With the victory of the Pheu thai Party in the Thai election and the elevation of Yingluck Shinawatra as the Thai prime minister, many Cambodians see this victory as a good sign for improving the relations between the two countries. Some see that border problems could ease or resolved, while others are still pessimistic as they see that those who call the shots regarding border issues are not from the government, but from the Thai military, the Thai ultra-nationalists and possible the Thai royal palace. Here are their comments:
Warrior Blood said...
This Shinawatra dynasty is like the Bush dynasty. My hope with the new leadership in Thailand, relationship between Thailand and Cambodia will improve. Thus far PM Hun Sen seem to position himself in the winning corner, while Sam Rainsy tended to position himself in the losing corner. Thailand election hurt Sam Rainsy's chance to ever become anything but another looser.
4 July 2011 1:05 AM
-----------------------------------
Anonymous said...
Failure to democratise and reform public institutions in Cambodia equates absence of political progress and democracy.
By consequence, the real losers are Cambodian people and Cambodia, not SRP or Rainsy.
Cambodia's opposition movement can only try and risk as much, including the personal risk of being assassinated or imprisoned by the power that be. Thailand, for all its ills allows its people to contest governmental power via the ballot box. Can the same be said of Cambodia's political system?
Kouprey
4 July 2011 2:50 AM
-------------------------------------------
Warrior Blood said...
I have predicted landslide victory and it comes true. Cambodia should send a congratulation letter to the PT to make sure it is on good footing.
----------------------------
Anonymous said...
It's not Abhishit alone that try to retake Preah Vihear. Also, the Thai military that is trying to go to war with Cambodia. Abhishit might be gone, but the military will not bow to any Thai politician, and the military will not take order from Yingluck. It might be other coup, if Yingluck tries to take control of the military as her brother before her.
4 July 2011 3:18 AM
------------------------------
Anonymous said...
Thai military has its own mind. The conflict between Thailand and Cambodia will not be over, just because Yingluck won the election. If the Thai military didn't cough, the Thai politician will not catch a cold, and it is not the other way around. So, don't have your hope up and jump the gun. It's a wait and see.
-----------------------------
Anonymous said...
Warrior Blood at 1:05 AM,
Relations between Thailand and Cambodia might improve because Hun Sen won't have a personal clash with Yingluck and Thaiksin as he does with Abhisit. However, don't forget that the relations between the two countries started to get deteriorated when Thaksin was the PM and when his proxies, Samak and his brother-in-law Wongsowat was in power. Remember in 2003, when Cambodian protesters burned down the Thai embassy in Phnom Penh in response to alleged comments by a Thai actress Suwanan Kongying about Angkor Wat belonging to Thailand? That was under Thaksin. Thai troops invaded Preah Vihear in 2008, that was under the Samak government, a proxy of Thaksin and armed clashes in October 2008 in Veal Entry and Phnom Trop, that was during the prime ministership of Mr. Wongsowat, Thaksin's brother-in-law.
On the diplomatic front and relations between the two governments might improve, but we must not forget that the border situations could be still be as bad because border issues are not determined by the Thai government, but were driven by nationalistic sentiments incited by the Thai ultra-nationalists like the yellow shirts people, the military and the Thai royal institution.
However, it is good to wait and see how the relations between Cambodia and Thailand play out after the new Thai government came to power.
4 July 2011 8:49 AM
--------------------------------
Anonymous said...
Dear 4 July 2011 2:50 AM,
"for all its ills allows its people to contest governmental power via the ballot box. Can the same be said of Cambodia's political system? "
Have you not followed Thai political landscape? Thaksin who was democratically elected was ousted by a military coup. Is that democracy to you?
Cambodia has its election for people to vote and choose their leader. Just because the ruling party has its overarching influence over the majority of the people to vote for them doesn't make it illegal. Obviously, the ruling party has done their part to win the vote to govern the country. You can't hold the whole country at a gun point at the ballot box, can you? The people get something from the ruling party that they don't from the opposition is the reason for the almost 2/3 majority in the last election.
It's a sad thing not everyone is able to benefit but the majority does. That's democracy for you.
4 July 2011 3:00 AM
--------------------------
Anonymous said...
Dear 3:00 AM ,
Where did I mention that Thailand is a democracy? 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 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.
We don't need to look to Thaksin's illegal removal by the military as evidence of imperfect democracy in Thailand, or to make some Cambodians feel better about the state of democracy closer to home. See the 1993 election supervised by UNTAC, and 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 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 else where, 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 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?
Kouprey
This Shinawatra dynasty is like the Bush dynasty. My hope with the new leadership in Thailand, relationship between Thailand and Cambodia will improve. Thus far PM Hun Sen seem to position himself in the winning corner, while Sam Rainsy tended to position himself in the losing corner. Thailand election hurt Sam Rainsy's chance to ever become anything but another looser.
4 July 2011 1:05 AM
-----------------------------------
Anonymous said...
Failure to democratise and reform public institutions in Cambodia equates absence of political progress and democracy.
By consequence, the real losers are Cambodian people and Cambodia, not SRP or Rainsy.
Cambodia's opposition movement can only try and risk as much, including the personal risk of being assassinated or imprisoned by the power that be. Thailand, for all its ills allows its people to contest governmental power via the ballot box. Can the same be said of Cambodia's political system?
Kouprey
4 July 2011 2:50 AM
-------------------------------------------
Warrior Blood said...
I have predicted landslide victory and it comes true. Cambodia should send a congratulation letter to the PT to make sure it is on good footing.
----------------------------
Anonymous said...
It's not Abhishit alone that try to retake Preah Vihear. Also, the Thai military that is trying to go to war with Cambodia. Abhishit might be gone, but the military will not bow to any Thai politician, and the military will not take order from Yingluck. It might be other coup, if Yingluck tries to take control of the military as her brother before her.
4 July 2011 3:18 AM
------------------------------
Anonymous said...
Thai military has its own mind. The conflict between Thailand and Cambodia will not be over, just because Yingluck won the election. If the Thai military didn't cough, the Thai politician will not catch a cold, and it is not the other way around. So, don't have your hope up and jump the gun. It's a wait and see.
-----------------------------
Anonymous said...
Warrior Blood at 1:05 AM,
Relations between Thailand and Cambodia might improve because Hun Sen won't have a personal clash with Yingluck and Thaiksin as he does with Abhisit. However, don't forget that the relations between the two countries started to get deteriorated when Thaksin was the PM and when his proxies, Samak and his brother-in-law Wongsowat was in power. Remember in 2003, when Cambodian protesters burned down the Thai embassy in Phnom Penh in response to alleged comments by a Thai actress Suwanan Kongying about Angkor Wat belonging to Thailand? That was under Thaksin. Thai troops invaded Preah Vihear in 2008, that was under the Samak government, a proxy of Thaksin and armed clashes in October 2008 in Veal Entry and Phnom Trop, that was during the prime ministership of Mr. Wongsowat, Thaksin's brother-in-law.
On the diplomatic front and relations between the two governments might improve, but we must not forget that the border situations could be still be as bad because border issues are not determined by the Thai government, but were driven by nationalistic sentiments incited by the Thai ultra-nationalists like the yellow shirts people, the military and the Thai royal institution.
However, it is good to wait and see how the relations between Cambodia and Thailand play out after the new Thai government came to power.
4 July 2011 8:49 AM
--------------------------------
Anonymous said...
Dear 4 July 2011 2:50 AM,
"for all its ills allows its people to contest governmental power via the ballot box. Can the same be said of Cambodia's political system? "
Have you not followed Thai political landscape? Thaksin who was democratically elected was ousted by a military coup. Is that democracy to you?
Cambodia has its election for people to vote and choose their leader. Just because the ruling party has its overarching influence over the majority of the people to vote for them doesn't make it illegal. Obviously, the ruling party has done their part to win the vote to govern the country. You can't hold the whole country at a gun point at the ballot box, can you? The people get something from the ruling party that they don't from the opposition is the reason for the almost 2/3 majority in the last election.
It's a sad thing not everyone is able to benefit but the majority does. That's democracy for you.
4 July 2011 3:00 AM
--------------------------
Anonymous said...
Dear 3:00 AM ,
Where did I mention that Thailand is a democracy? 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 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.
We don't need to look to Thaksin's illegal removal by the military as evidence of imperfect democracy in Thailand, or to make some Cambodians feel better about the state of democracy closer to home. See the 1993 election supervised by UNTAC, and 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 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 else where, 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 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?
Kouprey
3 comments:
kouprey,
You admitted yourself that Thailand's democracy is questionably but then you go on to say "Abhisit Vijajiva may not be everyone's cup of tea, but at least he is graceful enough to accept defeat and congratulate his rivals!" as a reason to put Thailand ahead of Cambodia in term of level of democracy.
Let me ask you this. What other option does Abhisit have besides prop up and say congratulation to the winner? If he does anything else, he is even over than he is now. By being civil and courteous right now, he can present himself as a nice guy that respect the people's voice. Looking like the righteous and civil one is the game he is playing. What politician doesn't?
Only by appearing to be sincere now that he has any chance to go on with his political career. He can appear to be accept defeat for now in the public eyes but what goes on behind the scene is matter that no one can say until it happens.
For all your eloquently written assessment of the state of democracy in Cambodia, what you failed to actualize like many in the opposition is the Cambodian culture itself. Sam Rainsy has this ideal concept of democracy taken textbook style from the West and want the Cambodian population to follow that. It's harder to change culture and attitude of the people, I believe. While at the same time, the ruling party applies Western style democracy with a tweaking to suit the taste of the Cambodian society. That's why it's called Cambodian Constitutional Monarchy, not America's democracy or any other.
The reason why the ruling party wins and the opposition loses is all fair game to me. What entity doesn't want its own survival and prosperity? Don't blame others who do what they can to grow and retain what they have because your instinct isn't so different, I imagine.
Cambodia is a country that hasn't come out of violent civil conflict for 15 years yet. Consequently, its state of democracy is not a thing you can compare to that of any of the country who has been at peace for years.
There is a time and place for things. While I would like to see a lot of things change in Cambodia, I can safely say that the ruling party so far knows the time and place to do things in order for them to be able to be at the top. Despite what you might want to believe, there has been many reforms that a lot of people take for granted. Do you see now as of 2011 gangs of soldiers fully equipped walking down the street in Phnom Penh as you'd in the 90's? The problems we see now isn't because nothing has changed but the opposite. These problems come from the changes itself. The landgrab, eviction, etc... If Cambodia hasn't changed to attain such relative peace and security, the investment that fueled the land price wouldn't be there and such social problems we have now also wouldn't exist.
So don't be so quick to say there hasn't been any change. There has and it is how you deal with the rising ones that will make or break you, if you're the politicians or responsible party.
Pal, you say a lot of things that have nothing to do with the article or the title. Can you just stick to the story. You're bore the hell out of me. Here, let me repeat the title."What does Pheu Thai victory mean for the Cambodian-Thai relation."
Try not to repeat yourself again and again. I already got your points from the last post.
Thai Military is still in charge, they will not take order from YingLuck...
Post a Comment