|
Cambodian Charade June 16, 1998 SINCE CAMBODIAN strong man Hun Sen staged a coup nearly one year ago, much of the international community has sought to restore democracy to that Southeast Asian nation. But from the start, Hun Sen has been eager to conduct a sham election that would perpetuate his rule, safeguard himself from any real challenge and get the international community off his back. Some outside nations have seemed willing to tolerate such a farce on the theory that anything else would be too hard and too unlikely. Others -- including, at least until recently, the United States -- have insisted on a real election. Now the July 25 vote Hun Sen scheduled is approaching, and the signs are discouraging. It is true that opposition politicians who fled for their lives have, in some cases, returned; that opposition parties are operating and holding rallies; that some newspapers critical of the government are being published; and that some of the trappings of democracy are in place. But these institutions are mostly props for a Hun Sen-directed charade. During and after the coup -- and as recently as late April -- close to 100 political murders took place, mostly of opposition politicians and their supporters. No one has been arrested, tried or punished for these killings; according to a recent United Nations report, the government has not even begun to investigate in most cases. As a result, fear and intimidation are pervasive. There are many other serious obstacles to a credible election: national and local election commissions under Hun Sen's control; radio and television that give virtually no access to the opposition; Hun Sen's campaign to thumbprint voters as they "voluntarily" join his party, a ploy to persuade people that on election day their ballots will be checkable. But it is the surrounding context of fear that makes each obstacle so overwhelming. This bleak situation would seem to leave the United States and its allies with two options, both unattractive. They could urge a postponement of the vote, which would indicate their disapproval but might just give Hun Sen more time to consolidate his power. More plausibly, they could accept the July 25 date but lay down clear benchmarks now that Cambodia would have to meet for its election to be judged credible and for Cambodia to win back, after July 25, its U.N. seat and foreign aid. Unfortunately, the Clinton administration is giving hints of leaning toward a third, even less attractive option: accepting the election results without much of a fuss. In recent congressional testimony, the administration's tone was disturbingly rosy. It spoke of opposition leaders "operating freely," took credit for "significant progress" and said results now "will largely depend upon the Cambodians themselves; how they exercise their right to vote and the candidates they choose." This is just not so. The results depend upon Hun Sen, and whether he will loosen his authoritarian grip during the campaign and allow political killers to be brought to justice. That can happen only with strong outside pressure. Bogus claims of success will only betray a Cambodian population that has been too often betrayed in this century. Copyright 1998 The Washington Post
|
|
[ Membership ] [ Feedbacks ] [ Contact Us ] |
  |