Where did I mention that Thailand is a democracy, 4 July 2011 3:00 AM? The frequent coups by the Thai military is one of those ills I referred to. In fact, Cambodia's trouble with Thailand over Preah Vihear and the prospect for democracy in Thailand itself is not yet free from the dark spectre or clouds cast by the Thai generals and, perhaps, by other powerful groups who are probably even more powerful than the generals themselves.
This writer is not too keen to engage in partisan argument that will probably go round in circle any way, particularly, one not being aligned to any political party. In fact, I will try to spare you unnecessary embarrassment by not taking your argument point by point. I will, however, urge you or anyone else who place premium on fairness in debate or social justice to separate subjective opinion from objective realities.
If one is affiliated with the ruling political party (Cambodian People's Party [CPP]) in Cambodia in any fashion, or just happens to be influenced by its propaganda and ideology, it would be difficult to acknowledge its defects or faults. Of course, this applies to one attached to a party from the opposition also, the violent coup instigated by the powerful Second Prime Minister in 1997 to consolidate political power and shut the door to political pluralism.
Now I don't blame a ruling party for trying to win legitimate votes by making use of its 'overarching' influence or economic resources. What really concerns many observers is the general absence of a genuine democratic procedure in virtually every social sphere. One should recall the widely perceived draconian draft law on NGOs and other civil bodies as an illustration of the ruling party fearing inroads made by those groups into areas (such as workers' rights) that hitherto remain largely under state manipulation and direction.
It is hardly the fault of the opposition Sam Rainsy Party (SRP) if it does not command the same amount of economic resources to vie for electoral support. Nor is it responsible for being emasculated as a political movement and opposition in just about every other respect. Have you ever asked what fair media representation would be like?
Democracy is not a one term that fits all. It designates a fluid concept that is used to describe particular or specific stages in political development. As I mentioned elsewhere, the recent public demonstrations in Thailand staged by opposing groups at least signal that 'democracy' as such is on the march in that country, even if these acts had sometimes been violently suppressed by the Thai military. By contrast, armed Cambodian police officers are seen shooting at farmers for tilling their farms in broad day light. What stage of democracy is Cambodia in?
Abhisit Vijajiva may not be everyone's cup of tea, but at least he is graceful enough to accept defeat and congratulate his rivals!
What gives some astute analysts and observers cause for pessimism as regards the prospect for positive change in Cambodian politics is not so much the opposition parties or lack of a credible challenger to the ruling regime, for there is no shortage of individuals who genuinely desire what is best for their long suffering compatriots or nation, but rather the nature and apparatus of the ruling CPP itself which still retains its anachronistic Stalinist character and essence. The CPP grandees and its central committee recently confirmed that the party endorses the PM [Hun Sen] as its sole unchallenged candidate to contest the next election, the one after that and so on . . .
Is this an indication that the party lacks better candidates, or because potential candidates are simply too frightened to put their names forward? Either way, it shouldn't make any difference given that the party itself has been formed to endorse that one man at the helm. No?
This writer is not too keen to engage in partisan argument that will probably go round in circle any way, particularly, one not being aligned to any political party. In fact, I will try to spare you unnecessary embarrassment by not taking your argument point by point. I will, however, urge you or anyone else who place premium on fairness in debate or social justice to separate subjective opinion from objective realities.
If one is affiliated with the ruling political party (Cambodian People's Party [CPP]) in Cambodia in any fashion, or just happens to be influenced by its propaganda and ideology, it would be difficult to acknowledge its defects or faults. Of course, this applies to one attached to a party from the opposition also, the violent coup instigated by the powerful Second Prime Minister in 1997 to consolidate political power and shut the door to political pluralism.
Now I don't blame a ruling party for trying to win legitimate votes by making use of its 'overarching' influence or economic resources. What really concerns many observers is the general absence of a genuine democratic procedure in virtually every social sphere. One should recall the widely perceived draconian draft law on NGOs and other civil bodies as an illustration of the ruling party fearing inroads made by those groups into areas (such as workers' rights) that hitherto remain largely under state manipulation and direction.
It is hardly the fault of the opposition Sam Rainsy Party (SRP) if it does not command the same amount of economic resources to vie for electoral support. Nor is it responsible for being emasculated as a political movement and opposition in just about every other respect. Have you ever asked what fair media representation would be like?
Democracy is not a one term that fits all. It designates a fluid concept that is used to describe particular or specific stages in political development. As I mentioned elsewhere, the recent public demonstrations in Thailand staged by opposing groups at least signal that 'democracy' as such is on the march in that country, even if these acts had sometimes been violently suppressed by the Thai military. By contrast, armed Cambodian police officers are seen shooting at farmers for tilling their farms in broad day light. What stage of democracy is Cambodia in?
Abhisit Vijajiva may not be everyone's cup of tea, but at least he is graceful enough to accept defeat and congratulate his rivals!
What gives some astute analysts and observers cause for pessimism as regards the prospect for positive change in Cambodian politics is not so much the opposition parties or lack of a credible challenger to the ruling regime, for there is no shortage of individuals who genuinely desire what is best for their long suffering compatriots or nation, but rather the nature and apparatus of the ruling CPP itself which still retains its anachronistic Stalinist character and essence. The CPP grandees and its central committee recently confirmed that the party endorses the PM [Hun Sen] as its sole unchallenged candidate to contest the next election, the one after that and so on . . .
Is this an indication that the party lacks better candidates, or because potential candidates are simply too frightened to put their names forward? Either way, it shouldn't make any difference given that the party itself has been formed to endorse that one man at the helm. No?
1 comment:
The CPP never believes in democracy. The word is used to get support from friends around the world when it needs that the most.
Hun Sen is the master of the CPP. There is not even democracy inside the CPP so we can't expect any democracy in Cambodia.
The structure of power control in Cambodia is the same as that seen in Vietnam or Burma, but in Cambodia, it is cleverly presented to the world so that aids will continue to flow in.
The moment the world decides to cut off aids to Cambodia, the CPP and Hun Sen will rule with true characters of dictatorship right away.
Dictatorship only works in a country where the armed forces are not well educated and listen completely to their generals rather than to the rule of laws in place.
Anet Khmer
Post a Comment