An alternative view of the Duch verdict in Cambodia

August 13th, 2010 by Benny Widyono, Guest Contributor · 29 Comments

The conviction, on July 26, of Kang Guek Eav-"Duch"- former prison chief of
the Khmer Rouge regime in Cambodia, drew international media attention to
Cambodia, at least for one news cycle. The verdict of the UN- sponsored
tribunal, was important in that, for the first time, a key Khmer Rouge
official was held accountable for the unspeakable crimes of the regime. The
press highlighted the outcry that the sentence, 19 years in jail, was too
lenient.

International coverage of the Duch verdict eclipses two issues. First, the
international community is ambivalent about the tribunal. Many consider it
deeply flawed by corruption and interference by the Cambodian government.
Others, especially in the West, insist that the tribunal must continue, as
if this were the only road to justice and reconciliation in post-Khmer Rouge
Cambodia. Nothing is farther from the truth.

Given the trial's thirty-year delay, Cambodia has since returned to
stability and won the confidence of both donor and business communities.,
Cambodia's growth rate over ten years stands at 7 - 13%. This is the result
of a rise in tourism and private investment, but also of the generous inflow
of foreign aid, since 1993, when a new Cambodian government was formed after
UN-sponsored elections. Given the Cambodia's expanding population pyramid,
today, a majority know very little about and have no experience of the Khmer
Rouge era. Recent surveys indicate in fact that Cambodians are paying little
attention to the tribunal. The youth of Cambodia, like their peers in Hong
Kong, Shanghai and elsewhere are more focused on building the future.

A less evident problem is that the past role of international actors in the
Cambodian tragedy has been whitewashed. Almost in unison, they now assert
that the Vietnamese liberation of Cambodia from Khmer Rouge rule, in January
1979, was followed by " ten years of civil war". What they fail to report is
that this civil war was largely brought on by what happened in faraway New
York, where, incredibly enough, spearheaded by the US and China, the United
Nations continued to recognize the ousted Khmer Rouge as the legitimate
government of Cambodia, rather than the new People's Republic of Kampuchea,
which soon gained control over 90% of the country. The alleged reason was
that Vietnam had invaded Cambodia, but the obvious truth was that Vietnam
was on the wrong side.

Opposing this UN decision to maintain Khmer Rouge representation were the
Soviet bloc, India and a number of others, who were easily outvoted. This
stalemate continued for 11 years during which the Khmer Rouge flag continued
to fly over Manhattan. To disguise this outrage, the Khmer Rouge was draped
in sheep's clothing, as a "Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea
(CGDK)", with two non-communist factions-the Royalist FUNCINPEC and a
pro-American group, the KPNLF. In the field, this CGDK received ample aid
from its Western backers, fueling and prolonging the "civil war" referred to
by the international press today. With the end of the Cold War, in 1991, the
Paris Peace Agreements were signed, and the United Nations Transitional
Authority in Cambodia brought the stalemate to an end by organizing
elections that established a new legitimate coalition government in
Cambodia.

Having succeeded in seating the Khmer Rouge in the UN General Assembly for
eleven more years, obviously the West was not in a big hurry to put the
Khmer Rouge on trial. It is ironical that the international press and
Western academics, almost in unison, now insist that the K.R. trials must
continue, and that the Cambodian government should not protect anyone from
the tribunal.

If the international tribunal were to end tomorrow, Cambodia would continue
on its path to progress and reconciliation, aided by private investment and
generous donors, whose efforts continue to lift Cambodia from poverty. This,
understandably, is the subject that concerns Cambodians today.

Ambassador Benny Widyono, from Indonesia, was Governor of Siem Reap Province
under the United Nations Transitional Authority, 1992-1993, and the
Secretary-General's Representative to Cambodia 1994-97. He is the author of
Dancing in Shadows: Sihanouk, the Khmer Rouge and the United Nations, Rowman
Littlefield, Lanham: 2008.

Tags: Cambodia

29 responses so far ?
1 R. N. England // Aug 13, 2010 at 5:10 pm

Thank you, Benny Widyono.
It is hard not to conclude that much of the misery endured in even the
remotest parts of the world is due to the foreign policies of the great
powers, and that the policies of each are in the grip of their respective
arms industries. Wherever potential conflict exists, the salesmen queue up
to peddle the instruments of death to those most likely to prosper from the
use of them.

Quality comment or not? 3 0
2 pino striccoli // Aug 14, 2010 at 1:08 am

What reconciliation would it be without these trials? The young generation
maybe ignores the past or probably wants to move on. But what about people
who suffered from the hands of Khmer rougue and now they see many of same
people at power? It is a difficult task to decide where to stop the trials.

Quality comment or not? 1 1
3 Suzie Wong // Aug 14, 2010 at 3:35 am

I am respectfully disagree with the Ambassador from Indonesia regarding
Crimes Against Humanity for the following reasons:

First, Crimes Against Humanity, as defined by the Rome Statute of the
International Criminal Court Explanatory Memorandum, "are particularly
odious offences in that they constitute a serious attack on human dignity or
grave humiliation or a degradation of one or more human beings. Inhumane
acts reach the threshold of crimes against humanity only if they are part of
a widespread or systematic practice, it is indisputable that Duch had
committed such a crime. In the situation where the perpetrator has all the
power while the victims have no power at all, international community must
intervene. Acting on it ensures that there will be no more future Neo-Nazi.

Here's an example. The systematic persecution of one racial group by
another, such as occurred during the South Africa apartheid government, was
recognized as a crime against humanity by the United Nations General
Assembly in 1976.

Second, when you live in the same neighborhood and you know full well that
your neighbor is abusing their children. You have a choice to either ignore
it or do something. By doing something about it, Asia and the Pacific moves
forward as a community that upholds norms of civilization.

Here's an example. The International Military Tribunal for the Far East
(IMTFE), also known as the Tokyo Trial, was convened to try the leaders of
the Empire of Japan for three types of crimes: "Class A" (crimes against
peace), "Class B" (war crimes), and "Class C" (crimes against humanity),
committed during World War II. The first refers to their joint conspiracy to
start and wage the war, and the latter two refer to atrocities including the
Nanking Massacre.

Lastly, human nature will continue on with the struggle for power, however,
we cannot allow using politics as an excuse for crimes against humanity. The
two issues are totally a separate issue. When the domestic law constitutes
crimes against humanity, International Law must intervene. In my opinion,
the Thai lese majeste law is systematic inhumane acts that reach the
threshold of crimes against humanity. By prosecuting Duch, countries in Asia
and the Pacific will think twice before abusing their citizens by using the
excuse of domestic law or sovereignty reasons.

Here's an example. The London Charter of the International Military Tribunal
was the decree that set down the laws and procedures by which the post-World
War II. Nuremberg trials were to be conducted. Crime Against Humanity
defined as "Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other
inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, before or during
the war, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds in
execution of or in connection with any crime within the jurisdiction of the
Tribunal, whether or not in violation of the domestic law of the country
where perpetrated".

Asia and the Pacific cannot continue to be the region of a white crow. When
domestic law constitutes Crime Against Humanity, International Law must
reign over to maintain peace and stability in the region.

Quality comment or not? 2 1
4 Victim Rights // Aug 14, 2010 at 7:24 am

The choice to have a trial or not should come from the victim familes-which
means that outsiders like us should probably stay out of this affair
altogether. It doesn't matter if you and I wrote a book, ran a province, or
hosted and dined with the diplomatic elite, it doesn't give us the "right"
to tell Cambodians how they should or should not run their affairs. If the
victims want a trial, let them have it! What about their voice? Should we
just defer human and minority rights to Hun Sen and his crony capitalists?
Let them be the final arbiter of the KR atrocities? Who are we to speak for
the whole of the Cambodian people, especially since we are not even from
there? And it wasn't just the West who kept the KR alive and running it was
your own allies and neighbors in ASEAN for goodness sake, " Singapore's
former prime minister Lee Kuan Yew said in his memoirs that as much as
US$1.3 billion was spent by China, the US, Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand
in support of the Khmer Rouge and other Cambodian rebels fighting the
Vietnamese and allied government forces. American, Singaporean, Malaysian
and Thai officials held regular meetings in Bangkok to coordinate the
Cambodian aid program, Lee wrote in From Third World to First: The Singapore
Story 1965-2000. He said the Singapore representative "estimated that the
United States dispensed a total of about $150 million in covert and overt
aid to the non-communist groups, Singapore $55 million, Malaysia $10 million
and Thailand a few million in training, ammunition, food and operational
funds".
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/KB19Ae01.html

Quality comment or not? 0 1
5 Benny Widyono // Aug 16, 2010 at 1:25 am

Susie Wong. Thanks for your thoughtful comments on my article. First of all,
although I am from Indonesia, I am not an ambassador of that country. I
served as the UN Secretary General's political representative in Cambodia
1994-97 with the rank of ambassador. The views expre4ssed in my article are
neither that of UN or of Indonesia but are entirely my own.
Please don't get me wrong Susie. I worked for the United Nations all my life
and I am and will always be a strong supporter of the international system
of criminal justice to punish perpetrators such as Hitler and Pol Pot. Ass
you are undoubtedly aware, the United Nations adopted a Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the crime of Genocide in 1948. Prior to that,
as you rightly pointed out were the Nuremberg trials against Nazi leadersby
the victorious allies and the Tokyo trials against Japanese war criminals.
However, during the cold war, after Nuremberg and Tokyo, the quest of
justice became a dead letter and the Rome Statutes quoted by you were only
adopted in 1998 long after the cold war was over. In the meantime there was
a long hiatus in international criminal justice.
In Cambodia, what bothers me is that the conviction of Duch only took place
30 years after the Khmer Rouge were ousted from power on January 17 1979 by
the Vietnamese troops. Both Nuremberg and Tokyo and the other examples you
gave took place immediately after the crimes were committed. As I stated in
my article, in 1979 the United Nations in New York, at the instigation of
the US and China, instead of punishing the Khmer Rouge, continued to
recognize this brutal regime for another 11 years as the government of
Cambodia, rather than the People's Republic of Kampuchea established in
Phnom Penh, out of spite of the Vietnamese. The stalemate during the 1980s
continued because Russia and its allies voted against the resolution
coddling the Khmer Rouge in the UN for eleven years until the Paris
Agreements were signed. . During those eleven years the Khmer Rouge flag
continued to fly over Manhattan!

Pino Striccoli and Victims Rights, echoing the western press, you say said
that certain leaders pf the government in power today, mainly members of the
PRK, should also be brought to trial. Just a bit of history. These leaders
were indeed ex Khmer Rouge troops who rebelled and helped the Vietnamese to
oust the KR regime. So the trial must go on and on without an end in sight.
I agree with Victims Rights that outside interference in Cambodia should
stop. Indeed, during the cold war Cambodia was, due to its geopolitical
location, a victim in the struggle for hegemony of South East Asia. Nixon's
indiscriminate bombing of Cambodia and the overthrow of Sihanouk by right
wing pro American general Lon Nol were powerful catalysts to catapult Pol
Pot, already strongly backed by China, into power. I already described how
international interference in supporting the Khmer Rouge prevented it from
going on trial. I wholeheartedly agree with Victims Rights that ASEAN, at
the behest of Singapore, a staunch ally of the US, was very much assisting
with the continued nurturing of the Khmer Rouge and its allies at the
borders so that they can continue their so-called "civil war" against the
PRK. However, this has nothing to do with the arguments in my article.
However, I disagree with Victims Rights that outsiders like us should stay
away from this affair altogether. How does victim Rights justify the
international western press insisting in the Wall Street Journal and the New
York Times of persecuting a bunch of ailing and aging Khmer Rouge leaders as
the only road to justice when they were silent in 1979? or leaders of the
PRK, ex Khmer Rouge, who helped the Vietnamese army got rid of the Khmer
Rouge. Victim Rights said to me personally that I do not have the right to
tell the Cambodians what to do just because I wrote a book and wined and
dined with the elite. I did not assume that right. I only make the
observation that young people of Cambodia have other things on their mind. I
wrote my book spending three years in Cornell University. Do you think only
western scholars and journalists have the right to comment on Cambodia and
we fellow Asians do not have that right.
I continue to visit Cambodia three times a year and have many conversations
with the youth of Cambodia. The majority of the population of Cambodia who
are less than thirty years old want to get on with their pursuit of economic
progress and their future. I heard comments from some of the victims
complaining that the defendants were housed in air-conditioned comfort with
three meals a day. The KR trials are very costly. In 2009, the original $78
million budget ran out and the international donors reluctantly agreed to
raise another $92 million for the next two years. Reluctance from western
donors stem from allegation of corruption and government interference.
Thus Susie Wong and others, I am not against putting on trial the khmer
Rouge leaders but the trials are thirty years to late. Reconciliation and
justice can be pursued in other ways than a trial especially since we are
thirty years late and Cambodia is now in the epicenter of the Asian economic
miracle of rapid economic growth from China to Indonesia, from Hong Kong to
Vietna. Just like the youth in Germany and Japan cannot be expected to
reflect on the crimes of the Nazi and Kempetai, the youth of Cambodia is
interested in getting on with their life and career in the new Cambodia.
This is my observation as a friend of Cambodia.

Quality comment or not? 5 0
6 Suzie Wong // Aug 16, 2010 at 3:37 pm

"The Killing Fields" happened and the honest truth is.

"Those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it"
George Santayana, 1905

If young generation do not learn history and the lessons of history, we will
make the same mistakes again in the future.

Quality comment or not? 0 0
7 Lee Jones // Aug 17, 2010 at 5:42 am

Victims Rights is quite correct about ASEAN being a key aider and abettor of
the Khmer Rouge during the 'civil war' of the 1980s. ASEAN gets off
incredibly lightly for this, because people - including Benny here - tend to
focus on the US and China. But without ASEAN - and particularly Thailand -
the Khmer Rouge would have been destroyed following the Vietnamese invasion
and the civil war would never have happened. If anyone is interested in the
details of ASEAN's activities they can find them in my article, 'ASEAN
Intervention in Cambodia: From Cold War to Conditionality, in the Pacific
Review in 2007. A copy should be accessible via my website.

Quality comment or not? 1 0
8 Benny Widyono // Aug 17, 2010 at 3:32 pm

Thank you Lee Jones. As I stated in my previous comment although I am
Indonesian I worked all my life for the United Nations as an International
Cibviul servant and was not endorsing or defending the Indonesian position.
What happened in new York I saw with my own eyes as i was stationed there.
As I related in chapter 2 of my book Dancing in Shadows: Sihanouk, the kHmer
Rouge and the United Nations, Rowman Littlefield: 2008 available from
Amazon.com, therewas a two pronged atatck by the west to isolate and if
possible defeat the PRK as they dont want another vietnam to rule Cambodia.
One is what happened in the United Nations in New York, and two is what
happened in the field. In New York, ASEAN has no power at all to influence
UN decisions as there were 120 member states (today 193). The UN General
Assembly is dominated by five veto wielding powers and the US and China
managed to sway the majority of the member countries to vote for the Khmer
Rouge to be seated as the legitimate government of Cambodia. This outrage
continued for eleven years although the Khmer Rouge wolf was draped in sheep's
clothes consisting ofthe Royalists FUNCINPEC and the pro American KPNLF. The
vote for the US resolution was 71 for, 35 against, 34 abstention and 12
absentees. The Soviet bloc . India and many non aligned countries voted
against or abstained and wanted to keep the Cambodian seat vacant, as
proposed by India head of the non aligned countries at the time. .
Ambassador Tommy Koh of Singapore, a staunch ally of the US, brilliantly
maneuvered not to allow the Indian proposal to leave the Cambodian seat
empty to take place.Yes, ASEAN of course voted with the US and China and for
eleven years Ambassador Thioun Prasidh of the Khmer Rouge sips cocktails and
lobbied against the PRK at every cocktail party which is almost evry night
during the General Assembly. . I tried to avoid him. Every day for eleven
years the Khmer Rouge flag was flying over Manhattan. This fact which is
shameful for the west is often swept under the carpet by western
journalists.Yes, you and Victims Rights were correct that in the field the
CGDK (Khmer Rouge, FUNCINPEC and KPNLF were very much aided by Thailand and
singapore and China as well as the US. China funneled weapons through the
DEeng hsiao Ping trail from Utapao base to the Cambodian border with the
Thai military getting its cut.Thus the "civil war"was aided by diplomatic
maneuverings in new York to continue to recognize the Khmer rouge and by
military and other support to rescucitate the three factions at the border
to fight the PRK. China supported the west politically but was then a very
poor economic entity. Tand oday China is an economic giant and is the
largest supplier of foreign aid to Cambodia and is a sizeable foreign
investor as well.
Today the west is trying to do the same with Myanmar by imposing economic
sanctions for twenty years. The difference today is that China is an
economic giant and has today surpassed Japan as the number two largest
economy of the world. The economic sanctions for twenty years against
Myanmar like they did against Cambodia today does not work at all, as the
economic giant China is providing Myanmar with foreign aid, as well as trade
and China's province of Yunan supplies all the consumer goods needed by
Myanmar while Myanmar supplies China with natural gas and other raw
materials. Myanmar can therefore ignore the west and rely on China and India
as partners.

Quality comment or not? 2 0
9 Lee Jones // Aug 17, 2010 at 8:12 pm

Benny, you are right on various points, but you continue to downplay ASEAN's
role (and just to clarify, I would never imply that you were trying to
defend Indonesia's position - I know your background and I like your book a
lot - this is just for the sake of accuracy). ASEAN played a crucial role in
organising diplomatic campaigning at the UN, to such an extent that by the
early 1980s the great powers were taking their cues from ASEAN communiques.
The resolutions at the UN to maintain the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia's UN seat
were not actually 'US resolutions' but ASEAN-sponsored resolutions, with the
US only playing a supportive, back-room role. When there were differences -
such as over the 1981 International Conference on Kampuchea - the US and
China naturally won out, but these were few and far between. Especially
after ASEAN cobbled together a new coalition government-in-exile in 1982 to
mask the continued domination of the Khmer Rouge, the Association played a
major role in convincing non-aligned countries to vote in favour of the
overthrown regime and against the PRK and Vietnam. Non-aligned states did
not, as you suggest, always abstain.

These points may seem pedantic, but to me they're important. Whenever people
discuss Cambodia in the 1980s, they are sometimes ready to acknowledge the
US/Chinese role, but the vital part played by regional states is almost
never acknowledged, allowing ASEAN to get off scot free. ASEAN is generally
seen as a peace-loving, sovereignty-respecting organisation but its
historical record is actually rather different. The broader point here is
that local/regional states are often vital in maintaining imperialist
strategies. We can think of the role of small Islamic states in the
Afghanistan War, of Egypt and Saudi Arabia in the Yemeni civil war, of South
Africa in policing radical states in Southern Africa, of Uganda acting as a
US/UK proxy in supporting the RPF in Rwanda, of Brazil and other states
acting as US proxies in Latin America during the Cold War, and so on. 'Small'
and 'weak' states are often seen as insignificant in world politics but
often their cooperation is vital to constituting the force and legitimacy
required by leading states to project their power around the globe and
pursue their projects successfully.

Quality comment or not? 2 0
10 Ricky Ward // Aug 18, 2010 at 1:03 am

Dear Benny

Thankyou for your article which accords with my recollection of the sad
history of Cambodia (with one exception - below) and my sentiments that
spending money on these trials is a waste when so much needs to be done to
help the people.

The one exception is in your first paragraph: " The verdict of the UN-
sponsored tribunal, was important in that, for the first time, a key Khmer
Rouge official was held accountable for the unspeakable crimes of the
regime. "

As I understand it, the new government, soon after the liberation of 90% of
the country by Vietnam, tried officials of the Khmer Rouge.

Of course the were subject to Socialist justice not the present Bourgeois
variety which is of course a glod mine for the lawyers.

Quality comment or not? 2 0
11 Suzie Wong // Aug 18, 2010 at 11:29 am

As of August 2010, China, India, the U.S., Thailand are not the States
Parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. In this
particular case, only Cambodia has ratified and acceded to the Rome Statute,
the treaty that established the International Criminal Court. In other
words, it was Cambodia people who pursued the case against those who
committed Crimes Against Humanity in Cambodia. China, India, Thailand, and
the U.S. have no power to pursue the case because none of them are parties
to the Rome Statute.

Mr. Widyono's argument is invalid - the premises do not lead logically to
the conclusion. There is no external force here to intervene into Cambodian's
domestic affairs on pursuing the case of Crimes Against Humanity. China,
India, Thailand, and the U.S. are not member of the Rome Statute, they
simply have no power whatsoever to interfere. It was Cambodian people
themselves who pursued the trial against the perpetrators on Crimes Against
Humanity. Mr. Widyono set up a false analogy.

In my opinion, Cambodia would like their own people to understand that,
"Those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it."
George Santayana, 1905

Quality comment or not? 1 0
12 Benny Widyono // Aug 19, 2010 at 12:58 am

Lee, thanks for your complements about my book. Since I am new to New
Mandala, I was not sure whether people know my identity. Victims Rights, for
instance said that just because I wrote a book and sipped cocktails with the
elite in Phnom Penh but am not a Khmer does not qualify me to make comments
on the KR trials. In other words he suggested that I should just shut up. Mr
or Miss Victims Right, please note that I wrote my book not while sipping
cocktails in Phnom Penh, but while drinking beer with professors and
students while beinga visiting scholar for three years at the Kahin Center
for Advanced studies on Southeast Asia at Cornell University in Ithaca,
which has the best library on SEAsia . Victims Rights, if you Google my name
you will find from 47,000 to 53,000 entries depending on the day. To just
say that I should not open my mouth because I am not Khmer is highly
unprofessional and belongs in Facebook, not in the highly respected New
Mandala.
Lee, I too admire and respect your credentials at Queen Mary University in
London and your expertise in research specifically on ASEAN's role on the
Cambodian problem. Now that we have praised each other enough let the fight
continue, hehehe!
I recently saw a History Channel documentary of Cambodia and when Carter was
asked why he recognized the Khmer Rouge, he said that this is what its
neighbors want. So this is in line with your arguments. America is indeed
ashamed to admit, especially today, that it committed this atrocious act,
for eleven years in a row and prefer to be hiding it. However, being
stationed in New York at the time it was quite clear that ASEAN could not
have pushed such an important issue as recognizing the genocidal Khmer Rouge
without the imprimatur of the powers that be, the veto wielding powers in
this case the US and China. You are a great scholar and I am sure you have
read the many tomes proving the powerful role of the US in the Security
Council and the UN. For instanced David Malone, in his The UN Security
Counicl. Lynn Riener, 2004, pp 636 ff
When Vietnam liberated Cambodia from the Khmer Rouge regime, Carter of the
US was faced with a dilemma. On the one hand there was the Khmer Rouge which
had just killed two million people and on the other was the Communist
Peoples Republic of Cambodia, led by Heng Samrin and Hun Sen, backed by
Vietnam and the Soviet Union. Carter chose to back the former which was the
Chinese position.So when the Soviet Union vetoed a resolution in the
Security Councilintroduced by Cyrus Vance of the US to demand Vietnam to
withdraw its troops. The battle shifted to an obscure nine member credential
committee of which the US, the Soviet Union and China were members. No ASEAN
country was a member of this committee. On September 19, 1979, this
credential committee voted 6 to 3 to award Cambodia's seat to the Khmer
Rouge. The committee did not even review the credentials of Heng Samrin Hun
Sen.
This resolution was then send to the 120 member General Assembly, where
there is no veto power, which voted in favor of seating the the Khmer Rouge
as I already described before to approve the seating of the Khmer Rouge. You
are right that because of the no veto power in the GA, the role of smaller
states, such as ASEAN became very important to lobby with the non aligned
countries. Tommy Koh, as I said yyewd before, the brilliant Singaporean did
so with great vigor and skills. As I am sure you know, ASEAN is by no means
always united and Thailand and Singapore were the most eager to toe the US
line. The brilliant Tommy Koh of Singapore managed to avoid a vote on the
Indian proposal as chairman of the non aligned countries to leave the seat
vacant. The seating of the Khmer Rouge was important as the west now can
impose sanctions on the PRK as it was not a valid government. In the field
you are right that ASEAN gave aid to the three factions while China, as a
stated, channeled aid to the Khmer Rouge through the Deng Xiao Ping trail
from the port of Sattahip in Thailand. The US and the UK of course also
helped the non communist resistance forces although in a more covert manner.
The importance of big power politics can again be proven that a solution of
the Cambodian problem was only possible when the cold war was over and the
Soviet Union collapsed. As a consequence, the UNTAC solution, as I claimed
in my book, was flawed because it contains the unjust decisions of the past
11 years in particular giving the Khmer Rouge a legitimate place in the
peace process.
It seems like history is repeating itself. The Obama administration is again
trying to use ASEAN to make Myanmar change. Obama was the first president to
meet with Prime minister Thein Sein of Myanmar in an ASEAN meeting in
Singapore. However, on the other side is China, not ideologically, but
economically and the Tatmadaw government can ignores western sanctions as it
receives trade and aid form China, as well as India. But that is another
story.

Quality comment or not? 0 0
13 Chris Beale // Aug 19, 2010 at 1:26 am

Lee Jones #8 - is n't the true essence of this that :
Vietnam liberated Cambodia in late 1978, and has never had any thanks for
doing so ?
I motor-biked Vietnam about a decade ago, and found Vietnamese of almost ALL
AGES immensely proud that their country had not only defeated the Japanese,
the French, the Americans, and the Chinese - but also liberated Cambodia
from further genocide.
I've no doubt they will move to protect Hun Sen, if he's threatened with
overthrown by Thailand now.

Quality comment or not? 0 0
14 Benny Widyono // Aug 19, 2010 at 7:19 am

Ricky Ward. I agree with you. In my earlier draft I did refer to the trial
by the PRK in which Pol Pot/ Ieng Sary were sentenced to death, but because
of consideration of length I had to chop off that part. Ricky, I agree with
you today;s trial is not only a goldmine for lawyers but security guards
imported from the United Nations in New York and other personnel as well. I
made a lot of enemies in Phnom Penh with my article hahaha.
Now for Susie Wong, With due respects, it appears to me that you get the
institutions and dates mixed up and that was why your conclusions about my
arguments were confused and therefore wrong.
Point 1. You are mixing up the International Criminal Court (ICC), governed
by the Rome Statutes, operating in The Hague with the Extraordinary Chambers
in the Court of Cambodia (ECCC) which is the court currently trying the KR
leaders which has nothing to do whatsoever with the ICC. The ICC is the
first permanent, treaty based, international criminal court. On 17 July
1998, 120 States adopted the Rome Statute, the legal basis for establishing
the permanent International Criminal Court. The Rome Statute entered into
force on 1 July 2002 after ratification by 60 countries. So the KR trials is
not taking place in the ICC so your arguments are invalid. Yes, you are
right that Cambodia is a member and not the four states you mentioned. But
this has nothing to do with the Khmer Rouge Court or the ECCC. To date the
ICC is hearing cases proposed by Uganda, Congo and Central African republic
as well as Darfur,Sudan but not Cambodia
Point 2. The Extraordinary Chambers in the Court of Cambodia is a Cambodian
court with international participation that will apply international
standards and was established with the help of the United Nations. It is not
a United Nations court, not even a hybrid one like the court of Sierra
Leone. Of course I agree with you that the Khmer people, of all people, want
a court to try the Khmer Rouge criminals. Every family in Cambodia has lost
loves ones and suffered at the hands of the Khmer Rouge. . So why did it
take so long, thirty years for the ECCC to sentence Duch?
To begin with, as I argued in my previous postings after the Khmer Rouge
genocidal regime was ousted by Vietnam and rebel ex Khmer Rouge forces on
January 7 1979 the US, China and ASEAN ensured that the Khmer Rouge
continued to be the legitimate government in Cambodia in the United Nations
in New York for elevn more years. Obviously, they were not in a big hurry to
try the Khmer Rouge. In Phnom Penh, as Ricky Ward mentioned, the Khmer
people and the PRK did try the Khmer Rouge and condemned the Pol Pot/Ieng
Sary to death in absentia. But in the world outside, this was totally
ignored. Ieng Sary is now sitting and grinning perpetually in his
air-conditioned cell in the ECCC, contemplating his good fortune.
Point 3. Why did it take so long for ECCC to start functioning? On June 7
1997, co premiers Samdech Hun Sen and Samdech Krom Preah Ranariddh asked the
United Nations to assist in establishing a trial to prosecute the senior
leaders of the Khmer Rouge. Since then, lengthy negotiations took place
between the UN and the Cambodian government. The government of Cambodia
insisted that, for the sake of the Cambodian people, the trial must be held
in Cambodia using Cambodian staff and judges together with foreign
personnel. Cambodia invited international participation due to the weakness
of the Cambodian legal system and the international nature of the crimes,
and to help in meeting international standards of justice. An agreement with
the UN was ultimately reached in June 2003 and in 2006 the ECCC started
functioning.
Point 4. As I stated earlier, after the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials after
world war II which you cited eloquently, there was a long international
hiatus in the pursuance of criminal justice because of the cold war. Perhaps
I should clarify what I meant by this: during the cold war America's villain
is Russia's friend and vice versa. It was not until the cold war was over
when in the 1990's International Tribunals were established to try the
leaders of the genocide and ethnic cleansing which took place in the former
Yugoslavia and Rwanda followed by the ICC. This has nothing to do with the
ECCC which was established pursuant to a request by the premiers of Cambodia
in June 1997, 18 years after the KR was ousted.

Quality comment or not? 2 0
15 Lee Jones // Aug 19, 2010 at 10:02 am

Benny: of course, you are right that ASEAN wouldn't have been able to do
much without Chinese and US interests being engaged. That said, China simply
couldn't have aided the Khmer Rouge without Thai assistance (there was no
way of smuggling the $500m-worth of arms per annum to the Khmer Rouge except
via Thai territory). Thailand's policy was absolutely crucial to
underpinning the civil war - a point which became very obvious when
Chatichai Choonhavan abruptly reversed policy after 1988. ASEAN diplomats
were also very important in the General Assembly debates and also in the
credentials committee. I reviewed the verbatim records on this issue in
enormous depth, and it was ASEAN diplomats who took the leading role in
politicising the credentials committee, not the US and China. This was a
historically unprecendented achievement since every other overthrown
government hitherto had been replaced at the UN - even that of Afghanistan
after the 1979 Soviet invasion. Again this was partly because of the way in
which ASEAN managed to sway third-world opinion by convincing non-aligned
states to oppose Vietnam in the name of defending non-intervention norms.
ASEAN also led opposition to Vietnam in annual resolutions on the Situation
in Kampuchea and on Peace and Stability in Southeast Asia, and in the NAM. I
don't want to play up ASEAN's agency too much, but equally I don't want to
erase it.

Chris Beale: I basically agree. The Vietnamese military presence was not
without its problems, but they were initially welcomed as liberators by many
Cambodians. The PRK was also generally accepted by the population and made
considerable progress in reconstructing the bombed-out country and
rehabilitating its half-dead population (as Michael Vickery's work on this
period shows). It would have achieved a lot more had it not been isolated
and sanctioned by the West, but having pounded Cambodia remorselessly, the
US and its allies decided to inflict further punishment instead. We shouldn't
romanticise the Vietnamese. They had initially collaborated with Pol Pot and
only invaded when Khmer Rouge cross-border attacks on Vietnamese villages
became so brutal and intolerable that they had to act. But if you had to
pick sides in this conflict I know I wouldn't choose to be on the side of
the US, China, ASEAN, the EU and the Khmer Rouge.

Quality comment or not? 2 0
16 Suzie Wong // Aug 19, 2010 at 4:13 pm

Mr.Widyono, let me summarize your points of view on the issue. You argue
that the international community has considered ECCC tribunal as a corrupted
organization as well as being dominated by the current Cambodian government.
In short, you imply that the ECCC carries no credibility and cannot be trust
on the issue of justice because the Judges are corrupted and the Cambodian
government interferes in the trial process. Second, you argue that trial
Duch is a waste of time and resources that should instead be spending on
investment enterprise. And you also imply that it isn't Cambodian but the
West that is interested in pursuing the crimes against humanity.

In contrast to Mr.Widyono assertion, I argued that it was Cambodian who
initiated the trial because the country ratified the Rome Stature. In my
opinion, all the international organizations were initiated and created by
the Victor Permanent Powers: Russia, U.S. China, France and Britain to
ensure international stability after the World War II. For example, the
International Court of Justice, the International Criminal Court, the United
Nations International Law Commission, etc. they all have "global"
jurisdiction within the United Nations Mandate, and ECCC is part of this
international system. The United Nations had announced publicly that Ms.
Michelle Lee of China coordinated UN assistance for Khmer Rouge Trials that
led to the establishment of the ECCC in 2006.

Anyway, the issue is not about jurisdiction, the issue is about Crimes
Against Humanity. Three million people perished during the Khmer Rouge
regime in power on 17 April 1975 to 7 January 1979. This matters!

International community has been providing funding and judges to ECCC to
express the collective conscious against inhumane cruelty. Cambodian
official H.E. Sok An makes statement "NEVER AGAIN" on the occasion of the
60th Anniversary of the Liberation of Auschwitz and the other Nazi
Extermination Camps.

Quality comment or not? 0 0
17 Benny Widyono // Aug 20, 2010 at 12:14 am

Susie Wong. You obviously did not read my article properly. I never said
that I agree with the international press that the ECCC is corrupt and that
there was interference from governments. Anybody who knows me and read my
book and my articles know where my sympathies are and certainly not with the
international especially western press who have a one track mind, to want
these trials to go on forever and to include new suspects now serving as
senior officials in the government. This is to me very dangerous.
If you read my article carefully, I never said that the ECCC carries no
credibility because it is corrupt. You put these words in my mouth and that
is very dangerous. I only quote the press, the western press, who repeatedly
consider the court corrupt and abhor government interference.Because of
these accusations by donors, the court had perenneial difficulties of
raising money from western donors. At one point the UN even stopped
negotiating because the Eiuropeans, lobbied by the European legal council,
do not want to continue with havbing a hybrid court. It is because of
initiative by the Australian and Japanese that the UN adopted a resolution
to resume negotiations. I was there when Europe voted against but Australia,
japan, USA, China and Group of 77 third world countries all voted in favor
of a resolution to resume negotiations. I was then an adviser to the
Cambodian Ambassador inNew York and all senior government offificals, from
the ambassador to the all senior offficials of the Cambodian government know
andtrusted me.
What I oppose is that the western press, including the New York Times, the
Wall Street journal etc. want to carry on the tribunal indefinitely, who
want to have more people put to trial. New York York Times said that that
the government should not hide anybody. They want to use the trial to
continue and to include new defendants now in the government. In the ECCC,
some UN recruited researchers were studiously and eagerly carrying out
research on who else should be tried in the court. Their aim is to cause
embarrasment for the government not to bring justice which they have helped
deny from 1979 to 1991. In my book I trace he western attitude since 1979.I
repeat again that at the time, instead of putting the Khmer Rouge on trial,
like Neuremberg, the Khmer Rouge was recognized as the legitimate
representtaive of Cambodia in the UN, rather than the PRK, because of
maneuverings by the US, the west, China and ASEAN . Obviously these
countrues did not think about putting the Khmer Rouge on trial. They did not
want another Vietnam type government to rule Cambodia. This went on for 11
years until the cold war was over and the Soviet Union, . principal backer
of the PRK agreed to sign the Paris Agreements. The letter of 7 June 1997 by
the two Samdechs prime ministers following a strong suggestion of Thomas
Hammarberg the UN representative on Human Rights. The Rome statutes were not
even conceived at the time so to say that the Prime Ministers wrote the
letter in the spirit of the Rome statutes was completely wrong. What I was
saying is that some western powers still want to destroy the leaders of the
government in power by insisting on expanding the trial to include new
suspects even senior government officials. My point is that thirty years
after the Khmer rouige was defeated, such continuation of the trial
endlessly could cause turmoil and renewed unrest in the country and will
jeopardize the economic stability and dynamic growth being enjoyed by the
Cambodian people, especially its young people who like to enjoy life like
their peers in other Asian countries with rapid economic growth.
Reconciliation has already taken place between ex Khmer Rouge people and the
vuctims.

Quality comment or not? 0 0
18 Benny Widyono // Aug 20, 2010 at 6:39 am

Lee Jones. You are quite right in emphasizing the role of ASEAN, especially
Thailand. in perpetuating theKhmer Rouge problem. Indeed, there was a Deng
XiaoPping trail from the Thai port of Sattahip to the border with Cambodia
through which Chinese arms and munitions were shipped to Khmer Rouge forces
by Thai military trucks to the Khmer Rouge forces perched at the border. It
was rumoured then that the Thai military got a 50% cut fot taking care of
the security and shipment. Secondly of course the three resistance forces
battling the Phnom Penh government were all operating in and out of refugee
camps at the Thai border within Thailand. Thirdly the Thais were engaged in
a bustling trade in gems and forest products with the Khmer Riuge Pailin
enclave inside Cambodia even though UNTAC was denied entry. I myself
witnessed this first hand. One day Mr Akashi the Head of UNTAC the UN
peacekeeping force inCambodia and the military commander Australian
GeneralSsanderson visited Pailin the Khmer Riuge stronghold along
withPprince Sihanouk.Akashi and Sanderson were denied entry through Khmer
Rouge territory heading towards Thailand by a young unarmed KR soldier with
a bamboo pole. They obeyed him and this incident was reported everywhere as
the day UNTAC blinked against the Khmer Rouge even though the KR was part of
the Oaris Agreements and was supposed to grant access to UNTAC. I was also
present as I was ordered, as a senior UNTAC official to sit with Prince
Sihanouk in a six seater French helicopter as a sort of Royal winetaster.
Unlike Akashi and Sanderson, i stayed overnight in the Khmer Rouge
stronghold of Pailin ( a picture of this appears at the last page of my
book). . Throughout the day I witnessed a constant stream of Thai trucks
hauling away logs as if there was no tomorrow. I was a told the Thai
military was afraid thir contract with the khme Riuge will be delcared nul
and void by the UN. The Thais had easy access to Pailian where the leaders
of uNTAC were denied access.

Back in New York Iam convinced that you who have done thorough research on
the role of ASEAN even in the Credentials Commitee. Perhaps my research was
mainly directed towards US policy which I found atrocious. I also have
interesting personal anecdotes to tell from the 1980s when I was stationed
in New York. Every year ASEAN would hold lavish dinners at the Grand Hyatt
hotel in Grand Central station for all delegates to the General Assembly to
lobby for the annual vote on seating the Khmer Rouge and partners at the UN
General Assembly. Prince Sihanouk held his own lavish party at the Helmsley
hotel for the same reason replete with live Cambodian band which accompanied
him singing such standpys like Tea for Two and That's what friends are for.
the Khmer Riuge leaders were also there to watch evry move he makes. The
third faction the KPNLF was represented by Sichan Siv with whom I often sat,
Sichan later became the Us ambassador to the UN and wrote a book called
Golden Bones. These expensive affairs were of course paid by ASEAN and
reportedly indirectly also by the United States. I was invited to and
attended both.
Thanks for bringing more light to this bizarre situation. Sihanouk is a
great entertainer, inter alia.

Quality comment or not? 2 0
19 Suzie Wong // Aug 21, 2010 at 5:46 am

Let's exchange points of view based on facts:

1. On 21 June 1997, Cambodia requested United Nations assistance in
organizing the process for the Khmer Rouge trials, in early 2006 the
Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC) were formally
established.
2. The General Assembly convened a conference in Rome in June 1998, with the
aim of finalising a treaty. On 17 July 1998, the Rome Statute of
International Criminal Court (ICC) was adopted by a vote of 120 to 7, with
21 countries abstaining. The seven countries that voted against the treaty
were China, Iraq, Israel, Libya, Qatar, the United States, and Yemen.
3. Cambodian people decide to combine ECCC plus ICC to make the objectives
of ECCC (No.1 + No. 2). The purpose of ECCC is to try senior members of the
Khmer Rouge for serious violations of Cambodian penal law, international
humanitarian law and custom, and violation of international conventions
recognized by Cambodia, committed during the period between 17 April 1975
and 6 January 1979. This includes crimes against humanity, war crimes, and
genocide.

4. "Duch" used to be the governor of the Tuol Sleng prison, a centre of
torture. In the late 1970s, an estimated 16,000 people were tortured there,
of whom only seven or ten are known to have survived. It's crimes against
humanity by any measures.

5. And here's what I understood Mr.Widyono's points of view quoting from his
article above-mentioned.
"International coverage of the Duch verdict eclipses two issues. First, the
international community is ambivalent about the tribunal. Many consider it
deeply flawed by corruption and interference by the Cambodian government.
Others, especially in the West, insist that the tribunal must continue, as
if this were the only road to justice and reconciliation in post-Khmer Rouge
Cambodia."

"If the international tribunal were to end tomorrow, Cambodia would continue
on its path to progress and reconciliation, aided by private investment and
generous donors, whose efforts continue to lift Cambodia from poverty. This,
understandably, is the subject that concerns Cambodians today."

6. Lastly, Lee Jones and Benny Widyono, during the Cold War period, the
organization was still SEATO not ASEAN because the bloc at the time had only
5 original members: the Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, and
Thailand. SEATO was U.S. military alliance during the Cold War, not a
neutral organization. Thailand maneuvering reflected SEATO's military
objective as well as to serve Thailand own national security. The
possibility of invasion (Vietnam + Cambodia) was prominent from the Thai
military perspectives and thinking, thus Bangkok requested military
assistance from China and the U.S. Hence, using Sattahip U-Tapao Navy Base
was in the interests of Thailand's national security.

(Here's the short summary of SEATO became ASEAN. The bloc grew when Brunei
became the sixth member after it joined on 8 January 1984. On 28 July 1995,
Vietnam became the seventh member. Laos and Burma (Myanmar) joined two years
later in 23 July 1997. Cambodia was to have joined together with Laos and
Myanmar, but was deferred due to the country's internal political struggle.
The country later joined on 30 April 1999, following the stabilization of
its government.)

Quality comment or not? 0 1
20 Ricky Ward // Aug 27, 2010 at 2:34 am

Dear Benny

I am so impressed by the way you respond to comments. If only the Thai
academics who appear on NM could get off their perches and deign to converse
with mere mortals.
Considering your latest posting about Thai military assistance to KR etc, I
saw no mention of General Prem (90 years old yesterday). Was he not the Thai
PM at the time and should it not be he who is in the dock answering charges
of genocide?

Quality comment or not? 0 0
21 Benny Widyono // Aug 27, 2010 at 9:51 am

Ricky Ward, Thanks for your nice compliments. Yes, you are right. In ordet
to curtail my original posting for size, i actually left out an important
omission of the Khmer Rouge Tribunal, the international culprits in the
Cambodian genocide.
The problem with the United Nations-backed trial of the remaining Khmer
Rouge leaders, is that it is dealing only with the Khmer Rouge leaders who
killed 1.7 million of its own people, but not with the Nixon secret Bombings
of Cambodia, 1969-73, which killed 500,000 Cambodians, radicalizing the
rural population of Cambodia and driving them into the arms of Pol Pot. It
is highly unlikely Pot Pot, who was heading a small communist movement
without a popular base in the jungle would have come to power had President
Richard Nixon and his national security adviser, Henry Kissinger, not
attacked neutral Cambodia. In 1973, B-52s dropped more bombs on Cambodia
than were dropped on Japan during all of the Second World War. Even the CIA
admitted that the Nixon bombings has resulted in the successful recruitment
of a great number of young men. Of course Kissinger will not be in the dock
in Phom Penh. He is advising President Obama. Nor will the Chinese leaders
be who gave massive material support to supported the Khmer Rouge especially
after Prince Sihanouk was overthrown in March 1970 and embraced Pol Pot in
Beijing and openly sided with the Khmer Rouge. Then as you pointed out there
were Chinese, Thais and Singaporeans who resuscitated the Khmer Rouge at the
Thai border refugee camps. The US conveniently stayed in the background but
was in the vanguard of imposing an embargo on the People's Republic of
Cambodia from January 7 1979 to 1991 and on Vietnam until 1992.
Unfortunately, the Khmer Rouge tribunal has no jurisdiction over foreign
leaders

Quality comment or not? 2 0
22 pino striccoli // Aug 27, 2010 at 3:12 pm

Dear Benny, thanks for your great accounts. Even if i did not know all the
fact in details, it was always clear to me and all western people
politically concerned of US and ASEAN involvement in backing the khmer rouge
after Vietnam' intervention.
So i might reflect western press but the Thailand involvment with gem's
exploitation in Cambodia, with stealing of buddha's heads, is still in my
mind for sure. Who can forget Khmer rouge and preh Viharn temple ?
My question is: can u bring into he court the real people who happened to
kill other people as shown in the video of Thet Sambath? maybe a silly
question but even those people i guess they hurt

Quality comment or not? 0 0
23 Ricky Ward // Aug 28, 2010 at 9:17 pm

Suzie:

SEATO had 3 NATO members USA,UK & France; 2 British Imperial creations
Australia & NZ and only 2 South East Asian Nations Philippines & Thailand.
Indonesia was a major member of the Non-aligned movement and hosted its
Bandung conference in 1955 attended by India, China (Red) , Cambodia etc
etc.
As for Thailand looking out for itself, that should read the rich ruling
elite. If Thailand had remained non-aligned it is difficult to imagine how
the catastrophe the USA launched upon Laos, Vietnam & Cambodia and a
generation of US youth could have been perpetrated.

Quality comment or not? 0 0
24 Lee Jones // Aug 29, 2010 at 10:38 am

"6. Lastly, Lee Jones and Benny Widyono, during the Cold War period, the
organization was still SEATO not ASEAN because the bloc at the time had only
5 original members. Here's the short summary of SEATO became ASEAN."

I don't think you know what you're talking about. ASEAN was founded in 1967
and included three members who were not part of SEATO (Indonesia, Malaysia
and Thailand), which was basically defunct by then. SEATO was a completely
different organisation. It was essentially wound up in the 1970s.

"The possibility of invasion (Vietnam + Cambodia) was prominent from the
Thai military perspectives and thinking"

As I demonstrate in my research this is basically nonsense. Top Thai
generals and foreign policy officials were on record, at the time, as saying
that Vietnam had no intention to invade Thailand. The threat wasn't
conventional in nature; the fear was that Vietnam had started to promote
revolutionary activity in mainland SE Asia after a lull in the 1975-78
period.

Quality comment or not? 0 0
25 Suzie Wong // Aug 30, 2010 at 2:18 pm

Thank you everyone for pressing me to be precise. Initially, my intention
was only to defend the international regimes and principles of crimes
against humanity so that horrific events at the level of genocides will not
ever happen again. However, I realized that my argument can't be separated
from politics. So let me clarify a few points in relation to history of
Southeast Asia during the Cold War era.

As for Lee Jones, your contention that, "top Thai generals and foreign
policy officials were on record, at the time, as saying that Vietnam had no
intention to invade Thailand. The threat wasn't conventional in nature," is
an enticing argument. Such a contention is more complex than it seems on the
surface. For example, your position statement mentions "top Thai generals
and foreign policy officials" as though they were decision-makers. When in
fact their opinions remained only opinions, it didn't carry weigh into the
decision making process. They simply were not decision makers. It may be
more accurate to say, not that the Thai opinions were not important, but
rather that decisions were made by the Great Powers: the US-China. At the
time, General Kriangsak Chomanan was the Thai Prime Minister, he had the
closest and warm relationship with to the US.

US combat operations ceased in 1973, nearly all American troops were
withdrawn that year. Some advisors and logistical personnel remained to
support the South Vietnamese. US Congress cut off aid to South Vietnam in
1975, North Vietnamese troops captured Saigon, ending the Vietnam War.

In Cambodia, Khmer Rouge overthrew the pro-US General Lon Nol in 1975.
Immediately after the end of the Vietnam War, large numbers of people were
killed by the Khmer Rouge regime from 1975 to 1979. Large scale fighting
last between December 25, 1978 and January 7, 1979, Vietnamese forces
invaded Cambodia.

On Feb 17, 1979, a People's Republic of China force of about 200,000 entered
North Vietnam. Full scale fighting between China and Vietnam lasted between
Feb 17 and March 16, 1979.

Lee Jones, I considered those aforementioned events as the result of
conventional threat perception within the context of détente, Sino-Soviet
split, and the US-China rapprochement.

Quality comment or not? 0 0
26 Benny Widyono // Aug 31, 2010 at 1:48 am

Dear Pinot Stricolli and Susie Wong. I think Thet Sambath made a great movie
with such a small budget. He even said that he did not give his wife and
children money to buy rice because of his "prokect"and his wife was asking
when this project will be finished. Thet Sambbath,s interviews with Nuon
Chea which took him more than two years, (NUON Chea is now in the ECCC
detention(, will do more for understanding the mind of the Khmer Rouge than
the tribunal. I am all in favor of circulating Thet Sambath's movie with the
help of donor funds rather than the costly tribunal costing more than $100
million where sophisticated international lawyers with fat salaries
defending the criminals like Nuon Chea and Ieng Sary who are jailed in
airconditioned comfort and get the best medical care in Cambodia. Unlike
Suzie Wong, who persists in misquoting me as if i said that I think the
future generation should forget the past, which I never said, I am all in
favor of educating the young people about the evils of the Khmer Rouge. All
I said was that apart from the Khmer Rouge tribunal which is very costly and
is thirty years late. there are other ways to bring reconciliation and
justice in Cambodia like the trith commissions in South Africa and Timor
Leste or the face to face reconciliation meetings in Rwanda. Today the
people in Cambodia do not look around them to ask were you or you or you are
a former Khmer Rouge or try to find out whether the their neighbor was a
former Khmer Rouge. That is a thing of the past. Fortunatelky because the
killings were poltically nmotivated and not etnically or racially, it is
easier to do so than if the perpetrators are another race such as between
Jews who suffered in the Holocaust and ethnic Germans or between Tamils and
Sinhalese in Sri lanka or between Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda. The only time
business compabies in Phnom Penh are interested in hiring an ex Khmer Rouge
is when they are looking for security guards as the Khmer Rouge were famous
for being good soldiers. All I said in my original article was that there
are other ways to reconciliation and justice including truth commissions
etc. For instance apart from Thet Sambath's movie I strongly support
educating the children about the evils of the Khmer Rouge and I commend the
efforts of Youk Chang of Documentation Center on Cambodia (DCCam) who
published a text on the Khmer Rouge in English and Khmer which is now
circulating in million copies. My own book Dancing in Shadows, is now being
translated into Khmer by the Center for Khmer Studies, (CKS) in SiemReap for
the purpose of educating the new Khmer generation about the evils of the
Khmer Rouge and the unjust international manipulations of the problem to
prolong the suffering of the Khmer people whom I love like my own.

Quality comment or not? 0 0
27 Benny Widyono // Aug 31, 2010 at 2:12 am

Regarding SEATO and ASEAN, Lee Jones is absolutely right by saying that
Suzie Wong did not know what she was talking about when she said that "6.
Lastly, Lee Jones and Benny Widyono, during the Cold War period, the
organization was still SEATO not ASEAN because the bloc at the time had only
5 original members. Here's the short summary of SEATO became ASEAN." Suzie,
I am sorry byt this is absolute balderdash.
SEATO was primarily created to block further communist gains in Southeast
Asia but only had three Asian members: Thailand, the Philippines and
Pakistan )because of its membership in CENTO). SEATO could not do anything
in the Cambodia conflict or about anything else because it lacks unanimity.
ASEAN was established in 1967 grouping together non communist or anti
communist countries Thailand, Indonesia,Philippines, Singapore and Malaysia
later joined by Brunei. (Indonesia becvame staunchly anti communist after
the 1965 coup attempt and the massacre of 800,000 socalled communists under
the Suharto regime). It was supposed to be an economic union and only became
a political force when supporting the Khmer Rouge government and opposing
the People's Republic of Cambodia in the UN in New York until 1991 as the
detailed discussions between Lee Jones and I have explained. After the
Cambodia conflict was settled Vietnam Laos, Myanmar and lastly Cambodia
became members to achieve ASEAN ten a dream of teh founding fathers. As
their economies grew stronger the economic bonds between the countries
became stronger as well and there si now even a talk of an ASEAN stock
market. Politically ASEAN is engaging Myanmar in a constructive dialogue and
the US wants to use ASEAN to counter China's menacing presence and flexing
its muscles in the Pacific. For instance.during President Obama's trip to
Asia in November 2009. in Singapore, he met with Thein Sein, the Prime
Minister of Myanmar during the first ASEAN-US summit.But that is another
topic.

Quality comment or not? 0 0
28 Benny Widyono // Aug 31, 2010 at 3:02 am

Susie Wong, your comment of August 21 followed by my responses.:
1. On 21 June 1997, Cambodia requested United Nations assistance in
organizing the process for the Khmer Rouge trials, in early 2006 the
Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC) were formally
established.
Myresponse: There is a long hiatus between the two dates because of the
following: In 1997, the UN responded to the Cambodian request by sending an
exprt group proposing a UN Cambodian mixed tribunal. Samdech Hun Sen
insisted to the New York delegation that the tribunal must be a Cambodian
tribunal with foreign assistance. During the long negotiations between the
UN and Cambodia Excellency Sok An whom I frequently met during his
negotiations in New York and Phnom Penh insisted on this point: that the
court is a Cambodian court with UN assistance. That is why negotiations took
so long and was even broken off at one point by the UN. Finally, Cambodia
triumphed and the court is today a Cambodian court with international
assistance and not repeat not an international court. Hence ECCC has three
Cs in it: Chambers in the Court of Cambodia.
Then you mentioned Michelle Lee a United Nations official whom I know very
well being a staffmember of the ECCC to prove that it is an international
court. You are wrong. Michelle Lee, who has two years ago been replaced by
UN staffer Knut Rosandhaug, is a a deputy Director of the Administration,
and they serve as deputies under His Excellency Kranh Tony, Acting Director,
who represents the Government of Cambodia. Likewise, the chief of Public
Affairs representing the government is Mr Reach Sambath and all UN officials
are under him. So it is clear that it is a Cambodian court with
international assistance and not an international court. This is what the
Cambodian government and people want. Suzie, we cannot argue about facts.

2. The General Assembly convened a conference in Rome in June 1998, with the
aim of finalising a treaty. On 17 July 1998, the Rome Statute of
International Criminal Court (ICC) was adopted by a vote of 120 to 7, with
21 countries abstaining. The seven countries that voted against the treaty
were China, Iraq, Israel, Libya, Qatar, the United States, and Yemen.
My response: this is a fact that everybody knows that has nothing to do with
our argument.
3. Cambodian people decide to combine ECCC plus ICC to make the objectives
of ECCC (No.1 + No. 2). The purpose of ECCC is to try senior members of the
Khmer Rouge for serious violations of Cambodian penal law, international
humanitarian law and custom, and violation of international conventions
recognized by Cambodia, committed during the period between 17 April 1975
and 6 January 1979. This includes crimes against humanity, war crimes, and
genocide.
My response: objective of ECCC us the same as that of the ICC. The
definition of crimes against humanity was taken from the UN Convention on
the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, New York, 9 December
1948. Pol Pot's massacre was largely based on political and not ethnic
consideration and therefore cannot be tried as genocide that is why the
Khmer rouge is being tired for crimes against humanity. This is because the
definition of Genocide adopted in 1948 did not include political crimes.
Stalin cleverly excludes political reaons as genocide as he does not want
his massacres to be classified as genocide.
You can say whatever you want but the fact is that the ECCC is not part of
the ICC.

Quality comment or not? 1 0
29 Lee Jones // Aug 31, 2010 at 7:05 am

"your position statement mentions "top Thai generals and foreign policy
officials" as though they were decision-makers. When in fact their opinions
remained only opinions, it didn't carry weigh into the decision making
process. They simply were not decision makers. Thai opinions were not
important, but rather that decisions were made by the Great Powers"

Sorry, Suzie, but that's just not true. But thank you for proving my earlier
point about the tendency to massively over-exaggerate the agency of the
great powers, while under-estimating the agency of smaller, weaker states
and their crucial role in constituting imperial rule.

Quality comment or not? 1 0
Leave a Comment
Please note: New Mandala encourages vigorous debate. However, for the moment
we will only be publishing high-quality comments that make original
contributions to discussion. There will, of course, still be space for
pithy, humorous, eccentric and cheeky input. Short and sweet will usually
trump long and involved. Repetitive ranting, unimaginative point-scoring and
idle abuse will not be entertained. Comments which carry a real name are
also more likely to be approved. Thank you for your ongoing interest and
contributions.

© 2006-2008 New Mandala - Sitemap - Cutline by Chris Pearson

Independently Searching for the Truth since 1997.
MEMORY & JUSTICE

“...a society cannot know itself if it does not have an accurate memory of its own history.”

Youk Chhang, Director
Documentation Center of Cambodia
66 Sihanouk Blvd.,
Phnom Penh, Cambodia