Dear Editor,
Many observers have assumed current transitional Cambodian politics will
gradually become mature. But I believe this is an obscure statement. If we say
the tendency of Cambodian politics is towards maturity within a cave of
immaturity, this might be more plausible. However, what we cannot fathom is:
How bad is this cave?
Some Cambodian people and major incumbent Cambodian politicians will, not
reluctantly, concur that they are very glad as a result of many new emerging
things that they didn't have during the Pol Pot period. This statement is
logical, but even wise people might not see that it is still important to
develop Cambodia's political maturity.
Pol Pot came to power with the intention of restructuring Cambodian society to
build a new, utopian, agrarian society. The regime's approach has become
globally recognised as "year zero". So how wise and good can we be when the
present emerging development is pragmatically compared to the "year zero" of
Pol Pot? Anything now is socially, economically, politically unmatched to those
of the Khmer Rouge regime.
The current Cambodian hybrid Khmer Rouge trial has solemnly proclaimed its
primary mission is to enhance national reconciliation, to help heal Cambodians'
[Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)], and to eliminate the culture of
impunity. Cambodian people should not be easily exploited by the politically
orchestrated attempt to disfavour the Khmer Rouge and favour the so-called
Khmer Rouge liberators. In reality, we should try and achieve some insight and
understanding of the fact that while the Khmer Rouge were communist, the
Vietnamese who liberated us from the Khmer Rouge were also communist. They both
are communist by origin. Contemporary Cambodian politicians and people have to
protect themselves from both of these two disadvantaged political influences
with the overall intention of truly democratising Cambodia, developing
ourselves to appreciate this new political trend and nourishing the maturity of
political leaders and their followers.
Regarding the political parties, no distinction can be made between government
party and opposition party. These two national political parties are
interdependent and inseparable. The Cambodian People's Party (CPP) can
legitimise themselves in front of the Cambodian people as well as international
communities because of the Sam Rainsy Party. Similarly, the Sam Rainsy Party
can have a stage to test the weaknesses and strength of their future
leadership, or that of the CPP. For example, their current legal movement to
reject the result of election was a brave performance.
The Cambodian people, both old and young, are observers, referees and owners of
this social contract. They should not be careless and allow an imbalance of
power between government and opposition to continue to happen. If such an
imbalance is not dangerous per se, it is surely not compatible with the
principle of liberal democracy.
Sophan Seng
Ph.D student of political science
University of Hawaii at Manoa.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Cambodia Discussion (CAMDISC) - www.cambodia.org" group.
This is an unmoderated forum. Please refrain from using foul language.
Thank you for your understanding. Peace among us and in Cambodia.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/camdisc
Learn more - http://www.cambodia.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
