December 3, 1997

Subject: First Meeting of the Study Group on Cambodia - Additional Comments

Due to time constraints, I was unable to comment on two important points made by Mary Huhtula, the State Department, Director of Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Vietnam Office, during her presentation, on December 2, 1997, at SAIS.

(1). Hun Sen's vacation in VangTau, Vietnam just two days before the coup.  She said that there was no substance to the effect that Vietnam had anything to do with Hun Sen regarding the July 5 coup in Cambodia. To substantiate her statement, she mentioned that the State Department had consulted the Vietnamese Ambassador to Washington who confirmed that Vietnam had not been involved in Cambodia. Therefore, Hun Sen's visit along with his family was purely coincidental taking place only two days before the coup. Nobody would expect that the Ambassador would say otherwise.

This is perfectly consistent with the stance that the State Department has maintained since the coup started, namely, that Hun Sen did not plan the coup.  This is contrary to local observers in Phnom Penh. For instance, Kassie Neou told me that most NGOs in Phnom Penh believed that the coup was well planned and that Hun Sen tested the possibilities on numerous occasions as a way of appraising the reaction of the international community in Phnom Penh, starting with the March 30, 1997 hand grenade attack on Sam Rainsy and his supporters near the National Assembly. Having assured himself that the international would not register a very strong protest against him, Hun Sen decided that he could go ahead with the coup, which he did on July 5. As predicted, the State Department, until today, consistently refuses to call the bloody July 5 putsch by Hun Sen a coup. It is also very odd for most Cambodians and some US Congressmen to learn that Hun Sen would go to Vietnam for vacation at a time when there was high tension between the two countries, when there are as many beautiful beaches in Cambodia as in Vietnam. The explanation given by Mary Huhtala did not quite fit with the facts as reported by a number of local neutral observers such as Kassie Neou.

(2). The preconditions for the Union of Cambodian Democrats (UCD) to return home. On this point she said that UCD's preconditions were unrealistic. What were the UCD' preconditions? They want among other things, to have their properties (offices, cars, furniture...) which were deliberately ransacked by Hun Sen's forces during the coup be restored; their rights to have free access to radio and television (which is the monopoly of the government), for electoral campaign purposes; and the freedom to campaign actively even in a dangerous environment. Are these UCD demands unrealistic, when the international community is pushing for a free and fair election in Cambodia?  As one diplomat recently commented to the Phnom Penh Post  (Nov.21-Dec.4, 1997) on the difficulties that UCD members will face when they returned home ``They would be coming back to no money, no infrastructure, thus no ability to campaign at a national level."  It appears that Mary Huhtala continues to treat the UCD members with suspicion while hardly questioned Hun Sen's acts or intentions. The burden of proof seems to be always unfairly put on the UCD's side by the State Department.

Naranhkiri Tith, Ph. D.
Professor of international economics the Johns Hopkins University, and Chairman of WCC