The following is part three of a six-part interview between Khieu Samphan, the nominal Khmer Rouge head of state, and Mr. Sam Borin of Radio Free Asia. This interview was conducted in January, 2004 and was re-broadcast in November, 2007.
Translated from Khmer by Khmerization
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sam Borin: Mr. President, on this point I would like to clarify something. In 1967 or even 1968, it was a period under the Sangkum Reastr Niyum regime. You said that the authority persecuted the people. Were the authorities from the Sangkum Reastr Niyum or from somewhere else?
Samphan: Now we have seen clearly. At that time we cannot see anything clearly. During the Sangkum Reastr Niyum regime there were people who came from many different political persuasions. Those who joined the Sangkum Reastr Niyum Party came from many different parties such as the Democratic Party, the Neang Kunghing (Earth) Party etc. Those were people who came from different political parties to join the Sangkum Reastr Niyum Party. Each one of them still have their old ideology that led to many schools of thought and different political leanings. And no one knew who beat me up at that time. Only later that people found out who they were. At that time there were rumours that those who beat me up were people who did not like me because they accused me of being a Khmer Rouge. They said that it was the cyclopusse (rickshaw) drivers and the ordinary people who hated me who carried out the attack on me. At that time no one knew that it was the police who carried out that attack. But at that time Kou Roun, who was minister of security, went around showing off the photo of an attack on me to everyone to make fun of me. So from then on people knew that it was the police who carried out that attack. From the beginning people never thought that the attack was the work of the police. They thought that it was the work of the cyclopusse who hated me. When Kou Roun got the photo of the attack he went around showing it off to everyone that's why everyone knew it was Kou Roun's police who attacked me. And later on, someone did the investigation and found out more about that. I never thought of reporting it to anyone because I was not one hundred per cent sure. Also I did not want to complicate the matter further. So I just continue to do my newspaper work as usual because I did not want any more trouble.
Borin: I would like to ask you, in your capacity as a member of the Sangkum Reastr Niyum Party, what was the relationship between the party members and the party president at that time.
Samphan: As far as I can remember there was no relationship. And the Prince probably knew that those who attacked me were the people who did not like me, whom they accused of being a Khmer Rouge, because of what I wrote in my newspaper. And Mr. Kou Roun had one time called me into his office and questioned why someone like me who graduated with a doctorate did not apply for a job with the government? Why did I became an editor of my own newspaper? Is it because I was against the policy of the Sangkum Reastr Niyum?
I have to admit that when I studied in France I have observed that most people who had higher qualification had also become an editor of the newspaper after they graduated. It was a normal thing. And my decision to establish my own newspaper was because I wanted to lead a life as an intellectual who used to live with ordinary people. So I have heard a lot of diverging opinions from ordinary people. At that time there were two distinctive schools of thought. One side was so happy with the outcome of the Bandung Conference which could lead our country to prosperity because it envisaged a policy of neutrality- neither leaning toward America nor leaning toward the Soviet Union. Those people who supported that policy were the monks, ordinary people, the teachers and even the intellectuals who had just returned from study abroad. All of them would like Cambodia to follow this path. Even I myself supported that policy. This is the first point I wanted to make.
The second point is that I have noticed that in the Sangkum Reastr Niyum regime there were people from sections of the armed forces who did not like Sihanouk's policy of neutrality because it could create a problem with America because they thought that we sided with the Resistance, especially the Vietnamese resistance. And these people thought that because we were not truly neutral, we would have angered America anyway. And as a result, we would always have problems with America.
So since then those kinds of people, such as military leaders, viewed that Cambodia always need American aid. Those sections of the people were not confined to the military alone but also business people as well. They all need American aid and they always complained about our policy of neutrality. So at that time we had two schools of thought.
Even intellectuals who went to study in France were divided on the issue of neutrality. One side supported the policy of neutrality which has been agreed at the Bandung Conference because they thought that it was the right path to take. They saw that a lot of countries from Africa also followed that path as they did not want to support either the American side or the socialist bloc.
Also at that time we had the Dap Chhuon Affairs when Dap Chhuon accepted arms cache from the South Vietnamese government. He also received 270 kilograms of gold from South Vietnam as well, in an attempt to stage a beakaway by cutting off the northwestern provinces from the central administration. The authority found out about the plan so they destroyed it before it was hatched. But the Cambodian authority thought that the problem might not end there. They had to do something to prevent another possible Dap Chhuon-style uprising. The authority assumed that a weapon cache from South Vietnam must be the work of America who had recruited people from Cambodia to oppose the path decided in Bandung which was neither the American path nor the socialist path.
On the other side of the intellectual circle, they thought that the only path to survival for Cambodia was to establish a republic. But one side of this camp argued that if Cambodia was to establish a republic, where could they get the support from? They must contemplate the American support in order to topple the monarchy and establish a republic. So we see that this issue posed a problem so they have to discuss about the pros and the cons. What will be the benefits and what will be the disadvantage?
So when I heard all those diverging opinions, I decided to establish my own newspaper to support that policy of neutrality in order to generate debate for the pros and the cons of both diverging views.
That was the reason why I established my own newspaper. And as a result I was accused of opposition to His Majesty (Sihanouk) just because I did not join his government. In fact I was never against him. My newspapers have been archived so if anyone wanted to know they can read them and will see whether I was against him or not. But at that time there were accusations that I was against His Majesty. That's why I was attacked by the secret police.
Borin: Mr. President, when you mentioned about the reason why you established your own newspaper was because of the diverging views at that time between supporters of the free world and the supporters of the socialist world. One reason amongst other reasons were that you saw that the policy of neutrality agreed in the Bandung Conference was not implemened properly in Cambodia because of the facts that Cambodia allowed foreign troops, especially the Vietnamese troops, to station on the neutral land of Cambodia. In your capacity as a member of parliament of the Sangkum Reastr Niyum Party, how did you view that issue? And what view did you present to the party and the party president?
Samphan: According to my recollection we have debated this issue in the parliament on the one hand. And on the other hand we had privately discussed amongst ourselves in our capacity as members of parliament and in the intellectual circle. We came to the conclusion that, in fact, His Majesty (Sihanouk) did not allow those Vietnamese troops to station on our soil.
In the Vietnam war the Vietnamese resistance side had fought to unite their country. But they were met with resistance from America which supported the South Vietnamese administration. At that time, in comparison, the American side was militarily stronger. So the Vietnamese resistance fighters were forced to escape to hide themselves in the areas along our borders. And if we examined closely Prince Sihanouk knew that militarily we did not have enough troops to push them out. If we tried to push them out we would have more problems with them. So the Prince turned a blind eye and let them stay there. But he had his own way and that was he insisted those Vietnamese troops who were stationed on our soil must recognise the current borders of Cambodia.
He had not only asked the Vietnamese resistance side to respect our border. He had also demanded that the South Vietnamese, the American, the North Vietnamese sides and other countries around Cambodia to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Cambodia in the context of the current border demarcations.
So if we talk about the reality and in fairness, we can see that Prince Sihanouk had never sold our land to the Vietnamese like some of our intellectuals had said. That's what happened.//(To be continued in parts 4, 5, 6...). To read part four click here.
No comments:
Post a Comment