុងសៀវភៅដ៏ល្បីរបស់លោក រាំក្នុងស្រមោល Dancing in Shadow ក្នុងទំព័រទី១១៨ដល់១៨១ គឺការដែលល្បិចនយោបាយឌីហ្វីត DIFID (Divide, Isolate, Finish, Integrate, Develop) របស់លោកហ៊ុនសែនក្នុងការប្រឡេះលោកសម-រង្ស៊ីនិងទ្រង់សិរីវុឌចេញពីហ៊ុនស៊ិនប៊ិចដែលធ្វើអោយបក្សមួយនេះចុះខ្សោយដល់សព្វថ្ងៃ។ តែអ្វីដែលសំខាន់ពេលនោះគឺមានកឹម-សុខាម្នាក់ដែរ ក្នុងតំណែងលោកជាសមាជិកសភាពីគណបក្សព្រះពុទ្ធសាសនាដើម្បីអភិវឌ្ឍន៍របស់លោកតាសឺនសានបានជំទាស់ក្នុងការបណ្តេញលោកសមរង្សុីចេញពីសភាទាំងបំពានច្បាប់នេះ។ ដូច្នេះគោលការណ៍សមរង្សុី-កឹមសុខាជាមនុស្សតែមួយនៃគណបក្សសង្រ្គោះជាតិបច្ចុប្បន្នពិតជាឆ្លុះបញ្ចាំងឧត្តមគតិរួមរបស់អ្នកទាំងពីរកាលពី២៧ឆ្នាំមុន។
Today, I would like to express deep sadness and share condolence with family and friends of Dr. Benny Widyono who passed away this March 16, 2019. He was the key secretary and UN’s official during UNTAC in Cambodia.
But what I am most impressed is his book “Dancing in Shadow” in page of 118-181 illustrating the political tactic of Hun Sen’s DIFID (Divide, isolate, finish, develop) to divide and isolate Sam Rainsy and Prince Sirivudh which has weakened FUNCIPEC ever-since. But the most exotic memoir is Kem Sokha who was MP from Buddhist Development Party of Sen San stood up to protest in the parliament for this illegal act of expelling Sam Rainsy from the Parliament and stripped off his Parliamentary impunity. So, the principle of Sam Rainsy-Kem Sokha is ONE of modern CNRP has been historically identical of their ideal since 27 years ago.
Original source for your reference: UH Press
Benny Widyono’s Dancing in Shadows
Book Review, University of Hawai!i
Alvin Lim is a Ph.D. student in Political Science at the University of Hawai‘i. Lim received his B.A. (Hons) and M.A. from the National University of Singapore, and taught Philosophy for three years at Pannasastra University in Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Widyono, Benny. (2008). Dancing in Shadows: Sihanouk, the Khmer Rouge, and the United Nations in Cambodia. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
Benny Widyono’s gripping!Dancing in Shadows is a memoir of his peacekeeping and diplomatic work in Cambodia: in 1992-93 he served as the United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia’s (UNTAC) Provincial Director of Siem Reap; subsequently in 1994-97 he served as the UN Secretary-General’s Political Representative to the Royal Government of Cambodia (2008, p. xxvii).
Dancing in Shadows begins on an unexpected note with! Ben Kiernan’s foreword that focuses on the role of Indonesians in resolving the Vietnamese occupation of Cambodia, paving the way for UNTAC. Kiernan notes a July 1980! meeting at Phnom Penh’s! Noor Al-Ihsan mosque between Cham genocide survivors and!Indonesian journalists. Their pioneering reportage triggered a change in Indonesian policy towards Cambodia which eventually led Indonesia to guide the warring Cambodian factions to reach a peace settlement (ibid., pp. xvii-xxiv).
This largely unknown thread of Cambodia’s tortured recent history nicely introduces the role of Widyono, himself an Indonesian citizen; for the key Indonesian role in the Cambodian peace process is also reflectedn Widyono’s subsequent participation in UNTAC. The Indonesian-Cambodian connection does not end there: Kiernan (ibid., p. xix) and Widyono (ibid., pp. 23-24) both note Indonesia’s and Cambodia’s mirrored experiences with politicide and genocide. This tragic mirroring is not just an academic observation for Widyono, as his ethnic Chinese heritage subjected him and his family to General Suharto’s anti-Chinese policies (ibid., p. xxix).
The key contribution of Dancing in Shadows is found in Widyono’s critique of the Cambodian peace process. Unlike other academics, he was actually part of UNTAC’s top administration, and enjoyed a privileged perspective of the mission’s ultimate failure in Cambodia. In Widyono’s view, UNTAC’s ultimate failure stemmed from two significant flaws in the 1991 Paris Agreements. First, the Agreements legitimized Pol Pot’s genocidal Khmer Rouge faction; second, the Agreements downgraded the status of Hun Sen’s្្ State of Cambodia (SOC) regime, disregarding its extensive administrative and military control over most of Cambodian territory (ibid., p. 35). These problems would adversely affect UNTAC’s subsequent performance. Not only did the Khmer Rouge pose a significant military challenge to UNTAC; UNTAC also found itself incapable of asserting its nominal authority over the SOC’s apparatuses of power (ibid., p. 42).
Op-Ed: U.S. Department of State
Cambodia is a constitutional monarchy with an elected parliamentary government. The ruling Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) won all 125 National Assembly seats in the July 29 national election, having banned the chief opposition party in November 2017. Prior to the victory, Prime Minister Hun Sen had already served for 33 years. International observers, including foreign governments and international nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and domestic NGOs criticized the election as neither free nor fair and not representative of the will of the Cambodian people.
Civilian authorities maintained effective control over the security forces, which often threatened force against those who opposed Prime Minister Hun Sen and were generally perceived as an armed wing of the ruling CPP.
Human rights issues included unlawful or arbitrary killings carried out by the government or on its behalf; forced disappearance carried out by the government; torture by the government; arbitrary arrests by the government; political prisoners; arbitrary interference in the private lives of citizens, including pervasive electronic media surveillance; censorship and selectively enforced criminal libel laws; interference with the rights to peaceful assembly and freedom of association; restrictions on political participation; pervasive corruption, including in the judiciary; and use of forced or compulsory child labor.
The government did not provide evidence of having prosecuted any officials for abuses, including corruption. A pervasive culture of impunity continued.
Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person, Including Freedom from:
a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings
There were reports the government or its agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings. As of July a local human rights NGO reported four extrajudicial killings.
In March 2017 the court sentenced Oeuth Ang to life imprisonment for the 2016 murder of Kem Ley, an outspoken and popular political analyst. As of July the case remained open and the government pledged to look for coconspirators, although it took no action. Noting that the victim and killer were not acquainted and other anomalies, including the impoverished assailant’s possession of an expensive handgun, many observers believed a third party hired Oeuth Ang.
On March 8, violence broke out in Kratie Province when security forces opened fire on persons protesting the transfer of land, decades before, to a rubber plantation. Several media outlets reported a death toll of two to six persons with another 40 injured. Shortly after the violence occurred, the government ordered local media to “correct” its news reports. Four NGOs and the UN Office of the High Commission on Human Rights (OHCHR) formed an investigation committee to tour the site. They found that on March 7, the company began demarcating its land and that a day later 150 soldiers, military police, and police burned down villagers’ houses, leading the villagers to block the main road and demand an immediate stop to the arson. According to the OHCHR report, the security forces opened fire to disperse the villagers. OHCHR acknowledged that, because the security forces closed off the site of the shooting, there were no reliable counts of the dead or injured.
After the incident Kratie governor Sar Chamrong denied reports that security forces shot the protesters. National Police spokesperson Kirt Chantharith claimed villagers with homemade rifles injured as many as seven police officers while only two villagers were slightly injured, not by gunfire, but by bamboo sticks.
The Venerable Meas Vichet, a well known monk and social activist who disappeared in June 2017 in Krobei Riel commune, Siem Reap Province, after security officials beat him, remained missing, and no new information on his case arose during the year to October.
c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
The constitution prohibits such practices; however, beatings and other forms of physical mistreatment of police detainees and prison inmates reportedly continued during the year.
There were credible reports military and police officials used physical and psychological abuse and occasionally severely beat criminal detainees, particularly during interrogation. As of July a local NGO observed physical assaults against detainees and prisoners in nine cases. Journalist Kim Sok told local media following his release from detention that prison guards beat him whenever he disobeyed an order or opened books. Other detainees reported authorities forced them to walk for up to an hour with a bucket of water on their heads, or forced them to stand in the hot sun for several hours.
Interview: Book Author’s 10-Year Observation of Cambodia
09 March 2019
My book is exactly about “Cambodia in the 21st century”. I thought the book could include some kind of photos of Cambodian society now. What is happening and what is changing, from a traditional to a more modern society.PHNOM PENH —
[Editor’s Note: Marc Baudinet, author of “Cambodia In The Twenty First Century: A Short Social Study”, sat down with VOA Khmer’s Ky Mengly to share the key takeaways from his recently published work and his observations of the country, from the state of the rule of law to domestic politics, foreign policy and socio-economic progress.]
VOA: How long did you spend researching and writing this book?
Baudinet: I came here the first time in 2010. I come from Europe. Everything was very different, quite amazing compared to where I come from. And I was struck straight away by how different things are and how I couldn’t quite understand how people interacted. So, I wanted to know more about that and I started doing interviews, asking people questions in a very informal ways. Why’s this and why’s that? And much later basically three years ago, I thought I could write something about how Cambodians are changing fast. Therefore, it would be interesting to observe Cambodian society now. That’s how I got the idea to do the book. And it took me two and a half years to write this.
VOA: Can you tell us briefly what your book is about?
Baudinet: My book is exactly about “Cambodia in the 21st century”. I thought the book could include some kind of photos of Cambodian society now. What is happening and what is changing, from a traditional to a more modern society. People’s education is improving, more people are going to school, people are buying cars, mobile phones, and people are getting jobs that never really existed here before. So, there is a lot happening in this society and this is my point really. And how is that affecting the traditional society? What are the consequences on how people interact? All of these interest me and basically that’s my reason why I wrote the book.
VOA: In the book you seem to lack optimism about the current Cambodian government. Why is that?
Baudinet: So, I started writing the book in 2016 and everyone was talking about the Commune Elections in 2017 and the General Elections in 2018 and I thought that many people were quite optimistic that things could change and then suddenly there were upheavals. Everything took a different path in November 2017. The rule of law is a key aspect of a successful society. If you take Singapore and Singapore’s rule of law is very strong, meritocracy is very strong, good governance is very strong and that society is very successful. Here, the rule of law is shaky. It is very much about having more money than whoever is against you. Therefore, there is a problem for people to trust in their own society and have the courage to invest for instance when they know possibly that the law is not on their side because they’re not rich enough for instance. Meritocracy is also very important. It is improving I think. I think that there are many problems. I think as education is improving, meritocracy is also more valued than a few years ago. So, this is very good for the future. However, there is still a long way to go. So, I’m sometimes optimistic and sometimes a bit pessimistic here.
VOA: You mention in the book that the “natural order” in Cambodia does not sit well with democracy. What do you mean by that?
Baudinet: The idea of democracy … is that basically every individual every person has the same rights and has the same value. No matter whether they’re a cleaner, a poor farmer, they’re as important as rich land owners or rich business persons. Everyone, when people vote, everyone is the same. Equality is very much the key or let’s say not the key but the grounding within which democracy can grow. Now here in the traditional society in Asia in general not only in Cambodia, the idea that everybody is equal is not part of a traditional understanding of how a society functions. People accept that there is an elite and then there are a lot of other people and those people should just do their work and not challenge authority. Therefore, here I think in terms of democracy, the idea that everyone is equal, is possibly not yet accepted, especially by of course the elites.
VOA: Towards the end of the book you draw a comparison between King Ang Duong’s embrace of France and Prime Minister Hun Sen’s embrace of China. What is the implication of this?
Baudinet: Geopolitics is very much a power game between different players; some are big players and some are smaller players. Cambodia, in the 19th century, had a lot of problems with its two bigger neighbors: Vietnam and Thailand. For Cambodia, the king decided to call a third power to somehow help. But there was a price that possibly the king did not realize. Cambodia became a colony, lost its independence. Now of course, the situation is very different. The context is vastly different from those days. However geopolitics remains of course a power game. I was wondering whether the way Cambodia today is possibly giving too much to China or a lot to China. Is it going to affect in the longer term prospects of Cambodia’s independence. Not that China is going to colonize Cambodia. No, those days are over. But there are other ways to manipulate or influence smaller countries.Read More …