Will Cambodia's youth secure political change (original) (raw)
Related papers
Cambodia in 2016- 2017 Asia Maior 2017.pdf
In continuity with the previous years, in 2016-2017 the hegemonic crisis of the CPP, the ruling Cambodian party of the authoritarian leader Hun Sen, continued and was epitomised by two main developments: the declining popular consensus, revealed by the June 2017 communal elections, and the government-imposed dissolution of the CNRP, the main opposition party. As a result, the CPP got rid of any significant opposition in parliament. The feeble reaction of the western countries coupled with the strengthening of Cambodia’s relationship with China and Japan contributed to stabilise the internal situation, allowing a continuing economic growth propelled by neoliberal economic policies. However, such growth was coupled with the increase in social disparities, which brought in its wake social conflict and police repression.
PRINCIPLES OF ELECTION LAW: LIBERAL MULTI-PARTY DEMOCRACY
Despite its introduction into the Kingdom for nearly a century ago, Cambodia’s representative democracy has retained the “restrictive” characteristics of the first constitutional monarchy in the current, second regime of constitutional monarchy. While constitutional frameworks have often been used to legitimate the possession of exclusive state power by an individual or a dominant state institution, the source of power has moved from the state to the people. Interestingly, the principle of “liberal multi-party democracy”, as an integral part of the 1991 Paris Peace Accords, was integrated into the 1993 Constitution as one of the permanent and untouchable constitutional norms. In other words, any change to the fundamental rules governing the relationship between the state and the people must occur within the limits of this principle. This chapter aims to provide an insight into the concept and constitutional framework of this principle through which state power and citizens’ rights and freedoms are exercised, to discuss the current practices of state organs in compliance with this constitutional norm and attempts to analyze how this principle may be enhanced to build up state institutions as the only legitimate mechanism for achieving the ideal of liberal democracy and assuring the representativeness and responsiveness of the government. [Link: http://www.kas.de/kambodscha/en/publications/47410/\]
Cambodia between China and the United States
Capriciously, China appears to shift its policy towards Hun Sen and the Cambodian People’s Party in the wake of Phnom Penh tussle on July 5 and 6, 1997. At a short notice, Cambodia under the leadership of Hun Sen discernibly has burgeoned relations with Beijing emphatically. Some even suggest this bilateral relation has reached its peak in the last few years. Concurrently, the relations between Phnom Penh and Washington remain strained, despite strenuous efforts aimed for diplomatic revitalization since the mid1990s. It is perceptible that Cambodia has undertaken foreign policy that apparently takes side with Beijing, rather than the Washington between 1997 and 2013. While economic interests have been attributed to this move, this paper aims to explore motivations that exhort Cambodia to be more supportive to China, rather than the United States during the unfolded period. The findings of the thesis postulates that five catalysts serve as the motivating forces, including the personality perception, and background of the Prime Minister Hun Sen, the influences of the bureaucrats and Cambodian interests groups, Cambodia’s contexts between 1997 and 2013, different intensities of economic interdependence and exchange visits between Cambodia and the two countries.
CAMBODIA'S FOREIGN RELATIONS IN REGIONAL AND GLOBAL CONTEXTS
KAS Cambodia, 2017
A look at Cambodia’s history and present shows the multifaceted nature of its foreign relations and how the relations have shaped the political, socio-cultural and economic landscape of the Kingdom. In this regard, foreign relations, simply put the relations between Cambodia and other states or international institutions, have been a double-edged sword. On one side, there were conflicts, war and diplomatic tensions due to reasons of ideology and national interest, imperialism and mutual misunderstanding. A case in point is the Preah Vihear conflict between Thailand and Cambodia as well as the Indochina war in the 60s and bombardments against Cambodia in the 70s. On the other side, foreign relations have been a source of inspiration, cooperation and development. New political and economic ideas have been exchanged across borders and led to growth and prosperity. Common international environmental and security challenges have been tackled in a cooperative way sharing the same vision. There are countless examples buttressing the positive effects of cooperation like the UNTAC peace mission, the results of development cooperation and ASEAN. Even if it is not always easy to bring stakeholders together, to create a common basis of mutual understanding, to design cross border decision-making procedures or to overcome national interests and historical resentments, the avoidance of war and insecurity is worth all the efforts. Cambodia has, since 1991, deepened and extended its foreign relations with regional and international partners, always envisioning the relevance of national stability, national interests and sovereignty. It is due to the importance of Cambodia´s foreign relations that Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung Cambodia, in cooperation with the editors of this book, decided to create a comprehensive source of information on the Foreign Relations in Regional and Global Contexts of the Kingdom of Cambodia. As there is, to-date, a limited number of publications available, this book serves as a useful guide into the different relations and dynamics between Cambodia and its diverse cooperation partners. The publication is a comprehensive and thought-provoking contribution to the academic field of foreign relations and international studies as well as to all interested people. One particular aim of the book has been to motivate Cambodian scholars and students to academically engage with research questions about the relations of Cambodia with other countries and contribute with their articles towards the analysis and general better understanding of Cambodia’s foreign relations. The book is structured in four main parts, namely the relations with neighboring countries and maritime southeast Asia, relations with regional and global powers, memberships in international organizations and economic integration and security policy. Articles about Cambodia’s relations with neighboring countries and maritime southeast Asia is mainly concentrating on the difficult position Cambodia has, being located in the middle of two strong countries: Thailand and Vietnam. To give a balanced view the editors and KAS chosen to give a platform for authors from both of these countries. This part of the book also enlightens Cambodia’s relations to Laos and in general the importance of relations to the neighboring countries in the context of ASEAN. Articles about Cambodia’s relations with regional and global powers, especially the bounds to the three superpowers China, United States and the Soviet Union/Russia is the central theme of the publication. The tensions and cooperation Cambodia had with these countries are interwoven with all other parts of the book. Other partner countries focused on are the European Union, Australia, Japan, South Korea, and India. These chapters give the reader an insight about the rapidly rising economic ties Cambodia is establishing. Furthermore, the publication contains articles about Cambodia’s membership in international organizations and economic integration and security cooperation. Articles introduce the reader to Cambodia’s role in the ASEAN and its relation to the United Nations. Economically and security wise the reader learns about Cambodia’s defense policy, the Greater Mekong Subregional Cooperation (GMS) and Cambodia’s integration in global economic and financial systems.
One of the goals routinely ascribed to international criminal law (“ICL”) prosecutions is the ability to improve the rule of law domestically in post-atrocity states. This Article reassesses the common assumption that the relationship between the pursuit of ICL accountability and improving the rule of law in post-atrocity states is necessarily a linear, wholly positive one. It does so through an analysis of the relationship between the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia and the rule of law domestically in Cambodia. Through this analysis, this Article highlights the oft-ignored possibility that ICL prosecutions may actually have a mix of positive, nil, and negative effects on the domestic rule of law, at least in the short run. In the Cambodian context, this Article argues that such risk is quite real and arguably, in the process of being realized. These harmful rule of law consequences are most visible when viewed in light of the particularities of Cambodia’s rule of law deficit, which increasingly stems from government practices of subverting the rule of law through means obscured behind façades of legality.
Strategic Survival of Electoral Authoritarian Regimes The Case of Cambodia 1993-2016.pdf
For many years, scholars have debated the durability of hybrid or authoritarian regimes.23 In their selectorate theory, Bueno de Mesquita, Smith, Siverson and Morrow postulate that leaders of a regime survive because of their winning coalitions, known as sets of people who support the rulers to remain in office or power.24 In nondemocratic or hybrid regimes, the winning coalition is a group or a set of people who possess power to keep the leaders in office, and in democratic regimes, is a set of people who select or elect the leaders. Furthermore, Bueno de Mesquita et al. assert that to maintain office tenure by keeping the winning coalition loyal, the ruling parties have to design appropriate policies, especially concerning the distribution of private and public goods, to not only serve vested interests of the winning coalitions, but also to entice all of the electorate or society. In democratic regimes where the winning coalition is large, the regimes distribute public goods; however, in authoritarian or hybrid regimes where the winning coalition is small, the regimes distribute private goods to keep their supporters loyal. Despite being praised by a number of scholars25, Bueno de Mesquita et al.’s conceptualization has raised two puzzles: (i) how regimes generate goods (wealth) to entice the winning coalition; and (ii) how the regimes deal with challengers, especially in hybrid regimes. As a contribution to resolving these puzzles, this paper draws upon evidence from the Cambodian case where a hybrid regime has survived over two decades.
Klepto-Neoliberalism: authoritarianism and patronage in Cambodia
Neoliberalism is never uniform. Instead, it is always hybridized and imbricated within existing political economic matrixes and sociocultural process. In the Cambodian context neoliberalism is characterized by its intersection with kleptocracy, and specifically the ways in which patronage has enabled local elites to transform, co-opt, and (re)articulate neoliberal reforms through a framework that has focused on ‘asset stripping’ public resources. This chapter examines the Royal Government of Cambodia’s (RGC) discursive positioning of populism vis-à-vis international ‘enemies’ inasmuch as it presents a convenient pretext for the tensions of neoliberal development. This discussion critiques the frequent suggestion that the RGC maintains a ‘communist’ outlook rather than recognizing the kleptocratic ‘shadow state’ practices that have been modified to accommodate a neoliberal modality. I then turn my attention more specifically to the mechanisms of Cambodia’s patronage system via an analysis of privatization and primitive accumulation. I assess these developments through a critique of the purview that legal reform will somehow serve as cure-all for development, contrasting this idea with the realities of a judiciary firmly entrenched within patron relations. The degree of political patronage in Cambodia reflects a certain nepotism, or what I am calling ‘nepoliberalism’ to signify a particular application of neoliberalism that is never without the influence of patron politics. The enduring impunity of those with connections to power is the concentration of the final section before the conclusion, where I assess the continuing constraints of the poor with regards to patronage and the inequality and precarity it affords. It is here, in the question of (in)security that Cambodia’s neoliberalization alongside patronage demonstrates the depth of kleptocracy and violence in the country.
Since the early 1990s, Cambodia has been provided with large volumes of development assistance from many nations across the globe to reconstruct its devastating economy and development after decades of civil wars and instability. To date, four Asia-Pacific states are the largest bilateral donors of development assistance to the Kingdom, namely the Japan, China, Australia, and the US. This research aims to explore the reasons why these four Asia-Pacific countries disburse the development aid to Cambodia, based on five grounds, including security interests, political interests, economic interests, socio-cultural interests, and humanitarian concern. Three major IR theories, such as realism, liberalism, and constructivism, are also implicitly employed to explain the phenomenon. The findings of this study suggest that all the five elements are the motivations for the development aid distribution from all the four donors and that all the three IR theories are applicable for the explanation of the reason why these donors provide bilateral development aid to Cambodia. However, with regard to which elements and theories matter more, it is varied accordingly to each individual donors.
The United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia (UNTAC)
The paper puts forward a deliberate and definitive narrative of the operational undertakings of the United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia (UNTAC), one of the UN's most complex and extortionate yet successful peacekeeping missions that commenced in post-conflict Cambodia between February 1992 and September 1993. A brief synopsis of the successes and failures accrued from the mission is also provided at the end of the study.