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.