Sam Rainsy

Wednesday, 14 January 2009
By Emmanuel Deslouis
Eurasie

Original version in French at
http://www.eurasie.net/webzine/Entretien-avec-Sam-Rainsy-depute.html

Tentative translation

Last year, MP Sam Rainsy, Cambodia ‘s opposition leader, published his autobiography “Rooted in Stone,” a direct account that shed light into Cambodia ‘s political events during the last 50 years. Sam Rainsy has accepted to talk to us in detail about these issues, and to present – without any restraints – all the problems faced by this magnificent country.

Eurasie (Eur): How are your detractors depicting you in Cambodia?

Sam Rainsy (SR): The CPP, Prime minister Hun Sen’s party, says that I will bring in upheaval. They want to scare people with the following threat: “If Sam Rainsy comes to power, everything will be upside down.” It is true that I am against the current regime and the status-quo which equates to injustice. When I advocate a land reform, they say that Sam Rainsy will take away from the rich and give to the poor, leveling everybody downward, just like “under Pol Pot,” whereas, all that I want, is to give land to those who cultivate and live on it. Between hungry farmers on one side, and the new feudal lords and land speculators on the other side, I support the former. But the CPP accuses me of being an “instigator” who is behind the “troublemakers.”

Eur: Who are your main supporters among the voters?

SR: Farmers without land and factory workers. They are being badly mistreated and exploited. Poor people generally support my party. But, some of them also support Hun Sen’s party: most of the time, it is not because they adhere to the CPP per se, but it is because of their stomach. They are so poor that they have to live on a day-to-day basis. They listen to Hun Sen saying: “Sam Rainsy is not giving you anything to eat, we offer you bags of rice that allow you to live for several days.” I would answer to that by saying that my party does not offer bags of rice, but we offer a vision, we offer hope. This does not prevent some of the poor from being entrapped by Hun Sen, rather than accepting my arguments.

Eur: Which voters are you attracting best?

SR: The youths and those who are educated. Studies have shown that when the living condition improves, people vote more for us than for the ruling party. Then, they would not vote based on their stomach, but rather based on their head … or their heart.

Eur: What do people appreciate in you in Cambodia?

SR: Maybe the courage to oppose the ruling forces, and the faithfulness to principles. Some people told us: “Why knock yourself against a piece of rock?” The CPP-State system has everything (money, armed forces, power). Why persevere against them? It’s because we must maintain our beliefs and our principles, this in spite of the (political) murders, jailing, the exile imposed on activists. And it works: the number of our votes continues to increase from one election to another in spite of the intimidations, cheating and vote buying, and this has happened in the last decade.

Eur: The fight against corruption in Cambodia, when one is the minister of Finance, isn’t it like trying to empty an ocean with a teaspoon?

SR: It is very hard, it can take a lot of time, but I am not giving up. That said, the confrontation against the brutal force and against this wall of money, it is very difficult, but I hope to succeed during my lifetime.

Eur: Murder attempt is another way of conducting politics in Cambodia in the past few years. You and your supporters have suffered from them. How do you explain this impunity?

SR: This is rooted in the consecutive trauma from the genocide perpetrated by the Khmer Rouge. When they killed people by the thousands, people saw these large scale killings. They were traumatized, terrorize, they shut up. All these horrors were perpetrated with impunity. And the current regime is made up of former Khmer Rouge people.

Eur: Do you believe that the KR Tribunal will reach something constructive?

SR: If it can reach to a conclusion quickly, then maybe. Otherwise … you know, in 10 years, the main suspects, who are already very old, will be dead, by then the government will allow the trial of these dead people. It will no longer be a judicial work, but a historical one. If the trial comes in quickly, this can affect some people, some of the leaders all the way to district chiefs under Pol Pot and who now occupy much higher positions. These people are afraid of a true tribunal that moves fast. Thus, the government let the situation drags on to delay the judicial process. I think that the International community is starting to understand that!

Eur: There was indeed a Nuremberg (trial) in Germany.

SR: Yes, but the situation was not the same. Imagine Germany right after the war with all its former leaders, except for Hitler, still in power, would there be a Nuremberg? No, it would be a show trial, just like in Cambodia now.

Eur: Do you think, like Father Ponchaud, that this trial is incomplete because the Superpowers supporting the regime cannot be brought to justice?

SR: In my opinion, we must set a limit, set markers to the accusation, otherwise we cannot do anything. We must identify the leaders and those directly under them, like the regional commanders. To bring to trial the US, the West, ASEAN which supported (the KR) later, it is not the same thing. We must focus on the 1975-1979 period.

Eur: In your autobiography, one can follow your changing feelings toward Norodom Sihanouk. First, appalled, when he (Sihanouk) pushed away your father without mercy, and when he sent your mother to jail, then admiring (Sihanouk) in the 80s when he was a rallying figure. In retrospect, now, what do you think of his (Sihanouk) attitude?

SR: He is a complex person who knows how to maneuver in rough seas and in difficult time. He was right on certain things, but he was wrong in a lot of other. He recognizes this himself. He said: “The one who can cheat Sihanouk is not born yet.” He was wrong because he could have conquered back power and preserved Cambodia from the CPP which is under foreign and mobster influence. But, now, he is a powerless King-Father who is facing Hun Sen who can do whatever he wants. On the whole, he did not know how to maneuver, just as he could have brought in democracy to Cambodia like what the Paris Peace Accords stipulated. The non-communists were cheated by the communists or neo-communist mobsters. When Sihanouk wanted to return to power, Hun Sen refused, and the same goes for Ranariddh, his own son. The latter is the main culprit, he lost this opportunity because of incompetence and corruption.

Eur: What quality do you find in Sihanouk?

SR: His uncompromising nationalism and his integrity. That’s why I respect him.

Eur: By making compromises, first by siding with the Khmer rouge, then by handling Hun Sen with kid gloves, didn’t he (Sihanouk) push the country toward chaos?

SR: Sihanouk maintains his old habit whereby he was everybody’s father, and he can unite everybody. When he was king, it was the case. He was the great rallying point. But, when he thought he could do the same thing with Hun Sen and the CPP by granting royal titles to former communists, thinking that he could integrate them under his wings, it did not work. From this point of view, he was wrong. The world has changed, he is not in step with the time.

Eur: Just like Vietnam and Laos, Cambodia is still under the mercy of communist leaders from the 80s. This occurs in spite of the flagrant failure of their policy. What can you attribute this to?

SR: There is a tight correlation between dictatorship and economic failure. If you consider countries that have the same decade-long ruling leader, they are generally the poorest countries. There is no possibility of change. Abuses and corruption, that’s what keeps these countries backward. This is opposite to good governance and the rule of law. This is not really an issue of ideology. It’s about people clinging on to power. It’s a vicious circle: since they committed misdeeds during the past few years, they must hold on to power, otherwise they lose everything. This goes on until the day when everything explodes.

Eur: A few years ago, actress Piseth Pilika was assassinated in Phnom Penh in broad daylight. We have learnt about the bottom of this affair, not through the Cambodian media, but by the French one: high-ranking leaders were implicated (in this case). Fear was too strong to publicly denounce them for fear of reprisals. Is the media still clamped down or was there any change?

SR: We must distinguish two types of media: the printed media and the audiovisual one. In the printed media, there is no censorship, but there are assassinations (that occur) from time to time! You notice that there is a relatively free media, even though it is operated under its own risk. This is a democratic façade because the printed media barely reaches 1% of the population. The largest publication does not even exceed 20,000 copies. The main newspaper: Rasmei Kampuchea, “Light of Cambodia,” a CPP newspaper. Otherwise, there are about 200 titles (on sale), and most of them print about 100 copies. Even if they reach 1% of the population, it’s practically nothing.

Eur: How about the audiovisual media?

SR: All these media is controlled by the ruling party. There are 7 TV channels, all of which are directly or indirectly controlled by the CPP. Out of about 20 of them, about 3 radio stations are relatively independent. But, they do not cover the entire country. Thus when people talk about the media, it’s very misleading.

Eur: Currently, there is a conflict brewing between Cambodia and Thailand about Preah Vihear, a temple located along the border between the two countries. Each side claims it. Without going into the details of it, nor going into the arguments advanced by each party, don’t you think that this conflict is politicized by both Thailand and Hun Sen for election purpose? By inciting nationalism, Hun Sen was able to hide all his problems just in time for the general election.

SR: Yes, there are several things that were not spelled out. Each side defends the interest of their respective countries, in the name of a noble cause. The Thais know how to adapt. During the colonial era, in order to counteract against the French, they benefitted from the British support. During World War II, they allied themselves with Japan. They know how to adapt themselves for national unity, the current tension can help the Thais bring themselves together and rebuild their unity.

Eur: How about Cambodia?

SR: It very clear, we are seeking to create tension with a neighboring country. You will recall that in January 2003, just before the July general election of that same year, there was a riot against the Thais. After that, Thaksin and Hun Sen concluded a deal. The former wanted to launch a project in Koh Kong province (which neighbors Thailand).

Eur: What for?

SR: Most likely to establish a political basis before retaking power in Thailand. He (Thaksin) gave false assurances to Hun Sen, in particular about the Preah Vihear temple. To Hun Sen, this is convenient, this situation allows him to divert (border) problems in the east (with Vietnam) to the west (with Thailand).

Eur: Really?

SR: Yes, there are border problems between Vietnam and Cambodia. Farmers from the eastern provinces are telling me that Vietnam nibbles Cambodian territories when I meet them as an MP. Hun Sen does not want to see this issue discussed, he threatens people who talk about this issue (with sending them) “coffins.” Of course, Hun Sen remains under the Vietnamese influence, a discreet one but a solid one nevertheless. He still maintains Vietnamese advisors. Even the ones from the 80s still stay in Hun Sen’s entourage. Furthermore, for any important decision to be made, he would jump on his helicopter to go to Vietnam which is located only a few tens of kilometers from his residence.

Eur: So Cambodia is nibbled by both Vietnam and Thailand?

SR: Over the centuries, our two neighbors from the east and the west wanted to swallow Cambodia. We would have disappeared if not for the French intervention in 1863. It was King Ang Duong who made an appeal to Napoleon III. Vietnam and Thailand (then Siam) were fighting each other through their Cambodians puppets.

Eur: What is the outcome of your years spent in the government?

SR: All the essential reforms remain unheeded.

Eur: How would you describe Hun Sen?

SR: A political animal who succeeds very well in one thing: survival at the helm of the Cambodian state. His ability: survival by clinging on to power through political intrigues that he resolved with an iron fist, and this lasted for almost 30 years now. He is even better than his Vietnamese masters. On the other hand, when you only have this ambition, clinging to power for the impunity it provides, it is catastrophic for the country, the “little” big chief has no vision for Cambodia. (It’s a case where) personal interest is blended with the interest of the country.

Eur: What is your plan of action in the Parliament?

SR: Take action through all legal, democratic, peaceful, legislative means … it will be difficult because they did not give us any right. But I think that this regime will implode, an implosion rushed in by the International crisis. It is more severe than people think. Nobody is protected from the world storm, especially when one is a small country, like Cambodia, that is very dependent on the rest of the world, especially, when the country is managed the way it is done now also. The real estate crisis is getting worst each month. The wind is turning, price of farm produce and farmers’ income are crumbling, constructions are stopped, factories are closed. For the establishment side, unity is only a façade, they will devour each other when the economic crisis will turn into a social and political crisis. Sometimes, there are historical telltale signs, this crisis is surely one of them.

Eur: In your book, one can feel how important yours and your wife’s engagement in politics are (for both of you). How do your children see your political engagement?

SR: It depends on each of my three children. The eldest one follows up on our steps since the very beginning, he understands. The middle one was traumatized, she remains in France, away from us. The youngest one went with us to Cambodia, and she drew a strong experience in life from it. She is the one who is most attached to Cambodia, she lived there between 5 and 15-year-old.

Eur: Aren’t you tempted to return back to France considering the size of your task?

SR: I have a mission to accomplish in Cambodia. But, I recognize that when I am in France, I feel good because the rule of law is present. When you live (in such environment) all the time, you don’t feel it. My goal: bring the rule of law to Cambodia. Not being fearful, no longer bend down, equality in justice, same rights for everybody. In France, we can feel secure, we have confidence, we have hope. This is not the case in Cambodia.

Interview conducted by Emmanuel Deslouis

On January 7, 1979, I was living in France and publishing a monthly anti-Khmer Rouge bulletin named Serika (meaning Liberation).

When the Vietnamese communist army invaded Cambodia to “free” us from the Khmer Rouge, we quickly realized that we were caught between Scylla and Charybdis.

We remembered what happened to most Eastern and Central European countries after Stalin’s Red Army has invaded them to “free” them from the Nazis.

According to the Vietnamese-installed regime’s propaganda, without Jan 7, 1979 we would not have been able to achieve anything that we have achieved since. Or, in other words, nothing would have grown around us without our salvation by Vietnam and its (mainly symbolic) auxiliary forces led by the CPP’s current leaders.

But it is worth realizing that without April 17, 1975 (the date of the Khmer Rouge takeover and the beginning of the Cambodian genocide), there would be no need for Jan 7, 1979. And without the Vietnamese and Chinese communist massive intervention in the early 1970s to help the Khmer Rouge, the latter would not have been able to seize power and there would be no April 17, 1975.

Therefore April 17 and Jan 7 are inextricably associated: both of them are communist Frankensteins, Celebrating Jan 7 without having in mind a broader historical perspective, is playing into the hands of the current Phnom Penh regime whose only raison d’etre was to free the Cambodian people from the Khmer Rouge with communist Vietnam’s decisive but not unselfish help.

It is sad to see most former leaders of the anti-Vietnamese Resistance in the 1980s, especially from Funcinpec, give up their ideal to fight for a free, democratic and independent Cambodia.

It is heartbreaking to see them sell out to the CPP, thus forgetting the memories of all those who have died for this ideal.

Sam Rainsy, SRP President
Paris

November 25, 2008: King-Father Norodom Sihanouk and Queen-Mother Monineath Sihanouk received Sam Rainsy and Tioulong Saumura in Beijing