Khmers complicit in Vietnamization

A. Gaffar Peang-Meth

via CAAI News Media

By A. Gaffar Peang-Meth

March 10, 2010

Next Page1| 2| 3Previous PageMy apologies. It's impossible to answer all e-mails on or related to any week's topic. But be assured that I read every one and even retrieve some that my ISP sends to a spam folder. My answers will sooner or later find their way to my columns.

To some who urge that I translate my writing into Khmer, I respond that God never meant a day to exceed 24 hours. Can't someone translate them?

A few days ago, the Hun Sen military test-fired 100 miles from the disputed border with Thailand, some 200 Russian-made Katyusha rockets, a Stalin-era weapon known today as BM21. A bank of 40 launch tubes mounted on a truck can fire in 20 seconds, with a range of about 20 miles and more.

Sen's military spokesman said the test was to strengthen Cambodia's abilities for "national defense against invaders." The test firing helped keep people intimidated and Sen in power.

Did it sidetrack the issue of Vietnamization of Cambodia? It seems only retired Johns Hopkins professor Naranhkiri Tith keeps a focus on the issue on his Web site. http://cambodiana.org/default.aspx. His proposed "roadmap," is a path he describes as "necessary but not sufficient," to save the Cambodian people.

His schematic should have been translated into Khmer long ago, because, if I rephrase a common saying to relate to Tith: "I know that you believe you understand what you think Tith said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what he meant."

A reader e-mailed me George Santayana's quote -- "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it" -- but I am reminded of Karl Marx's, "History does nothing; it does not possess immense riches, it does not fight battles. It is men, real, living, who do all this." I like Thomas Jefferson's "I like dreams of the future better than the history of the past" and American poet and champion of individualism Ralph Waldo Emerson, who said, "Make the most of yourself for that is all there is of you."

Today, let me examine the 25-year "Treaty of Peace, Friendship, and Cooperation" that effectively integrated Cambodia into a greater Vietnam.

As people educated in the culture of Confucianism, Vietnamese leaders' actions are, generally, carefully thought-out and calculated to maximize Vietnam's interests. They know what they want, what their national interests are and they move methodically to attain them.

Unfortunately for Khmers and their country, King Sihamoni, son of King Father Sihanouk, signed the supplements to the treaty, giving Vietnamese full access to colonize and Vietnamize Cambodia. The treaty cites "the traditions of Vietnam-Kampuchea militant solidarity and fraternal friendship."

Recall the Vietnamese revolutionary activities in Cambodia, described in my earlier column: Among them, in 1949, Hanoi's Canvassing Committee created the Revolutionary Kampuchean People's Party and, in 1950, Hanoi created the Kampuchean People's Liberation Army. That was the near 30 years of "great revolutionary gains" for Cambodia?

In its preamble, the treaty cites the "closely interrelated" independence, freedom, peace and security of Vietnam and Cambodia -- what affects one affects the other -- and that both countries are "duty-bound to help each other wholeheartedly and with all their might" safeguard and consolidate the products of their "revolution." It cites both countries' "militant solidarity" and "long-term and all-round cooperation and friendship" as representing their "vital interests."

In the treaty's first three articles, the Cambodians hand Ho Chi Minh the goal he had dreamed about.

In Article 1, the two countries pledge to "do all they can" to maintain their "traditions of militant solidarity" and to develop "mutual trust and assistance in all fields." In Article 2, they pledge to "wholeheartedly support and assist each other in all domains and in all necessary forms," as well as to take "effective measures to implement this commitment whenever one of them requires."

Cambodian leader Hun Sen can "require" Vietnamese intervention and Sen will be assisted "in all domains and in all necessary forms," and vice versa.

In Article 3, both countries pledge "mutual fraternal exchanges and cooperation" and mutual assistance in the economic, cultural, educational, public health, scientific, and technological fields, as well as the training of cadres and the exchange of "specialists and experience in all fields of national construction."

Article 4 stipulates a border agreement based on the "present border line." In Article 5, both parties pledge a "long-standing tradition of militant solidarity and fraternal friendship" to which they "attach great importance." Article 6 requires that the parties "frequently exchange views" on all questions concerning both countries' relationships and on "international matters of mutual interest." Articles 7, 8, 9, speak of the right and obligation of each party to any bilateral and multilateral agreements.

The treaty opens the door for Vietnam to operate in Cambodia. For example, Vietnam always has been short of food, and Cambodia is historically rich in fertile land and fish and natural resources.

In 1962, Prince Sihanouk wrote: "Whether he is called Gia Long, Ho Chi Minh, or Ngo Dinh Diem, no (Vietnamese) will sleep soundly until he succeeds in pushing the Khmer toward annihilation, after having made them go through the stage of slavery."

Pol Pot and his French-trained Marxists handed Cambodia to Vietnam. Then Heng Samrin and company agreed to a Vietnamized Cambodia. Now the King has ratified it.

Why blame the Vietnamese for expansionism when Khmers have acquiesced to it?

A. Gaffar Peang-Meth, Ph.D., is retired from the University of Guam, where he taught political science for 13 years. Write him at peangmeth@yahoo.com.