But why didn't Vietnam do it earlier, not waiting till after 2 million death ?
On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 10:18 PM, Soriya <[email protected]> wrote: > > jayakhmer, > > > The war of 1979 and its aftermath generate this lingering question > whether the > > war was an invasion or liberation. > > The war was both an invasion & a liberation, or, more precisely, an > invasion & a rescue. Vietnam invaded Pol Pot's Cambodia. It had the > right to do so because the 2 countries were in war. The liberation or > more precisely the rescue of the Cambodian people from the genocide by > the bloody hands of Pol Pot & the Khmer Rouge were a by-product of the > invasion. Although it was a by-product, it was a > liberation or more precisely a rescue nonetheless. What would happen > to Cambodia if Vietnam hadn't invaded?? A Cambodia with a population > of less than a > million all of whom are illiterate?? You bet!! > > Of the following 2 options, which one would you choose?? > > 1) Vietnam invaded Pol Pot's Cambodia, thus as a by-product ended his > killing spree of the Cambodian people, & withdrew its troops from > Cambodia 10 years later, > > 2) Vietnam didn't invade Pol Pot's Cambodia, & thus Pol Pot & Co > continued their massacre of the Cambodian people. > > > Can we move beyond this debate? I think we can and we should. > > The Khmer Rouge & their sympathizers here in CamDisc will never move > beyond this debate. They want & are trying to revenge Vietnam for > ending their reign of terror. > > > It would be easy to decide if the warring parties were all foreign forces > against > > Cambodian's. The complexity increases exponentially when Cambodians > > collaborated with the invasion forces. Battalions of the Khmer > Resistance Force > > of the United Front for National Salvation of Kampuchea (UFNSK) fought > side by > > side with the Vietnamese forces. > > The UFNSK were Khmer Rouge factions who opposed the genocide. The > opportunity arrived for them to rescue the Cambodian people when the > Vietnam/Khmer Rouge war broke out. Who else can they ask for help to > rescue the Cambodian people?? They knew that for Vietnam it was > Vietnam's interest that was the most important. But again, who else > would come to save the Cambodian people?? The Thais?? They treated the > Cambodian refugees in Thailand as street dogs!! Can you rely on them?? > > > Was it an invasion or a liberation? > > It was both an invasion & a liberation, or more precisely an invasion > & a rescue. > > > To Vietnam it was a conquest and an invasion. It was Vietnam's > Machiavellian > > approach to settling disputes between its weaker neighbors. What were > border > > skirmishes between the former allies during the Vietnam War against the > U.S. > > became a full-blown war between Vietnam and the Democratic Kampuchea (DK) > > as the two nations deeply divided between the Soviet and the Chinese > camp. > > Pol Pot, emboldened by his then so far success in his efforts to try > to wipe out the Cambodian nation from the face of the earth without > any resistance from the Cambodian people, didn't agree to Vietnam's > request for negotiations to end the conflict. He even "invaded" > Vietnamese villages along the border & massacred 1,000s of innocent > Vietnamsese civilians. > > What do you expect?? Do you expect the Vietnamese to sit still & wait > for the Khmer Rouge to come to cut off their heads?? > > What about you, if you're in war with Vietnam & you're stronger than > it, wouldn't you invade it to try to end the war?? > > > In my mind, the war would have been a liberation if it was conceived and > planned > > by the leadership of UFNSK. The UFNSK was promulgated as a resistance > force > > in Snoul, Kratie on December 2, 1978 by which time the Vietnamese > generals > > had meticulously planned the war, and the preparations for war were > already > > completed. While it is conceivable that the Vietnamese generals may have > > consulted with its Cambodian counterparts, the records, thus far, showed > that the > > Vietnamese generals were the brains behind the invasion. > > If the Vietnamese generals hadn't consulted with the UFNSK, what would > you do?? They were in war against Pol Pot's Cambodia, if they hadn't > consulted with Pol Pot's Cambodian opponents, what would you do?? They > were in war against Pol Pot's Cambodia, who says they had to consult > with Pol Pot's Cambodian opponents?? > > > In " The Tale of the Five Generals," Pribbenow II described the war > planning and > > execution in breath taking details. "The Vietnamese army spent all of > 1978 > > drafting and training new recruits, calling up reservists, rebuilding > under strength > > units, and converting military 'economic construction' groups back into > regular > > combat units." > > That's right. At that time I lived in Saigon. I heard that the > Vietnamese government even recruited the soldiers of the "ancient" > regime to go to fight the Khmer Rouge. How about ther Khmer Rouge?? Oh > yeah, they didn't recruit, they only killed. How "smart"!! > > > The war was scheduled to begin on January 1,1979. The KR made a > preemptive > > move by attacking Vietnam on December 21 and 22 of 1978. The Vietnamese > > and UFNSK force responded and capture Phnom Penh on January 7, 1979. > > See, how "intelligent" the Khmer Rouge leaders were!! > > > The Khmer Rouge's systematic killing of its citizens made an invasion a > welcome > > relief for many Cambodians. > > Not just for "many" Cambodians, it was for ALL non-Khmer-Rouge > Cambodians. > > > On the one hand, the invasion stopped the killing. Without the invasion, > the > > alternative could have been very gloom for many Cambodians. Clearly, the > U.S. > > could not have rescued Cambodians from the KR – the Vietnam War was too > > fresh for the U.S to return to the region; the Soviet Union was already > Vietnam's > > staunchest ally; and China supported the KR. > > That's right. > > > On the other hand, the invasion has been a constant source of criticism > and > > mistrust for the current government many of whose members served in the > > UFNSK that became the government of Cambodia after the 1979 invasion. > > The criticism is rooted in 2 sources: 1) the Khmer Rouge themselves, & > 2) racial hatred. > > Number 1 is understandable. For number 2, it's very hard to educate > the Khmers. It's virtually impossible to make them understand that the > past is the past, that in the past the Vietnamese were bad to the > Khmers and the Khmers were also bad to the Vietnamese, that it's ok & > even good that they should look back at it to learn from it but > shouldn't live in it, that now is the present & thus that they should > take the present conditions into consideration. > > It's even impossible to convince them that had Vietnam not invaded Pol > Pot's Cambodia, Pol Pot & Co would have eliminated all the non-Khmer- > Rouge Cambodian people from the face of the earth, including even > them. > > By "Khmers" I mean the Khmer Rouge & their Khmer buddies, both are > here in CamDisc. > > > In the coming weeks, the debates about the war will go on. As more and > more > > information about the war is available, I encourage my fellow Cambodians > to read, > > research for more information, and to come to your own conclusion. > > They have already come to their own conclusion, a long time ago. For > them, there's no need to read or research anything. > > > I have concluded that the war was an invasion, and that the Royal > Government of > > Cambodia, while pursuing a peaceful and friendly relation with Vietnam, > should be > > free to determine its own destiny. Cambodia does not owe Vietnam > anything. > > Vietnam did what Vietnam had to do to deal with the DK government. > Vietnam > > defeated the KR. It accomplished its mission. > > - Right, the war was an invasion. > - The Cambodian government is free to determine its own destiny. > - Right, Cambodia doesn't owe Vietnam anything. > - Good, Vietnam defeated the evil murderers Khmer Rouge. It > accomplished its > mission. It withdrew its troops from Cambodia almost 20 years ago, > in 1989. > > > Cambodia based on its current bilateral relationships with the rest of > the world > > and especially with China and the U.S. seems to be free of its neighbor's > > influence. It is up to all of us to find a way to put our past behind us > and to focus > > on the future. > > Agree 101%. Just an addition: focus also on the present, in addition > to the future. > > > The prime minister has stated that he will be serving as prime minister > again after > > the 2013 election. The implication is Cambodian People's Party (CPP) > will win > > again. The prime minister may be correct in his prediction if the > opposition > > parties fail to unite and fail to inspire a simple majority of Cambodians > to vote for > > change. > > Everything is up to the Cambodian people, as long as the election is > free & fair. The opposition parties must show the Cambodian people > that they can be better than the CPP. The Cambodian people are of > course smarter than the barbarians here in Camdisc. They even don't > buy Sam Rainsy racial-hatred rhetoric, which he used in the futile > hope that he could incite them to hate the CPP & thus to vote for him. > > > Based on past performance, it is highly likely that the opposition > parties will fail > > again unless they are serious about winning by making drastic changes in > the > > messages and leadership. > > First of all, they must get rid of their naming their parties after an > individual. I've never seen or heard any political party anywhere else > in the world that's named after an individual. > > > With all due respect to prime minister, the picture does not look quite > right when > > CPP can only come up the same candidate. And it is equally sad that the > > opposition parties keep sticking to the same strategy with the same > leadership > > election after election. > > For the CPP, why should it change its leader (I believe you mean "the > same leader" when you say "the same candidate") when that leader keeps > winning?? > > > The future depends on all Cambodians to work together to find a common > ground > > that moves the country forward. Cambodia may be poor comparing to the > rest of > > the world, but it has enough resources and talent to move Cambodia to be > > developed nation. Cambodia simply needs to provide equal opportunity for > all to > > participate in the process. > > Agree 102%. > > > While election is one of the vehicles to bring change, term limit can do > wonder in > > spreading the responsibilities to those who are qualified to serve and to > lead the > > nation. > > Agree 103%. > > Soriya > > On Dec 23, 1:00 pm, Jayakhmer <[email protected]> wrote: > > Also posted atwww.modernprogressivekhmer.blogspot.com > > > > For most of my adult life, I have tried to reconcile the conundrum of > > the so-called Cambodia's "liberation." The war of 1979 and its > > aftermath generate this lingering question whether the war was an > > invasion or liberation. Can we move beyond this debate? I think we > > can and we should. > > > > It would be easy to decide if the warring parties were all foreign > > forces against Cambodian's. The complexity increases exponentially > > when Cambodians collaborated with the invasion forces. Battalions of > > the Khmer Resistance Force of the United Front for National Salvation > > of Kampuchea (UFNSK) fought side by side with the Vietnamese forces. > > > > Was it an invasion or a liberation? > > > > To Vietnam it was a conquest and an invasion. It was Vietnam's > > Machiavellian approach to settling disputes between its weaker > > neighbors. What were border skirmishes between the former allies > > during the Vietnam War against the U.S. became a full-blown war > > between Vietnam and the Democratic Kampuchea (DK) as the two nations > > deeply divided between the Soviet and the Chinese camp. > > > > "In September [of 1978] Le Duan made the timing of the Vietnamese plan > > clear when he told the Soviet Ambassador to Vietnam that the > > Vietnamese Politburo had decided 'to solve fully this question [of > > Cambodia] by the beginning of 1979,'" according to Merle L. Pribbenow > > II, a former CIA agent and a Vietnam expert, who hailed the invasion > > as "one of the most seminal events of the last half century in South > > East Asia." > > > > To the UFNSK may have been a rescue mission or a liberation. > > > > In my mind, the war would have been a liberation if it was conceived > > and planned by the leadership of UFNSK. The UFNSK was promulgated as > > a resistance force in Snoul, Kratie on December 2, 1978 by which time > > the Vietnamese generals had meticulously planned the war, and the > > preparations for war were already completed. While it is conceivable > > that the Vietnamese generals may have consulted with its Cambodian > > counterparts, the records, thus far, showed that the Vietnamese > > generals were the brains behind the invasion. > > > > In " The Tale of the Five Generals," Pribbenow II described the war > > planning and execution in breath taking details. "The Vietnamese army > > spent all of 1978 drafting and training new recruits, calling up > > reservists, rebuilding under strength units, and converting military > > 'economic construction' groups back into regular combat units." > > > > Diplomatically, Vietnam made an informed calculation. To avoid > > fighting two wars at the same time, knowing that China would send > > troops to defend Phnom Penh if victory cannot be achieved > > expeditiously, the Commander of the General Staff, General Le Trong > > Tan and Party Secretary Le Duan traveled to inform the Soviet Union of > > the war plan in the summer of 1978. > > > > " The only way China could stop Vietnam would be to send large numbers > > of Chinese Troops to defend Cambodia" Duan told the Soviet > > ambassador. > > > > The next month, according to Pribbenow II, when the Soviet diplomat > > expressed concern over the possibility that Chinese would block the > > invasion, Senior Vietnamese Party official already concluded that > > China would not have enough time to dispatch large military units to > > rescue Cambodia. > > > > The war was scheduled to begin on January 1,1979. The KR made a > > preemptive move by attacking Vietnam on December 21 and 22 of 1978. > > The Vietnamese and UFNSK force responded and capture Phnom Penh on > > January 7, 1979. > > > > The Khmer Rouge's systematic killing of its citizens made an invasion > > a welcome relief for many Cambodians. > > > > On the one hand, the invasion stopped the killing. Without the > > invasion, the alternative could have been very gloom for many > > Cambodians. Clearly, the U.S. could not have rescued Cambodians from > > the KR – the Vietnam War was too fresh for the U.S to return to the > > region; the Soviet Union was already Vietnam's staunchest ally; and > > China supported the KR. > > > > On the other hand, the invasion has been a constant source of > > criticism and mistrust for the current government many of whose > > members served in the UFNSK that became the government of Cambodia > > after the 1979 invasion. > > > > In the coming weeks, the debates about the war will go on. As more > > and more information about the war is available, I encourage my fellow > > Cambodians to read, research for more information, and to come to your > > own conclusion. > > > > I have concluded that the war was an invasion, and that the Royal > > Government of Cambodia, while pursuing a peaceful and friendly > > relation with Vietnam, should be free to determine its own destiny. > > Cambodia does not owe Vietnam anything. Vietnam did what Vietnam had > > to do to deal with the DK government. Vietnam defeated the KR. It > > accomplished its mission. > > > > Cambodia based on its current bilateral relationships with the rest of > > the world and especially with China and the U.S. seems to be free of > > its neighbor's influence. It is up to all of us to find a way to put > > our past behind us and to focus on the future. > > > > The prime minister has stated that he will be serving as prime > > minister again after the 2013 election. The implication is Cambodian > > People's Party (CPP) will win again. The prime minister may be > > correct in his prediction if the opposition parties fail to unite and > > fail to inspire a simple majority of Cambodians to vote for change. > > > > Based on past performance, it is highly likely that the opposition > > parties will fail again unless they are serious about winning by > > making drastic changes in the messages and leadership. > > > > With all due respect to prime minister, the picture does not look > > quite right when CPP can only come up the same candidate. And it is > > equally sad that the opposition parties keep sticking to the same > > strategy with the same leadership election after election. > > > > The future depends on all Cambodians to work together to find a common > > ground that moves the country forward. Cambodia may be poor comparing > > to the rest of the world, but it has enough resources and talent to > > move Cambodia to be developed nation. Cambodia simply needs to provide > > equal opportunity for all to participate in the process. > > > > While election is one of the vehicles to bring change, term limit can > > do wonder in spreading the responsibilities to those who are qualified > > to serve and to lead the nation. > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
