Thursday, July 7, 2011
By Sam Rainsy
Liberation (France)
Unofficial translation by Tola Ek
The French Prime Minister was on official visit to Cambodia last weekend. He first talked about economy and globalization with Hun Sen, his Cambodian counterpart who is in power for the past quarter of a century. Next, along with King Norodom Sihamoni, he attended the reopening ceremony of Baphuon, a majestic Angkor temple rebuilt under the direction of the French School of Far East.
But NO, Mr. Prime Minister, the future of Cambodia is not just about restoring the Angkor site and the management of the frustrations of western entrepreneurs. The speech given by France is not up to par with the serious shortcomings of democracy in Cambodia, in particular, the continuing violation of civil freedoms. Yet it was that violation that initiated the 1991 Paris Agreements which allowed the return of peace and the beginning of reconstruction [in Cambodia]. But since then, the Phnom Penh regime has continued to drift away from the "liberal and plural democracy" which is guaranteed by the above national reconciliation agreements. I still remember the premonitions by our former king: One day in 1994, while I was the Finance minister, I was meeting face to face with Norodom Sihanouk then-king of Cambodia, at the Royal Palace in Phnom Penh, who confided to me: "I'm afraid to see that, one day, I will face the same fate as the last king of Italy." Then he went on to remind me that, following World War II, the Italians rejected the monarchy because they blamed Victor Emmanuel III of being too weak toward Mussolini. Beyond his concern for the future of the monarchy, Norodom Sihanouk implicitly compared Hun Sen, the strongman of Cambodia, to Mussolini and he already foresaw the danger of the shift of the [Phnom Penh] regime towards fascism.
It was indeed a Cambodia plunged into totalitarian drift that the French prime minister had to discover during his trip. Of course, they certainly repeated to him that the Khmer Rouge communism is a thing of the past. With the restoration of the monarchy, the restoration of religion and the triumphant return of capitalism, the country had a nice transition. But at what cost? Behind a fake façade of democracy, the French Prime Minister could take a peek into a dummy National Assembly where protesting MPs are sentenced to jail or exile through of a make believe justice ordered by the ruling executive, or he could take a peek at the tampered elections which allowed Hun Sen to remain in power for as long as Gaddafi in Libya, Ali Abdullah Saleh in Yemen or Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe.
However, the [Phnom Penh] regime also displays many other traits common to fascism just as Sihanouk feared. A cult of personality is devoted to Hun Sen, a former Khmer Rouge who grasps all the powers in his hands. The police state which dated from the communist era remains the regime’s pillar with its share of murders, jailing and other human rights violations. The weak king kept his silence in front of increasing power abuses. The pervasive religion serves as a drug for the people while the high-ranking clergy is invariably supported by the state in order to justify an infinitely unjust order. The economic system is based on wild capitalism where wealth is linked to political power whereas labor unions are severely repressed and their leaders persecuted and murdered, such were the cases of Chea Vichea, Ros Sovannareth and Hy Vuthy. It is this fascism under a tropical hue that keeps the country in deep poverty and risks leading it to chaos as a farmer revolution rumbles due to unrelenting land confiscations. Cambodia should learn the lessons from the recent events in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya. The government has a duty to seek to understand the suffering and the anger of the people in order to avoid a violent revolution. It is up to France and friends of Cambodia to convince Hun Sen to prepare himself for an alternative. They must also constantly remind [Cambodia] about the Paris agreements that serve to support the reconstruction effort in my country.
Hopefully, on October 23, the day of the twentieth anniversary of the signing of these priceless agreements in 1991, all Cambodians will joyfully attend to the restoration of the democratic process, a sine qua non condition to any progress.
---------------------------
Cambodge et fascisme tropical
Jeudi 7 Juillet 2011,
Par Sam Rainsy
Libération
Le Premier ministre français était en visite officielle au Cambodge ce week-end. Il a d’abord parlé économie et mondialisation avec Hun Sen, son homologue cambodgien au pouvoir depuis plus d’un quart de siècle. Puis, aux côtés du roi Norodom Sihamoni, il a assisté à la cérémonie de la réouverture du Baphuon, majestueux temple d’Angkor reconstruit sous la direction de l’Ecole française d’extrême-orient.
Mais «Non !» monsieur le Premier ministre, l’avenir du Cambodge ne se résume pas à la restauration du site d’Angkor et à la gestion des frustrations des entrepreneurs occidentaux. Le discours de la France n’est pas à la hauteur des graves carences de la démocratie cambodgienne, et notamment de la violation continue des libertés publiques. Pourtant, c’est elle qui est à l’origine des accords de Paris de 1991, lesquels ont permis le retour de la paix et le début de la reconstruction. Mais, depuis, le régime de Phnom Penh n’a cessé de s’écarter de la «démocratie libérale et pluraliste» garantie par ces accords de réconciliation nationale. Je me souviens des propos prémonitoires de notre ancien roi. Un jour de 1994, j’étais face à Norodom Sihanouk au Palais royal de Phnom Penh. Il était alors roi du Cambodge, j’étais ministre des Finances. Il me fit cette confidence : «J’ai bien peur de connaître un jour le même sort que le dernier roi d’Italie.» Et il me rappela qu’au lendemain de la Seconde Guerre mondiale, les Italiens avaient rejeté la monarchie parce qu’ils reprochaient à Victor-Emmanuel III sa trop grande faiblesse envers Mussolini. Au-delà de son souci pour l’avenir de la monarchie, Norodom Sihanouk comparait implicitement Hun Sen, l’homme fort du Cambodge, à Mussolini et il pressentait déjà le danger d’un glissement du régime vers le fascisme.
Car c’est effectivement un Cambodge en pleine dérive totalitaire que le Premier ministre français a dû découvrir lors de son voyage. Certes, on lui a certainement répété que le communisme des Khmers rouges appartenait au passé. Avec la restauration de la monarchie, le rétablissement de la religion et le retour triomphant du capitalisme, le pays vivrait une belle transition. Mais à quel prix ? Derrière une façade démocratique trompeuse, le Premier ministre français a pu entrevoir une Assemblée nationale factice où les députés contestataires sont condamnés à la prison ou à l’exil, une justice spectacle aux ordres de l’exécutif, ou encore des élections trafiquées ayant permis à Hun Sen de rivaliser en durée au pouvoir avec Kadhafi en Libye, Ali Abdullah Saleh au Yémen ou Robert Mugabe au Zimbabwe.
Mais le régime présente maintes autres caractéristiques teintées du fascisme que craignait Norodom Sihanouk. Un véritable culte de la personnalité auréole l’ancien Khmer rouge Hun Sen, qui concentre tous les pouvoirs entre ses mains. L’Etat policier de l’époque communiste demeure le pilier du régime, avec son lot d’assassinats, d’emprisonnements, et autres violations des droits de l’homme. Le roi faible reste silencieux face aux abus de pouvoir toujours plus graves. La religion omniprésente est l’opium du peuple et le haut clergé est invariablement soutenu par l’Etat pour justifier un ordre infiniment injuste. Le système économique est fondé sur un capitalisme sauvage, où les grosses fortunes sont associées au pouvoir politique, tandis que les syndicats ouvriers sont durement réprimés et leurs chefs pourchassés ou assassinés, tels Chea Vichea, Ros Sovannareth ou Hy Vuthy. C’est ce fascisme aux couleurs tropicales qui maintient le pays dans une misère profonde et qui risque de le mener au chaos, car la révolte paysanne gronde face aux confiscations incessantes de terres. Le Cambodge doit retenir la leçon des événements récents en Tunisie, en Egypte et en Libye. Le gouvernement a le devoir de chercher à comprendre les souffrances et la colère du peuple afin d’éviter une révolution violente. C’est à la France et aux amis du Cambodge de convaincre Hun Sen de préparer l’alternance. Et de rappeler sans cesse les accords de Paris pour soutenir l’œuvre de reconstruction de mon pays.
Espérons que le 23 octobre, jour du vingtième anniversaire de la signature de ces inestimables accords de 1991, tous les Cambodgiens auront la joie d’assister au rétablissement du processus démocratique, condition sine qua non pour tout autre progrès.
The French Prime Minister was on official visit to Cambodia last weekend. He first talked about economy and globalization with Hun Sen, his Cambodian counterpart who is in power for the past quarter of a century. Next, along with King Norodom Sihamoni, he attended the reopening ceremony of Baphuon, a majestic Angkor temple rebuilt under the direction of the French School of Far East.
But NO, Mr. Prime Minister, the future of Cambodia is not just about restoring the Angkor site and the management of the frustrations of western entrepreneurs. The speech given by France is not up to par with the serious shortcomings of democracy in Cambodia, in particular, the continuing violation of civil freedoms. Yet it was that violation that initiated the 1991 Paris Agreements which allowed the return of peace and the beginning of reconstruction [in Cambodia]. But since then, the Phnom Penh regime has continued to drift away from the "liberal and plural democracy" which is guaranteed by the above national reconciliation agreements. I still remember the premonitions by our former king: One day in 1994, while I was the Finance minister, I was meeting face to face with Norodom Sihanouk then-king of Cambodia, at the Royal Palace in Phnom Penh, who confided to me: "I'm afraid to see that, one day, I will face the same fate as the last king of Italy." Then he went on to remind me that, following World War II, the Italians rejected the monarchy because they blamed Victor Emmanuel III of being too weak toward Mussolini. Beyond his concern for the future of the monarchy, Norodom Sihanouk implicitly compared Hun Sen, the strongman of Cambodia, to Mussolini and he already foresaw the danger of the shift of the [Phnom Penh] regime towards fascism.
It was indeed a Cambodia plunged into totalitarian drift that the French prime minister had to discover during his trip. Of course, they certainly repeated to him that the Khmer Rouge communism is a thing of the past. With the restoration of the monarchy, the restoration of religion and the triumphant return of capitalism, the country had a nice transition. But at what cost? Behind a fake façade of democracy, the French Prime Minister could take a peek into a dummy National Assembly where protesting MPs are sentenced to jail or exile through of a make believe justice ordered by the ruling executive, or he could take a peek at the tampered elections which allowed Hun Sen to remain in power for as long as Gaddafi in Libya, Ali Abdullah Saleh in Yemen or Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe.
However, the [Phnom Penh] regime also displays many other traits common to fascism just as Sihanouk feared. A cult of personality is devoted to Hun Sen, a former Khmer Rouge who grasps all the powers in his hands. The police state which dated from the communist era remains the regime’s pillar with its share of murders, jailing and other human rights violations. The weak king kept his silence in front of increasing power abuses. The pervasive religion serves as a drug for the people while the high-ranking clergy is invariably supported by the state in order to justify an infinitely unjust order. The economic system is based on wild capitalism where wealth is linked to political power whereas labor unions are severely repressed and their leaders persecuted and murdered, such were the cases of Chea Vichea, Ros Sovannareth and Hy Vuthy. It is this fascism under a tropical hue that keeps the country in deep poverty and risks leading it to chaos as a farmer revolution rumbles due to unrelenting land confiscations. Cambodia should learn the lessons from the recent events in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya. The government has a duty to seek to understand the suffering and the anger of the people in order to avoid a violent revolution. It is up to France and friends of Cambodia to convince Hun Sen to prepare himself for an alternative. They must also constantly remind [Cambodia] about the Paris agreements that serve to support the reconstruction effort in my country.
Hopefully, on October 23, the day of the twentieth anniversary of the signing of these priceless agreements in 1991, all Cambodians will joyfully attend to the restoration of the democratic process, a sine qua non condition to any progress.
---------------------------
Cambodge et fascisme tropical
Jeudi 7 Juillet 2011,
Par Sam Rainsy
Libération
Le Premier ministre français était en visite officielle au Cambodge ce week-end. Il a d’abord parlé économie et mondialisation avec Hun Sen, son homologue cambodgien au pouvoir depuis plus d’un quart de siècle. Puis, aux côtés du roi Norodom Sihamoni, il a assisté à la cérémonie de la réouverture du Baphuon, majestueux temple d’Angkor reconstruit sous la direction de l’Ecole française d’extrême-orient.
Mais «Non !» monsieur le Premier ministre, l’avenir du Cambodge ne se résume pas à la restauration du site d’Angkor et à la gestion des frustrations des entrepreneurs occidentaux. Le discours de la France n’est pas à la hauteur des graves carences de la démocratie cambodgienne, et notamment de la violation continue des libertés publiques. Pourtant, c’est elle qui est à l’origine des accords de Paris de 1991, lesquels ont permis le retour de la paix et le début de la reconstruction. Mais, depuis, le régime de Phnom Penh n’a cessé de s’écarter de la «démocratie libérale et pluraliste» garantie par ces accords de réconciliation nationale. Je me souviens des propos prémonitoires de notre ancien roi. Un jour de 1994, j’étais face à Norodom Sihanouk au Palais royal de Phnom Penh. Il était alors roi du Cambodge, j’étais ministre des Finances. Il me fit cette confidence : «J’ai bien peur de connaître un jour le même sort que le dernier roi d’Italie.» Et il me rappela qu’au lendemain de la Seconde Guerre mondiale, les Italiens avaient rejeté la monarchie parce qu’ils reprochaient à Victor-Emmanuel III sa trop grande faiblesse envers Mussolini. Au-delà de son souci pour l’avenir de la monarchie, Norodom Sihanouk comparait implicitement Hun Sen, l’homme fort du Cambodge, à Mussolini et il pressentait déjà le danger d’un glissement du régime vers le fascisme.
Car c’est effectivement un Cambodge en pleine dérive totalitaire que le Premier ministre français a dû découvrir lors de son voyage. Certes, on lui a certainement répété que le communisme des Khmers rouges appartenait au passé. Avec la restauration de la monarchie, le rétablissement de la religion et le retour triomphant du capitalisme, le pays vivrait une belle transition. Mais à quel prix ? Derrière une façade démocratique trompeuse, le Premier ministre français a pu entrevoir une Assemblée nationale factice où les députés contestataires sont condamnés à la prison ou à l’exil, une justice spectacle aux ordres de l’exécutif, ou encore des élections trafiquées ayant permis à Hun Sen de rivaliser en durée au pouvoir avec Kadhafi en Libye, Ali Abdullah Saleh au Yémen ou Robert Mugabe au Zimbabwe.
Mais le régime présente maintes autres caractéristiques teintées du fascisme que craignait Norodom Sihanouk. Un véritable culte de la personnalité auréole l’ancien Khmer rouge Hun Sen, qui concentre tous les pouvoirs entre ses mains. L’Etat policier de l’époque communiste demeure le pilier du régime, avec son lot d’assassinats, d’emprisonnements, et autres violations des droits de l’homme. Le roi faible reste silencieux face aux abus de pouvoir toujours plus graves. La religion omniprésente est l’opium du peuple et le haut clergé est invariablement soutenu par l’Etat pour justifier un ordre infiniment injuste. Le système économique est fondé sur un capitalisme sauvage, où les grosses fortunes sont associées au pouvoir politique, tandis que les syndicats ouvriers sont durement réprimés et leurs chefs pourchassés ou assassinés, tels Chea Vichea, Ros Sovannareth ou Hy Vuthy. C’est ce fascisme aux couleurs tropicales qui maintient le pays dans une misère profonde et qui risque de le mener au chaos, car la révolte paysanne gronde face aux confiscations incessantes de terres. Le Cambodge doit retenir la leçon des événements récents en Tunisie, en Egypte et en Libye. Le gouvernement a le devoir de chercher à comprendre les souffrances et la colère du peuple afin d’éviter une révolution violente. C’est à la France et aux amis du Cambodge de convaincre Hun Sen de préparer l’alternance. Et de rappeler sans cesse les accords de Paris pour soutenir l’œuvre de reconstruction de mon pays.
Espérons que le 23 octobre, jour du vingtième anniversaire de la signature de ces inestimables accords de 1991, tous les Cambodgiens auront la joie d’assister au rétablissement du processus démocratique, condition sine qua non pour tout autre progrès.
2 comments:
Dear President Sam Rainsy:
I am appealing to Sam Rainsy to take time to reexamine the SRP party closely regarding the "I" philosophy. I realized that you probably not going to listen but I am offering this message to you and the leaderships any way, like it or not here it goes. Your movement has done many good things for Cambodian society; it also assist the government in making sure that there are some check and balance in the Cambodian political scheeme. SRP has done amazing job but not enough to win the election. Forget the election fraud accusation before it doesnt match up. You have fought hard battle with CPP but many occasions you ended up shoting yourself in the foot or the work produced very little result. There are many other opposition parties ready to run for election in 2013 and possibly join your efforts. I realized you are the biggest opposition party in the country and slowly weakening not of your leadership but lack of strategic planning and well thought out campaign strategies. I have seen many internal break up due to power struggle among SRP leadership; folks jumped ship left and right. I have seen you picked the wrong players to play with on international stage. You have tried very hard to have other international communities to assist you regain your parliamentary position in the royal government but seek the wrong party to help you regain your position. This is clearly lack of power analysis from your leaderhsip. While there are many opposition political parties that claimed to fight for the best interest of Khmer people. Many were doubtful groups but we dont know the motivation behind it. I was wondering if you ever plan to disolve your party name and created a new one so that others can participate without feeling that their hard works are in vein? I am sorry to ask such bold question. I have met with many of your leadership and I asked them why they left your party; many told me that "Why remains with SRP if my hard work never will mount to anything or recognize by the SRP leadership". "I cannot become party leader in the future no matter how hard I worked" "Mr. Sam Rainsy will remain as President for life and when he die, his name continues to glorify through the party name and no one else". They admitted that it is selfish thinking but people motivated based on "self interest" whether hoping to go to heaven or just feeling good about what they have accomplished. Sometime ago, Human Right Party wanted to merge with SRP but they can't seem to move foward with the formation because the afraid of loosing their identity to SRP. Dont get me wrong, they all love Khmer the same as SRP but they all wanted their hard work to be recognized and a chance to be in the leadership position some day. Why not? It is normal to think that way. If you work for a company, you will want to become a supervisor or ownership of the company some day. Will Sam Rainsy dissolve the party name to create the new party where all opposition can join hand and work equally to beneift Khmer and ultimately reward them equally of their hard work? Will Sam Rainsy ignores the outcried of true democracy to be borned and be stubborned and remain the "I" personality? What will it takes for Sam Rainsy to look for the common interests and forget the "I" thinking and starting thinking about the "WE"?
this man barking non-stop because he got no way out
Post a Comment