Helping to nurture the fledgling democracy in Cambodia

Helping to nurture the fledgling democracy in Cambodia

Sorpong Peou examines the political situation in Cambodia and suggests some ways to foster democracy in that country.

Several months ago, I wrote two articles contending that Cambodia was still not on the right path to stability and democracy. Since then, news about Cambodia has been negative and merely confirmed my analysis. In early October, the Thai newspaper The Nation viewed Cambodian democracy as being "threatened by intolerance". In late November, the Asian Wall Street Journal put out an editorial entitled Cambodia's Communist Comeback. In early December, The New York Times questioned the UN legacy in an article headlined Outsiders Gone, Cambodia Unravels.

What has made Cambodia a place that still commands press attention? A simple answer to this question is that the UN efforts at turning the Cambodian battlefield into a ballot box may have gone to waste. The international community spent more than US$2 billion on a multifarious mission designed to create a neutral political environment for free and fair elections. It was a tall order for the UN, and the world's expectations were high.

Nevertheless, the process of Cambodian democratization has not progressed at the pace anticipated by Cambodia watchers. There is a disturbing trend towards the iron-fisted authority of old. Besides its heavy-handed efforts to "discipline" members of the print media, the government has taken measures to silence its political opponents.

The internal purge of dissidents began with the expulsion of former finance minister Sam Rainsy, first from his ministerial position, then from his own party, and finally from the National Assembly. Later came the expulsion from their own party of Son Sann (leader of the Buddhist Liberal Democratic Party) and his loyalists. Information Minister Ieng Mouley, a high-ranking member of the BLDP, had thrown his lot with the Cambodian People's Party and succeeded in taking his party boss's place. CPP Prime Minister Hun Sen wrote a letter to congratulate his BLDP minister's political triumph.

The government's heavy-handed approach to its political opponents did not end there. The most recent victim of emerging authoritarianism against dissent was with the arrest and detention of former foreign minister Prince Norodom Sirivudh, King Sihanouk's half-brother, on dubious charges of premeditated murder, allegedly against Hun Sen.

What is most disturbing is how far violence against dissidents has gone. In late September, Son Sann's supporters fell victim to two grenades thrown at them in the midst of their meetings. The first grenade injured 24 people, with women, children and Son Sann's son (Son Soubert, who is the second chairman of the National Assembly) included. Sam Rainsy's new political party, known as the Khmer Nation Party (KNP), was declared illegal; one KNP worker was then murdered. Prince Sirivudh was also charged under the 1994 law that outlaws the Khmer Rouge rebels, or "anyone who commits acts destroying the Royal Government of Cambodia". If convicted, he could face up to life in prison.

Many conditions unfavorable for sustaining democracy still exist. On the individual level, Cambodian leaders remain autocratic, showing a lack of appreciation for democratic values. Prince Ranaridh still admires King Sihanouk's style of governance during the 1950s and the 1960s. He believes that "discipline is more essential than democracy". Prime Minister Hun Sen has failed to comprehend even basic concepts of democratic rights. Upon hearing Sirivudh's "plan" to assassinate him, he was determined to see his "enemy" punished. Without Prince Ranaridh's intervention, Sirivudh would not have been "of this world". Clearly, the Cambodian leaders have broken their promises and commitment to promote democracy by concentrating power in their own hands.

To place the blame on the Cambodian leaders, for the difficulties of democratic consolidation, however, would not do much to effect positive change in the country. Political attitudes and behavior should be seen more as a byproduct of the political environment shaped by socioeconomic conditions. Cambodia remains a structurally fragile state where political institutions are weak and vulnerable to social polarization.

Democracy in Cambodia is not an option; it is the only way to peace and stability because political authoritarianism has not worked. While the international community should not expect Cambodian democratization to be revolutionary, it can still do something more positive to ensure that this political process can evolve in the right direction. Democratization is an evolutionary process whereby democratic behavior and institutions can mature slowly and be strengthened by economic development.

The international community should not single-mindedly encourage Cambodians to adopt an economic and military solution to existing political problems. There are some correlations between foreign aid and poor economic performance, and between poor economic performance and the ongoing war. Cambodian leaders have tended to use foreign aid as a financial weapon to legitimize their political authority: the more aid they receive, the better they hope to be viewed in the eyes of their own people. In the long run, this growing mentality of aid-dependency may do the country more harm than good.

The war continues to have a serious negative impact not only on Cambodia's economic development but also on its political liberalization. There is a clear pattern in the way in which the leadership in Phnom Penh has succeeded in expelling members of parliament from the National Assembly or from their political parties. Sam Rainsy and his new party's members, Son Sann and his loyalists, and Prince Sirivudh are leaders who are neither communist nor pro-Khmer Rouge; however, they have spoken against corruption and been in favor of making peace with the rebels. External support for the anti-Khmer Rouge war may have inadvertently enticed Phnom Penh to flex its political muscle to bring individuals accused of "collaborating" with the rebels to their knees.

Cambodia's democratic future must not be left in the hands of Cambodians alone. External actors can still have a positive role to play in watering the seeds of liberal democracy already planted on authoritarian soil. They must not, however, allow their politically-motivated ideology stand in the way of peace. Failure to do so could only tempt some external powers to replay the old political chess game, where they used to lend support to many so-called anti-Communist dictators in the Third World.

Dr. Sorpong Peou is a Research Fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore.