The Huffington Post
Posted: 11/19/2012
Original artcle here.
As United States President Barack Obama's made history in Phnom Penh
today, becoming the first sitting American president to visit Cambodia,
his motorcade was escorted by Cambodian police--a force trained by the
U.S.--whose violence has made the capital a place where public
demonstrations are seldom if ever tolerated.
After two decades of U.S. aid, he will enter a city where the illegal
evictions of about 20,000 people from prime real estate has nearly been
completed by a close friend of Prime Minister Hun Sen — who held direct
bi-lateral talks with the president. Obama shook hands and touched
glasses with Hun Sen, despite a reportedly "tense" hallway discussion of
human rights.
The State Department has promised that U.S. officials will use
Obama’s attendance at a summit of East Asian leaders in Phnom Penh as
the occasion to scold the Cambodian government for human rights
violations.
But it remains to be seen whether American officials will confine
their displeasure to unofficial press briefings, or if they will dare
express their concerns within earshot of the Cambodian public.
Presumably at U.S. urging, Phnom Penh may have delayed plans ahead of
the meeting to evict almost 400 more families for an airport expansion.
Eight residents were held by police for 12 hours for writing ‘SOS’ on
their roofs and displaying Obama’s image to draw the president’s
attention.
This embarrassment came just six months after security forces shot
dead a 14-year-old girl during the forced eviction of a rural community
in Kampong Thom province (soldiers at the scene were photographed
donning U.S.-donated gear). The death was the latest outrage in a land
crisis that has victimized 400,000 of Cambodia’s poor in the last nine
years, according to one human rights group.
After the arrest of the independent radio journalist Mam Sonando, who
is again in jail for at least the third time in a decade, and this
year’s murders of the forestry activist Chut Wutty and the reporter Hang
Serei Oudom, U.S. Ambassador William E. Todd and other foreign aid
donors received letters in September from eight human rights
organizations urging them “not to endorse and reward” the government’s
actions with “a large-scale injection of new funds.”
And yet it won’t be surprising if they do. Since a U.N. peacekeeping
operation in the early ‘90s attempted to establish pluralist democracy,
wealthier nations including the U.S. have together poured billions of
dollars into Cambodia’s development, each year demanding reform and each
year continuing to pledge hundreds of millions more, even though it
hasn’t happened.
Over the first decade of this century, net inward flows of official
development assistance and aid totaled $6.24 billion, representing a
yearly average equivalent of 94.3 percent of government expenditures. In
2002 alone, foreign donors paid between $50 million and $70 million for
740 foreign consultants, roughly equal to the entire payroll for
160,000 Cambodian civil servants, according to ActionAid.
Has depending on all this money in fact encouraged corruption and prevented Cambodia from consolidating its democracy?
In a new study of aid to Cambodia,
Sophal Ear, a refugee who lost his father and eldest brother to the Pol
Pot regime of the 1970s and now teaches development studies at the
Naval Postgraduate School in California, argues that, yes, to an
important extent, living off the fat of foreign money has helped allow
the Cambodian government to abdicate its responsibilities and has
encouraged the famous venality of its ruling class.
Situating his findings within a large body of literature on aid
effectiveness in other countries, Sophal says the high level of aid has
relieved Cambodian authorities of the need to collect taxes, making
ordinary members of the public less inclined to hold them to account.
This has also stymied improvements in the quality of governance, as
Cambodia’s government ministries fought each other over “turf “in donor
funding, drained talent from the government to higher-paying donor
projects and encouraged officials’ “rent-seeking,” or efforts to cash in
on their positions.
“Certainly, with respect to control of corruption and the rule of
law, Cambodia may be further now from progress than it was a decade
ago,” Sophal writes. “It is also apparent that official development
assistance has made it more feasible, through fungibility, to divert
resources and enable corruption.”
Sophal has avoided simplistic conclusions or easy condemnations of
Cambodia’s donors. But the focus of his examinations is narrow, to the
point that Sophal does little to consider the role of the political
environment in shaping aid decisions.
In advance of Obama’s visit, land protesters had already appeared at the
U.S. Embassy, pleading for the U.S. President’s intervention, according
to The Cambodia Daily. But Obama’s very presence in tiny, poor,
Cambodia speaks to Washington’s eagerness to curry favor in Southeast
Asia and its inability to curb government violence. Phnom Penh is
already sufficiently irritated by Western support for human rights
monitoring and credit from China, now Cambodia’s largest foreign
benefactor, will easily make up for whatever Washington threatens to
withhold.
Sophal acknowledges this, yet his prescriptions for improving aid
(“stronger consequences for corruption;” “improved domestic tax revenue
performance”) appear unlikely to meet with success in the current
political climate. Likewise, while large, his e-mail and Internet
surveys of anonymous officials, as well as a cast of 113 anonymous
informants throughout government, diplomacy and aid organizations,
appears scattershot and unrepresentative--a fact which speaks to the
difficulty of the work that he has set out to do.
In Cambodia’s post-war era, foreign powers have been instrumental in
creating what little political space currently exists for democracy.
But, as Sophal has convincingly shown, genuine progress in the next 20
years will depend less on visiting American presidents than on
Cambodians themselves.
Aid Dependence in Cambodia: How Foreign Assistance Undermines Democracy
By Sophal Ear
October, 2012
Cloth, 208 pages, B&W Photos: 1, , Graphs: 4, , Figures: 3,
ISBN: 978-0-231-16112-1
$50.00 / £34.50
8 comments:
Oh come on dude!
you don't know what Khmer's sompeah is,you're a foreigner shouldn't say shit that you dint know,the greeting is genuine by khmers tradition there is nothing wrong Bunrany greeting Obama.I don't like Cpp henchmens for record because they were all corrupted's pigs.Mr Douglas is insane to write shit that didn't really know,I am Khmer guy born and raise in Srok Khmer read and write very well in Khmer languages I was a teacher teaching khmers language to high school,so I knew what I am talking about when come to Khmer tradition of greeting(Sompeah) Obama did a perfect job despite he is foreigner,Bunrany on the other hands did a fine job not in a manner of servant and master like Mr Douglas had stated in the useless article.Mr Douglas was completely wrong and absurd to write what didn't really know,infacts,the master will never greets[sompeah] the servant it doesn't matter in what circumstances in Cambodian's tradition.I would like to ask you Mr Douglas, what is your credential to claims to know khmer's tradition?
Young Khmer professional
I afraid the foreigners that have extensive study of khmer culture know more about khmer than you. There are different types of "sompeas" in khmer tradition. I kid you not, even some khmer don't even know khmer tradition, culture, courtesy and especially the hands positions, level, body posture, etc.
9:28 AM, The foreign writer did his research before he writes. There are many different types of "Sampeah". For people who have lower status than you, you put your palms lower than your chest. For people with higher status than you, you put your palms higher than your chest. You have to know that with your parents and grandparents, monks and kings you put your palms over your head. Servants, kids, your employees you put your palms lower than your chest. This the correct and respectable way of Khmer "sampeah"/greeting.
Mr Douglas was right. Bunrany never take any advice from someone and that is her own hair-dresser said.
1-) Lack of philosophy for young Khmer professional.
2-) Agreed with (28 November 2012 9:49 PM)
ល្មមឈប់រិៈគន់ខ្មែរឯងហើយ ម៉ក៏មិននិយាយ
អំពីអាមេរិកកាំងបង្គើតសង្គ្រាមសម្លាប់ជនជាតិខ្មែរផង
ខ្មែរងាប់ជិតផុតពួជមិនដោយសារអាមេរិកទេឬ ???
អាមេេរិកបានជួយអ្វីខ្លៈដល់ខ្មែរ ឬមួយបានជួយពួក
ខ្មែរក្រហមបានទៅរស់ប្រទេសវា។
បើអាមេរិកមិនបង្ករសង្គ្រាមនៅឥណ្តូចិនខ្មែរក៏មិនបាត់បង់ទឹកដីខ្មែរក៏មិនបានណ្រាត់ប្រាស់គ្រួសារស្លាប់វិនាស់ហិនហោច មិនដោសារអាលទ្ធិប្រជាធិបតីយ៏នឹង
អាលទ្ធិគុម្មុយនិសទេឬ?
សង្គ្រាមលោកលើកទីមួយនឹងទីពីរពលរដ្នពិភពលោកស្លាប់មិនដោសារអាមូលហេតុលទ្ធិទាំងពិរនេះទេឬ? ក្រោយពីរសង្គ្រាមលោកអាមេរិកចំណេញអ្វីខ្លៈ ? ទៅរៀនប្រវត្តិសាស្ត្រទៅកំភ្លើពេក។
ខ្មែរមិនចេះរួមគ្នា ខ្មែរល្ងង់ ខ្មែរពឹ២ងបរទេស
ខ្មែរស្រឡាញ់អំណាច ខ្មែរបក្សពួកនិយម ខ្មែរគ្រួសារនិយម ទាំងស្តេចទាំងរាស្ត្រដូចតែគ្នា អាស្តេច
អោបគុម្មុនិស្ស អារាស្ត្រអោមចក្រព័ទ្ធនិយម
ត្រង់នេះហើយដែលខ្មែររលាយ វិនាស់ពុំឈប់ឈរ
ល្មមចេះរួមគ្នាក៏សាងប្រទេសហើយអាខ្មែរឈាម
ថោក អាខ្មែរមិនខ្មោច ពីមុនមានអាសៀមមើលងាយខ្មែរឥឡូវសូម្បីតែ អាយួនអាស្រកីយឿក៏វាមើលងាយដែរ វាអស់សាច់ម្នាក់ៗពូកែណាស់តែទីបញ្ចប់
ខ្លួនក៏ងាប់ជិតផុតពូជ ឯដីក៏យួនយកព្រមទាំងជនជាតិវាមករស់នៅចិតពេញលើដី។
The word of RIS KUN is it good or bad? Do we have freedom of speech in Cambodia? Do we have the rights to criticize to anyone (High ranking officials or Head of state) for the better in Cambodia? There is no such practicing in Cambodia, Cambodia never had one. Now, freedom of speech or being shut up in Cambodia? The losing of territory recently to our neighbouring country it’s not because of criticizing each other between Khmer and Khmer that’s because lack of freedom of speech, therefore, no one dares in talking or criticizing against Youn.
Open your eye(s), ears, and heart. Cambodia losing territorial borders, land and sea is not soley because cambodia is "lacking freedom of speech" it is because cambodia lack a prime minister that is concern and protect its citizens interests and well being.
The main problem to cambodia issues is HUN SEN.
Post a Comment