Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Asia and Pacific Affairs

Hearing on Post-Election Situation in Cambodia and US Policy Options

(October 2, 1998, at 10:00 a.m)

Room 419 Dirksen

"A Longterm and Integrated Look at the Cambodian Crisis: Some Suggestions for A Possible Solution"

By Naranhkiri Tith, Ph.D.

Adjunct Professor

International Economics and Southeast Asian Studies

SAIS, the Johns Hopkins University

Executive Summary

According to both independent international observers such as the International Crisis Group (ICG), International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute, and the Asian Network for Free and Fair Elections as well as international human right groups such as Amnesty International, and Human Right Watch, the July 26, 1998 election in Cambodia was neither free nor fair.

Looking at the results of the 1998 rigged election, the democratic group of Prince Ranariddh and Sam Rainsy together still gathered 58.5 percent of total popular votes and only 41.5 percent for Hun Sen’s CPP. However, because of the illegal manipulation of the formula for allocating seats to the National Assembly, the CPP obtained 64 seats or about 52 percent against 58 seats or 48 percent for the combined parties of Prince Ranariddh and Sam Rainsy. This situation has led to a constitutional crisis because Hun Sen cannot form a cabinet without a two thirds majority.

Eager to legitimize Hun Sen and the CPP, the opposition parties are being heavily pressured by the international community, - especially by the European Union, Japan, and ASEAN - and the King, to join a coalition government dominated by Hun Sen and the CPP. The opposition parties have argued that before considering joining any coalition government they want that the National Election Commission (NEC) and the Constitutional Council (CC) to look seriously into their complaints of election frauds and irregularities. But the NEC and the CC which are dominated by Hun Sen appointees, have steadfastly rejected without seriously looking into the complaints. In turn, the opposition parties have had no choice but to lead a peaceful demonstration in front of the National Assembly. These demonstrators are now being brutally dispersed by Hun Sen’s security force, leaving many injuries and deaths.

Hun Sen’s decision to use force to suppress these demonstrations resulted from both the king’s decision to side with Hun Sen and from the international community’s, (including the State Department, and especially the European Union, Japan, and ASEAN) decision to rush to declare the election as reasonably free and fair and "broadly representative of the will of the Cambodian people." This is contrary to the independently observed conditions prior to, during, and after the election and the arithmetics of the results of the popular vote as discussed earlier.

The King needs Hun Sen’s support to change the constitution in order to make his consort queen a reigning queen upon his death or incapacitation. Therefore, the King can no longer be considered as a neutral party in any deal regarding the resolution of the current constitutional crisis. A new proof of the King’s partiality is revealed by his threatening to deprive the opposition parties members of their constitutional rights of immunity, if they don’t stop their public protest. While the international community’s politics of expediency toward Hun Sen has emboldened him not to make any concession and to remain entrenched in his dictatorial behavior.

The United States policy in Cambodia was a failure because it was based on two erroneous premises: (1) Hun Sen is the only person who has an organization which can give stability and promote prosperity in Cambodia, and (2) Hun Sen is the only person who can subdue the remnants of the Khmer Rouge forces.

The kind of stability that Hun Sen is said to be able to provide has been achieved by suppressing all opposition through the exiling or killing of those who dare to oppose him. Cambodia where corruption is systemic making it one of the most thriving centers in Southeast Asia for all kinds of criminal activities such as drug trafficking, money laundering, child prostitution, and illegal immigrant transit. Because of the uncontrolled and illegal deforestation by senior military officers and business tycoons supporters of Hun Sen corrupt regime, forest resources in Cambodia will be depleted within three years. This depletion, in turn, will have a devastating consequence on the environment and will soon turn Cambodia into a wasteland. Since the majority of Cambodians depend on land resource as the most important asset for their subsistence, the ecological problems resulting from deforestation will make Cambodia a beggar nation in the near future. These are definitely not the signs of an efficient and capable governance.

A closer look at how Hun Sen went about solving the Khmer Rouge problem showed that Hun Sen chose the most expedient approaches. He provided a blanket pardon to all Khmer Rouge leaders regardless of whether or not they are responsible for implementation or design of strategies and policies resulting in the slaughter of about two million Cambodians. This immoral approach completely disregarded the minimum of respect for the rule of law and human rights. As an example is the fact that ironically most of the notorious Khmer Rouge responsible for the Cambodian genocide, who were condemned by the international community at the 1991 Paris conference in as criminals against humanity, are now all in Phnom Penh under Hun Sen’s protection while the Cambodian democratic and freedom fighters are being persecuted. Is this a just and equitable way to solve the Khmer Rouge problem?

The rigging of the July 26 election by Hun Sen is only one of the phases in the CPP long term strategy to deliberately and often with violence undermine the democratic process put into place by UNTAC in 1993 . This deadly and well planned strategy was revealed at a hearing in the Australian Foreign Affairs Sub-committee in a recent testimony by Lieutenant- General John Sanderson, former Commander of UNTAC Force in Cambodia. He went on to add that the deficiencies of the recent elections were in no sense unavoidable or attributable to difficulties of conducting elections in a developing country. Rather they flowed from a series of conscious political acts by the ruling clique, reflecting a lack of genuine commitment to the process and the rights of individual Cambodians.

The solution of the Cambodian problem must start with the recognition that Hun Sen is the problem because he can neither bring prosperity nor stability to Cambodia. He is a war criminal for having summarily executed political prisoners while in his custody during the July 5, 1997 coup.

The Clinton Administration must disengage itself from defending Hun Sen and from making Hun Sen the sole person capable of maintaining stability Cambodia for fear that he can create more troubles because he has more guns at his disposal. In order to achieve this goal, the Clinton administration must consider taking the following measures to signal more openly to Hun Sen that he cannot get away with his inept mismanagement of the economy and environment, and his criminal conduct toward the opposition and the Cambodian people including Buddhist monks;

1. continue to deny Hun Sen the seat at the United Nations because of the illegitimacy of his regime and gross violation of basic human rights and the rule of law.

2. continue to cut off the economic and financial assistance, except humanitarian aid and not to put pressure on the World Bank and the IMF to resume their financial assistance because of Hun Sen’s bad governance and destruction of the environment.

3. recall the current Ambassador as soon as possible, and not appoint a new one until Hun Sen makes substantial and verifiable efforts to respect democratic principles, human rights and the rule of law by not oppressing the opposition and by arresting all those who had committed murders during the July 5 1997 coup as well as during the grenade attacks of KNP of Sam Rainsy and BLDP of Son Sann.

4 review the GSP granted to Cambodia because of the fact that the labor movement in Cambodia is not free and is under the control of Hun Sen and the CPP.

5. instruct the State Department not to put pressure on the opposition parties to enter any coalition government that is dominated by Hun Sen, even if King Sihanouk favors such an idea.

6. intensify the initiatives for an early establishment of an international war crime tribunal similar to those in Bosnia and Rwanda to bring to trial those notorious Khmer Rouge senior officials responsible for the Cambodian genocide such as Ieng Sary (former Pol Pot minister of foreign affairs) and Ke Pauk (director of Toul Sleng interrogation and torturing center) who are now under Hun Sen’s protection.

7. consider, in the near future, the possibility of establishing a caretaker government in Cambodia to provide a suitable and neutral political environment for genuine administrative, military, economic, financial, social, and institutional reforms to take place, without which no real progress and stability can be secured on a sustainable basis.

Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Asia and Pacific Affairs

Hearing on Post-Election Situation in Cambodia and US Policy Options

(October 2, 1998, at 10:00 a.m)

Room 419 Dirksen

"A Longterm and Integrated Look at the Cambodian Crisis: Some Suggestions for A Possible Solution"

By Naranhkiri Tith, Ph.D.

SAIS, the Johns Hopkins University

I am very grateful to you Mr. Chairman for convening this hearing at this critical time in the post election situation in Cambodia. I am fully aware that you are all busy with the many critical problems in the world today such as the Asian financial crisis and the Russian economic and political crisis which are having a contagious and negative impact on the US economy and that of the world. This hearing shows once again that the US Congress continues to be sincerely concerned about the plight of all oppressed people in the world, including the Cambodian people. This hearing is only one of the many that this committee under your chairmanship has frequently been holding on the situation in Cambodia during the past few years. I thank you.

I am deeply thankful to you and your colleagues for having made possible to have an independent Cambodian voice to discuss and analyze as honestly and straightforwardly as I can , the quickly deteriorating economic, political, and social situation in Cambodia, especially since the bloody coup which was planned and executed by Second Prime Minister Hun Sen against the duly elected First Prime Minister of Cambodia, Prince Ranariddh.

To fully understand the depth of this ongoing Cambodian crisis and, more specifically, the obviously Hun Sen staged and rigged July 26, 1998 election and its aftermath, one needs to briefly assess the role and the motivation of different interest groups involved. The proposed period of analysis starts just before the presence of United Nations Transitional Authorities in Cambodia (UNTAC) in Cambodia (1992-93) and continues until the present day. For analytical purposes, one can divide these interest groups into two broad categories; 1) the domestic factors such as the Cambodian political factions, the King, the Cambodian NGOs and the local media, 2) the international community encompassing the United Nations system, the major powers and regional powers as well as the international NGOs and media.

I. Domestic Aspect of the Cambodian Crisis

A. Cambodian People’s Party (CPP): origin, organization, ideology, strategies, and policies

The CPP is a splinter group from the deadly and monstrous Khmer Rouge Movement under the leadership of Pol Pot. All current senior CPP members were senior Khmer Rouge cadre including Hun Sen, Chea Sim, Heng Samrin, Sar Kheng, Tea Banh. The split came after Pol Pot started his periodical purges against party members. The current CPP group fled to Vietnam to save themselves from the Pol Pot purge and not because they wanted to liberate Cambodia from the Khmer Rouge as Hun Sen and his apologists have often stated. On December 25, 1978, the armed forces of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam invaded Cambodia and drove the Khmer Rouge back along the border with Thailand. In January 1979, Vietnam installed a new government, headed by Heng Samrin, a former Khmer rouge general, and the regime was renamed the People’s Republic of Kampuchea (PRK).

Gradually, the PRK had no choice but to release its firm grip on the economic organization of Cambodia. However, it kept firm control on the economic, political, and social organizations of Cambodia. Essentially, the PRK remained a communist organization with a centrally controlled and hierarchical economic and political command system. This centrally controlled command system is still in place today in Cambodia. However, it now wears the mask of a market system. As all typical communist organizations, the CPP remains a secretive organization and a one party state-controlled system. It does not tolerate any decent or political opposition however mild this may be.

Only with the collapse of the former Soviet Union and the subsequent halt of all Soviet financial and economic assistance to its satellites did Vietnam officially announce its withdraw from Cambodia. Without support from the socialist block the PRK was forced to start opening up and negotiating with the United Nations which was backed up by the major and regional powers for an election to set up a democratic system and a market economy in Cambodia.

The successful conclusion of the second Paris Conference in October, 1991 led to the establishment of UNTAC, under whose mandate an election was organized and carried out in May, 1993. The result of the election gave a clear majority to the non-communist parties which garnered a total of 69 seats. These parties included FUNCINPEC (Front Uni National pour un Cambodge Independent Neutre Pacific et Cooperatif) led by Prince Norodom Ranariddh, Buddhist Liberal Democratic (BLD) led by former Prime Minister Son Sann, and Moulinaka (Movement de Liberalization National du Kampuchea) led by Ros Roeun. Despite the advantage of the incumbency and a deliberated, and vicious campaign of intimidation and political killings of the members of the opposition parties, the CPP (formerly PRK), led by former senior Khmer Rouge officials, Chea Sim, and Hun Sen managed to grab 51 seats.

The elected representatives established a Provisional National Assembly which succeeded in promulgating a new constitution. After a threat of secession of seven eastern provinces by the CPP with a tacit approval of the King. a new coalition government coalition was imposed on the victorious non-communist parties. In coalition Hun Sen and his CPP not only obtained the crucial post of Second Prime Minister, but also the important post of Chairman of the National Assembly. To lock in their minority position in any decision making in the National Assembly, the CPP succeeded in imposing the rule of two thirds majority in any vote in the national Assembly. FUNCINPEC was given the post of First Prime Minister. They co-managed major ministries such as Defense, Interior. The economic ministries were split between CPP and FUNCINPEC. The army, the police, and civil administration remained totally in the hands of the CPP.

The Royal Coalition Government of Cambodia (RGC) was a tenuous coalition. Political infighting continued, both within and among the parties in the government. Corruption was and continues to be widespread. This combined with the extremely low capacity of government to manage, was increasing the threat of destabilization, which culminated in the July 5, 1997 bloody coup organized and executed by Hun Sen against Prince Ranariddh.

Last year’s coup was only a phase in a long term plan by Hun Sen and his CPP to completely take economic, and political control of Cambodia. Despite the claims by Hun Sen apologists, it was not a reaction to preempt a so-called coup by Prince Ranariddh in collusion with the Khmer Rouge. The CPP’s longterm plan to derail and undermine the democratic process which was established by UNTAC which was agreed upon and paid for by the international community. This conspiracy was clearly enunciated by two former senior UNTAC officials, Lieutenant-General John Sanderson, Commander of UNTAC force, and Michael Maley, Senior Deputy Chief Electoral Officer during a recent hearing at the Australian parliament Foreign Affairs sub-committee in Canberra during which they commented that the CPP has been deliberately, and often violently, undermining the democratic process begun in 1993 by UNTAC. They went on to say that the deficiencies of the recent elections in Cambodia;

" were in no sense unavoidable or attributable to the difficulties of conducting elections in a developing country. Rather they flowed from conscious political acts by the ruling clique, reflecting a lack of genuine commitment to the process and to the rights of individual Cambodians" (1)

There were several bloody incidents which preceded the July 5 coup, such as grenade attacks against the opposition parties of Mr. Son Sann in 1995 and a worse one against Sam Rainsy in March, 1997. These were not isolated incidents. They were carefully planned and well executed for specific purposes; first to silence the opposition, and second to test the degree of commitment to the defense of democracy and the rule of law in Cambodia by the international community.

After having rigged the July 26, 1998, election, Hun Sen started to implement the last phase of his grand plan to gain complete control of Cambodia’s destiny. On September 7, he ordered the arrest of one of his most outspoken critics, Mr. Sam Rainsy, (Under international pressure, that order of arrest was subsequently withdrawn). Some of Hun Sen’s false accusations against Sam Rainsy include 1) plotting his own death during the bloody incident in March, 1997 in which several peaceful and lawful demonstrators were killed and over 100 other demonstrators were injured including a US citizen, and 2) for having incited riots against the government after the election. Regarding the grenade attack, several eyewitnesses reported that they saw Hun Sen’s personal security guards prevent those who committed this crime from being caught by the demonstrators. Up to today, nobody has ever been arrested for that incident.

At first one is struck by the fact that unlike the other two major totalitarian Asian countries, China and Vietnam, there are no political prisoners in Hun Sen’s Cambodia. The main reason for this anomaly is the fact that Hun Sen does not take prisoners. He just has his opponents murdered in the most savage way. If they are lucky, they are sent into exile, despite the fact that the current constitution does not permit such an action against any Cambodian citizen.

B. King Sihanouk’s Role and His Influence in the Current Cambodian Political Crisis

It is no simple matter for anybody, and especially for a Cambodian, to criticize a national icon like King Sihanouk and to analyze his role in the political life in the current Cambodian crisis. However, it would also be irresponsible and imprudent to leave Sihanouk’s role out of any assessment of the contemporary political situation in Cambodia. Right or wrong, and although being only a constitutional monarch, he still can command a lot of influence both in Cambodia and internationally.

On the bright side, he is a tremendously charismatic, charming, shrewd, and talented person. However, on the dark side and from past behavior, he was also known to be very unpredictable and mercurial, and not very committed to moral or democratic principles. By birth, he is an autocrat and behaves like one. Judging from his preferred places of residence outside Cambodia (Beijing and Pyongyang) and the leaders he admired and befriended with (Kim Il Sung, Mao Tse Tung, Ceaucescu, Hodja, Sukarno, to mention only the obvious ones)(2) he is no friend of democracy. The dark and machiavellian side of Sihanouk was recently revealed and well captured in an article in the Phnom Penh Post - a well respected English language local newspaper - describing the role of Sihanouk’s role as a power broker in the current constitution crisis resulting from the charge of frauds during the July 26, 1998 election, when it wrote that;

"The King is ‘smiling his Bayon face’, as one Khmer politician described it - the Bayon being the four faced god statue of Angkor. Under this premise, Sihanouk selectively makes his thoughts and advice known to all actors, much of it probably contradictory - all the while muddying the waters further even as many look to him for a solution"(3)

He has always allied himself with those with strong preference for power, more specifically raw power. For instance, during the 1970’s and 1980s, he worked very closely with the Khmer Rouge leaders such as Pol Pot, Son Sen, Ieng Sary, and Khieu Samphan and has often proclaimed publicly that they were the most patriotic people dedicated and the best equipped to defend Cambodia’s sovereignty. Recently, he appears to have decided to switch his allegiance to Hun Sen even though he knows that Hun Sen is no royalist. Why then did the King decide to choose Hun Sen as his ally and to go against his own son, Prince Ranariddh and his own brother, Prince Sirivudh in the current crisis? He refused to pardon Prince Sirivudh who was framed by Hun Sen to have plotted his assassination, while he has pardoned some of the most notorious Khmer Rouge responsible for the Cambodian genocide, such as Ieng Sary (former Khmer rouge foreign minister) and Ke Pauk (the executioner of the Toul Sleng interrogation center). More recently, he reluctantly pardoned his own son, Prince Ranariddh, only after a great deal of international pressure.

To better understand this apparent contradiction, It is important to analyze the King’s motivation. It is a well-known fact in Phnom Penh political circles that one of the King’s main goals is to make his beloved consort queen Monineath (formerly Monique Izzi) a reigning queen after his death or incapacitation. To achieve his royal wish, King Sihanouk needs the support of Hun Sen and the CPP. For that reason Sihanouk has recently struck a deal with Hun Sen to have the constitution changed (4) to make possible a female to become a reigning queen, which the present constitution does not allow for. Queen Monineath, in turn, would groom her son, Prince Norodom Sihamoni to become king of Cambodia after her retirement or death. Therefore, King Sihanouk can no longer be considered to be a neutral party in this current constitutional crisis and any future search for its solution.

It is also important to point out that under Hun Sen there is no credible legal or justice system. Hun Sen is the law. The members of the National Election Commission (NEC) as well as the Constitutional Court (CC), the highest institutions in which to settle constitutional disputes are all stacked with Hun Sen appointees. That is why these two influential institutions which have enormous power to determine the outcome of any election have been consistently refusing to listen to the complaints of the two major opposition parties regarding the electoral frauds and intimidations before, during , and after the election.

One of UNTAC’s legacies was the establishment of a vibrant and sometime unruly written media. However, this press freedom is quickly dwindling under Hun Sen’s unrelenting assault which has included assassinations of editors and reporters in broad daylight and threatening grave consequences if they don’t stop criticizing him and his regime. Now most editors and reporters who opposed Hun Sen and the CPP have either gone underground or are in hiding.

Another organization which came under Hun Sen’s attack was the free Cambodian labor movement which is now practically under total state control. This in turn, raises the question whether the granting of GSP to Cambodia is still legal under current US law. A representative of the AFL-CIO in Bangkok has recently filed a petition to the Congress on this issue calling into question the legality of the granting of GSP to Cambodia.

The opposition parties are being literally torn into pieces. Immediately after the 1993 elections the two main opposition parties, FUNCINPEC and the BLD were subjected to systematic assaults through bogus accusations against prominent politicians such as Prince Norodom Sirivudh, former Deputy Prime Minister, by assassination during the July 5, 1997 coup, and through corrupt practices such as buying the allegiance of those opposition politicians who were ready to leave their parties. In this latter case, the most favored tactic was to create a splinter group and then allow the pro-CPP splinter group to use the old party name while refusing to allow the original members to do so. This method was devised to confuse the international Community and the Cambodian electorate. That is why the BLD became the Son Sann party, and the old Khmer Nation Party is now the Sam Rainsy party.

II. The International Aspect of the Cambodian Crisis

A. The Ambivalent role of the international community in the current Cambodian crisis

Despite the CPP’s maneuvering, and intimidations before and during the July 26 election the majority of the Cambodian people came out en mass (90 percent) and courageously voted in favor of the opposition. As a matter of fact, together FUNCINPEC and Sam Rainsy parties received about 59 percent, while the CPP received only 41 percent of the total popular votes. In other words, the opposition won the election. However, because of the secret change in the seat distribution formula by the NEC, the CPP received 52 percent of the seats in the new National Assembly while the two major opposition parties together received only 48 percent of the total. These numbers do not add up to make the July 26 anywhere near the "miracle on the Mekong" as suggested by former Congressman Steve Solarz. Additionally, the European Union and ASEAN observers have prematurely declared that the election was free and fair and "broadly representative of the wish of the Cambodian people" without even bothering to wait for the electoral process to be completed.

It is important to point out that the preconditions for a free and fair election were never there to allow the election to move as scheduled. Almost all of the independent organizations such as the International Crisis group (ICG), the International Republican Institute (IRI), the National Democratic Institute (NDI), Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and numerous local NGOs have indicated that the opposition parties were not allowed sufficient access the electronic media, and that the NEC and the CC were not neutral. I would like to also point out that some influential members of the US Congress such as Congressmen Benjamin Gilman, Dan Burton, Tom Campbell, Dana Rohrabacher, Chris Smith, and Gerald Solomon, have recently written a letter to Secretary of State Albright to draw the attention of the Secretary of State to the post- election intimidations and irregularities and to ask her to have

"the State Department immediately deliver a firm statement to Hun Sen informing him that all acts of violence and ballots manipulation will not be tolerated." (5)

There were also the issues of the politically-motivated killings of opposition parties members prior to the election and continued impunity for the perpetrators of politically motivated violence.

B. Wrong and damaging premises and double standard of judgment for the support of Hun Sen by the international community

Why then was the international community including the Clinton Administration so eager to push for the election to take place despite all the major problems which were mentioned previously? The answer to that is the fact that 1.) there is a general compassion fatigue and 2.) the politics of expediency have been adopted by the major and regional powers. The rationale for such realpolitik approach is based on two wrong premises. The first premise is that the CPP is the only efficient political organization which can maintain stability and promote prosperity in Cambodia. The second premise is based on the perception that the CPP is the only organization capable of defeating the remnant Khmer Rouge force.

1. On the first premise that Hun Sen and his CPP can maintain stability and promote growth is untrue, in fact Cambodia under Hun Sen has wasted a lot of economic and financial assistance to maintain an army whose main objective is to eliminate all opposition and to maintain an atmosphere of permanent fear in which to subdue and to control the majority of the population. In that sense, the CPP is a very efficient organization in the tradition of communist countries which destroy rather than builds the society.

One can cite many examples to illustrate the fiasco of the Hun Sen’s management of the Cambodian economy and society. For instance, Cambodia is on the US list of narco-states. The other distinctive failures of the Hun Sen regime include the pervasive presence of money laundering, the exploitation of children for prostitution and labor, the use of Cambodia as a staging area for illegal immigration to third countries, the pervasive corruption and banditry and, last but not least, a dismal record in human rights, and the mismanagement of the environment, especially of forestry resources .

It is estimated by two independent and professional organizations, Global Witness and the World Bank that at current rate of exploitation there will be no more forest left in Cambodia within three years. This, in turn, will deprive the majority of the Cambodian people the necessary means to grow food and to raise animals for field works. The impact of deforestation on the Cambodian society is well captured by Kirk Talbot, Senior Director for Asia-Pacific at Conservation International.

"The Plunder of Cambodia’s forest is viewed by many as close to spiraling out of control. The resulting damage to the country’s natural resource base is huge, as the loss of revenue to its government. And less tangible, but also important, is the concomitant loss of the government’s credibility as the protector of the common good. As a result how Cambodia deals with logging is vital to the country’s economic and political future." (6)

For these reasons, Cambodia may soon become a beggar nation waiting for the international community to provide the basic food to survive. Because of the more pronounced cycles of droughts and floods Cambodia is already confronted with a growing and prolonged food shortage. This problem will become more acute within two to three years. Are these signs that the Hun Sen administration is efficient and capable of promoting growth and stability?

2. On the second premise that only Hun Sen and the CPP are capable of solving the Khmer Rouge problem, one should ask the following questions. How did Hun Sen go about solving this problem? Where are those Khmer Rouge now?

Hun Sen’s immoral method of solving the Khmer Rouge problem was to offer a general pardon to all Khmer Rouge except Pol Pot (who was already dead), Khieu Samphan, Noun Chea, and Ta Mok. The rest of the Khmer Rouge including the most notorious executioners of the two million innocent Cambodians are all now integrated into the Hun Sen government or army. In other words, Hun Sen has disregarded all the basic principles of a modern society like justice, the rule of law, and human rights.

The main reason why Hun Sen has been able to continue to oppress and impose his tyranny on the Cambodian people, is the fact that the international community has been too expedient and indifferent in dealing with him. They lowered their standards in judging his behavior in the and the management of Cambodian society. This point was eloquently expressed by Martin Collacott, a former Canadian Ambassador to Cambodia and chief Canadian observer during the July 26 election when he wrote that;

"The argument has been made that Cambodia has suffered exceptional trauma and dislocation in recent decades and that it is therefore not reasonable to apply the same standards we expect of more settled and economically developed countries.

This approach makes sense up to a point. The fact is, however, that, after an impressive start following the United Nations-sponsored elections in 1998, there has for the most part been more erosion than consolidation of democratic value"

Only by comparing Hun Sen’s management style and behavior to those of the Khmer Rouge can there be any sign of progress. In contrast, the Cambodian democratic movement has been judged according to the international standard of value in terms of justice, the rule of law and human rights.

This double standard way which the international community including the State Department has been adopting to judge Cambodian politicians has allowed Hun Sen to continue to destroy the Cambodian society and to lead Cambodia to remain dependent on foreign assistance. Based on his academic and professional experiences as an economist specializing in the reform of many countries in transition, this writer is convinced that Hun Sen does not even have a minimal grasp or understanding of any democratic or civil society principles to lead Cambodia toward a path of modernity and prosperity. Well schooled in the Khmer Rouge culture of violence and corruption, Hun Sen can only bring Cambodia down toward the path of permanent dependence and misery.

III. What should the United States Policy be With Regard to the Ongoing Crisis in Cambodia?

Cambodia is a very small and poor country with only 11 million inhabitants. However, its people have had their share of misfortune and tragedy. The international community has spent more than US$ 3 billion to help Cambodia return to normal conditions through the work of UNTAC. On the surface, the international community has every reason to have compassion fatigue. However, if the international Community decides to drop Cambodia from its radar screen, this would only fulfill the wish of Hun Sen and allow him to rule Cambodia as a primitive despot.

I argue that the Cambodian people, because of their courage and tenacity in their belief in democracy and the rule of law still deserve the attention of the international community only if one argues not in economic or financial terms, but in humanitarian and ideological terms. To allow Hun Sen to run Cambodia as his private fiefdom and to behave like a tyrant oppressing the Cambodian people on a massive scale could send a very strong but wrong message to countries like Indonesia, Myanmar even China, where democratic movements are getting stronger and more active, and like Russia where democracy and the market system are being questioned.

For the reasons discussed earlier, the Clinton Administration should recognize that its policy of picking Hun Sen as the only choice for governing Cambodia is fundamentally flawed. I would like to suggest that if the Cambodian people are to have any chance of escaping mass starvation and permanent dependence on international generosity, the Clinton Administration in consultation with the Congress should consider the adoption of the following measures:

1. disengage itself from the current policy of considering Hun Sen as the only leader who can bring stability and prosperity for the Cambodian people. This policy of expediently supporting Hun Sen, at all costs, is contrary to the principles upon which President Clinton has publicly and officially stated as the cornerstone of his administration foreign policy; namely the promotion of democracy, the rule of law, and human rights in the world. Based on the above analysis, it is clear that Hun Sen is not a "born again democrat" as some State Department officials have been suggesting, and his political organization is only efficient at destroying but not at building a nation.

2. continue to deny Hun Sen the right to be represented at the United Nations until he can sufficiently and sustainably demonstrate his willingness to respect human rights, the rule of law and democratic principles.

3. strongly communicate to Hun Sen that he must make all efforts to bring to justice all those responsible for the political killings prior to and after the July 5, 1997 coup before the United States sends a new Ambassador to Cambodia. This would send a strong message to Hun Sen that the US means business if the current Ambassador can be withdrawn from Phnom Penh as soon as feasible.

4. continue to deny Hun Sen economic and financial assistance, except humanitarian aid, from the United States and from the international financial institutions such as as the IMF and the World Bank until Hun Sen makes substantial and sustainable efforts to improve the governance of the country, by eliminating corruption in general and stopping the destruction of the environment in particular.

5. review GSP for Cambodia as soon as possible to see whether the current Cambodian government labor law and practice are conformed to the existing US legal conditions for granting such an economic privilege.

6. make renewed and sustained efforts in bringing to trial all Khmer Rouge senior officials whose records are on files with the Cambodian Genocide Project and who are now under Hun Sen’s protection as soon as possible within the framework of an international criminal court similar to those for Rwanda or Bosnia.

7. refrain from pressuring the opposition leaders to join a coalition government dominated Hun Sen, even if King Sihanouk supports that idea. More specifically, the Clinton Administration should instruct the State Department not to put pressure on the opposition parties to enter into a CPP-dominated coalition government whose economic and social policies will have no chance to succeed because of the pervasive corruption and the absence of the rule of law within the CPP organization.

8. consider the possibility of establishing a caretaker government in Cambodia in the near future. Only when Hun Sen and his CPP are politically neutralized can the Cambodian situation really improve. But this requires a firm commitment from the United States and its allies to put this plan into action. The Cambodian situation is at such a hopeless juncture that only a drastic policy change by the United States, as the world leader in the promotion of democracy, the rule of law, and human rights, can really have a lasting impact. This situation has recently been forcefully and soberly argued by Henry Kamm of the New York Times.

"I see no other way but to place Cambodia’s people into caring and disinterested hands for one generation of Cambodians, who will have matured with respect for their own people and will be ready to take responsibility for them. Unrealistic? of course. Unrealizable? No."

Thank you Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee for your kind attention

Foot Notes:

(1) For a more complete view on how the CPP has been undermining the UNTAC program, see Phnom Penh Post (9/04/98) "UNTAC officials speak out on election"

(2) For more details on Sihanouk's friends, see, Charisma and Leadership, by Norodom Sihanouk, Yohan Puublications, Inc., Tokyo, 1990

(3) Phnom Penh Post, (9/04/98) "Relaxed Hun Sen Holds the Royal Key".

(4) As reported by the National Radio of Cambodia - a government-run radio (AFS No. BK25081 42598)

(5) See the letter dated August 6, 1998 from the six members of the Congress to Secretary of State Albright

(6) For a detailed description of the devastating effects of deforestation on the Cambodian people, and the corrupt practice in Hun Sen regime, see "Logging in Cambodia: Politics and Plunder" by Kirk Talbot in Cambodia and the International Community, Asia Society, New York, 1998